Finally, we have the imprimatur of Moscow itself upon the reality of international Communist solidarity. Our authority is the magazine, International Affairs, published monthly in Moscow by the Soviet Society for the Popularization of Political and Scientific Knowledge, from an article by A. Kortunov entitled "For Peace, Democracy, and National Independence," in its issue of June 1956. The following excerpts make these outstanding points: (1) The international Communist movement as a "single and monolithic force;" (2) the tasks of the Communist Party, U.S.A.; (3) the "inspiring force" of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, especially through its 20th Congress held in February 1956. The Kortunov article reads in part as follows: But despite the variety of conditions, the international communist movement as a whole is a single and monolithic force, united on a common basis-the immortal and constantly developing Marxist-Leninist teaching which is the guide for the Communist parties of the world * * Important tasks in the struggle for peace and democratic freedom confront the Communist parties of Great Britain and the United States. The Communist parties in these countries are not yet mass parties. They lack as yet the great influence enjoyed, say, by the Communist parties of France and Italy. The Communist Party of the United States is working under exceptionally difficult conditions at the moment, being subjected to persecution and repressions. Communists are banned from government service, denied jobs in some branches of industry, barred from teaching in schools and from holding leading positions in the trade unions. Despite these hardships the American Communists are waging a courageous struggle for peace and the vital interests of the people. * * * On December 27, 1955, Eugene Dennis, Secretary General of the Party (U.S.A.), replying to questions by newspapermen, noted that in the United States there is every possibility of forming a mass democratic front and a political combination powerful enough to ensure in the 1956 elections the return to power of a Government and Congress, which, undoubtedly, would give more heed to the will and needs of the people than their immediate predecessors. * * Communists all over the world are now able to make use not only of the experience of the CPSU but also of the rich experience of the Communist Party of China and the other countries of People's Democracy. The success of the Soviet Union and of all the countries of the socialist camp in home and foreign policy is of enormous inspiring force for the working people of all countries. * A feature of this new phase is the monolithic solidarity of the Communist parties, the undivided triumph of the MarxistLeninist ideology and the further strengthening of the parties' ranks. The elaboration by the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union of a number of vital questions of the day greatly assists the Communist parties. Communists all over the world unanimously approved the results of the 20th Congress of the CPSU.2 PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS From the days of Karl Marx to the present, Communists have arrogated to themselves the right to speak in the name of the workers— for the proletariat. The pattern is set by Marx in the "Communist Manifesto": They (the Communists) have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working class parties of every country *. The immediate aim of the Communists is ***: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.3 * Similarly, the Communist Party, U.S.A., in its 1957 constitution refers to itself as "an American working-class political organization which bases itself upon the principles of scientific socialism." The Declaration of Communist and Workers' Parties held in Moscow, November 14-16, 1957, emphasized the need of strengthening "the solidarity of the international working class" and the "principles of proletarian internationalism." The declaration continued, "Today the vital interests of the working people of all countries call for their support of the Soviet Union and all the Socialist countries. The manifesto issued by this gathering was indorsed by the representatives of 64 Marxist parties." In usurping the right to speak for the workers of the world, it may well be asked whether these Communist apostles were themselves proletarians who spoke from their own firsthand knowledge of conditions of those who labor with their hands and bodies, and whether Socialist-Communist theory grew out of this firsthand knowledge. Lenin spoke plainly on this matter: The theory of socialism, however, grew out of the philosophic, historical, and economic theories that were elaborated by the educated representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals. According to their social status, the