MAO TSE-TUNG July 1964
At the 22nd Congress of the CPSU Khrushchov openly raised another banner, the alteration of the proletarian character of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. He announced the replacement of the party of the proletariat by a "party of the entire people".
The programme of the CPSU states, "As a result of the victory of socialism in the U.S.S.R. and the consolidation of the unity of Soviet society, the Communist Party of the working class has become the vanguard of the Soviet people, a party of the entire people". The Open Letter of the Central Committee of the CPSU says that the CPSU "has become a political organization of the entire people".
How absurd!
Elementary knowledge of Marxism-Leninism tells us that, like the state, a political party is an instrument of class struggle. Every