founders of modern scientific socialism, Marx and Engels, themselves belonged to the bourgeois intelligentsia. Similarly, in Russia, the theoretical doctrine of Social Democracy "International Affairs," June 1956, pp. 54, 61, 62, 63, and 65, from article entitled "For Peace, Democracy and National Independence" by V. Kortunov. "Manifesto of the Communist Party" by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (International Publishers, New York, 1932), sec. II. "Proceedings of the 16th National Convention of the Communist Party, U.S.A.," Feb. 9-12, 1957 (New Century Publishers, New York, 1957), p. 335. Political Affairs, December 1957, p. 87. Daily Worker, Dec. 2, 1957, p. 2 arose quite independent of the spontaneous growth of the labor movement, it arose as the natural and inevitable outcome of the development of ideas among the revolutionary socialist intelligentsia." The facts are that Marx was the son of a fairly well-to-do lawyer in Trier, Germany, and he was educated at the University of Bonn;8 Friedrich Engels was the son of a wealthy textile manufacturer;' and Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) was the son of a respectable school inspector of Simbirsk in Czarist Russia. 10 None of these men was a worker. Lenin was extremely dubious about the ability of the working class to work out its own salvation. These ideas, he held, could come only from "the bourgeois intelligentsia": * The working class exclusively by its own efforts, is able to develop only trade-union consciousness Modern socialist consciousness can only be brought to them from without ** ** can arise only on the basis of profound scientific knowledge. The bearers of science are not the proletariat but the bourgeois intelligentsia. It is out of the heads of this stratum that modern socialism originated."1 With characteristic inconsistency Marx and Engels repeatedly emphasized their belief that: The emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves. 12 William Z. Foster, for many years chairman of the Communist Party, U.S.A., in an article written in 1957 for the Moscow Communist, expressed his profound disgust with the great body of organized labor in the United States, which has thus far turned a cold shoulder to the teachings of Marx and Lenin. ment * ** However, the revolutionary teaching of Lenin has never become predominant in the American labor union moveThe big labor union movement in the U.S.A. which has a membership of 17 millions *** officially sticks to the theory of "Progressive Capitalism" of RooseveltKeynes. In the fact, the great majority of higher, middle and lower rank officials of the AFL-CIO openly advocate the capitalistic system in opposition to Socialism. 13 The Communists ceaselessly intone their self-assumed role as leaders of the masses, i.e., the proletariat. But they do not hesitate to employ the same chicanery in defining what they mean by the "masses," as they do in interpreting other terms of their ideological 7 V. I. Lenin, "What Is To Be Done?" (1901-2), "Selected Works" (Lawrence and Wishart, Ltd., London, 1936), vol. 2, pp. 90-91. "The Red Prussian" by Leopold Schwarzschild (Scribner, New York, 1947), p. 6. Ibid., p. 98. 10 Three Who Made a Revolution," by Bertram D. Wolfe (Dial, New York, 1948), p. 41. 11 V. I. Lenin, "What Is To Be Done?", reprinted in "Three Who Made a Revolution" by Bertram D. Wolfe (Dial, New York, 1948), p. 159. 12"Inaugural Address and Rules of the International Workingmen's Association," written by Karl Marx (1864) and quoted by William Z. Foster in "History of the World Trade Union Movement" (Inter national Publishers, New York, 1956), p. 70. 13 William Z. Foster, "The October Revolution and the Working Class of the U.S.A.” (Communist, Moscow, vol. 15, October 1957, pp. 57–73). arsenal. Thus the exact interpretation of the meaning of the term becomes a matter of sheer expediency as shown by Lenin himself: I would like to say just a few words about the meaning of the term "masses." The meaning of the term "masses" changes in accordance with the character of the struggle ***. During our revolution there were occasions when several thousand workers represented the masses. When the revolution has been sufficiently prepared, the term "masses" acquires a different meaning." SELF-DETERMINATION OF NATIONS "No nation can be free so long as it keeps another nation in chains," declared Engels in the Deutsche Brusseler Zeitung in 1847.15 Since then the theme of national independence has been a major plank in the Communist platform. Lenin expanded on this theme in even more vigorous terms: If any nation whatsoever is detained by force within the boundaries of a certain state, and if (that nation) contrary to its expressed desire-whether such desire is made manifest in the press, national assembly, party decisions, or in protest and uprisings against national oppression-is not given the right to determine the form of its state life by free voting and completely free from the presence of troops of the annexing state or stronger state and without the least pressure, then the adjoining of that nation by the stronger state is annexation, i.e., seizure by force and violence." 16 He even went so far as to advocate the right of nations to secession from the oppressing nation: The right of nations to self-determination means only the right to independence in a political sense, the right to free political secession from the oppressing nation.17 The consistency with which this type of propaganda has been maintained is demonstrated by the following words of Joseph Stalin uttered as early as 1917 but reprinted in Moscow in 1946. Stalin was looked upon as an authority on the national question and wrote numerous articles, books and pamphlets on the subject. But no one has the right to interfere forcibly in the internal life of a nation and by force "correct" its mistakes. Nations are sovereign in matters of internal life, and they have the right to manage themselves according to their own desires. 18 Stalin even applied his theories to the Negro question in the United States through his chosen representatives, such as John Pepper, representative of the Communist International, who declared: The Negro Communists should emphasize in their propaganda the establishment of a Negro Soviet Republic. Lenin, "Selected Works" (International Publishers, New York, 1943), vol. X, p. 287. Friedrich Engels in the Report in the Deutsche Brusseler Zeitung, 1847, No. 98, as reprinted in "The Communist Manifesto" of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels with an "Introduction and Explanatory Notes" by D. Ryazanoff (International Publishers, New York, 1930) p. 249. V. L Lenin, "Declaration" signed as Chairman of Soviet of People's Commissars, Oct. 28, 1917. V. L. Lenin, "The Socialist Revolution and the Rights of Nations to Self-Determination," "Selected Works" (International Publishers, New York, 1943), vol. V, p. 270. J. Stalin, "Counter-Revolution and the Peoples of Russia" (Aug. 13, 1917), Sochineniya (Gospolitizdat, Moscow, 1946), vol. III, p. 209. "The Communist, October 1928, p. 634. American Communist Authors James S. Allen and James W. Ford described as follows this proposed Negro Republic which would have involved actual civil war in the South: The actual extent of this new Negro Republic would in all This objective has since been withdrawn. Communist spokesmen have been quite frank, however, in explaining how this type of propaganda serves their revolutionary interests rather than the welfare of the human beings involved. We cite, for example, the words of N. Bukharin, leading theoretician, at the Eighth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union: If we propound the solution of the right of self-determination for the colonies, the Hottentots, the Negroes, the Indians, etc., we lose nothing by it. On the contrary, we gain, for the national gain as a whole will damage foreign imperialism ***. The most outright nationalist movement, for example that of the Hindus is only water for our mill, since it contributes to the destruction of English imperialism.21 But when it comes to the actual carrying out of these noble pretensions within the Soviet Union, a sharp contradiction emerges. We will utilize the writings of Premier Khrushchev, himself, to describe some of the havoc which took place among national groups under the Stalin regime: All the more monstrous are the acts whose initiator was Stalin. * * * We refer to the mass deportations from their native places of whole nations, *** this deportation action was not dictated by any military considerations. Thus, already at the end of 1943, when there occurred a permanent breakthrough at the fronts of the Great Patriotic War benefiting the Soviet Union, a decision was taken and executed concerning the deportation of all the Karachai from the lands on which they lived. In the same period, at the end of December 1943, the same lot befell the whole population of the Autonomous Kalmyk Republic. In March 1944, all the Chechen and Ingush peoples were deported and the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Republic was liquidated. In April 1944, all Balkars were deported to faraway places from the territory of the Kabardino-Balkar Autonomous Republic * * * 22 20 James S. Allen and James W. Ford, "The Negroes in a Soviet America," (Workers Library, New York, June 1935), p. 39. 21 N Bukharin at the Eighth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, as quoted in "A Guide to Communist Jargon" by R. N. Carew Hunt (MacMillan, New York, 1957), p. 94. 22 Nikita S. Khrushchev, speech at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, February 24-25, 1956. |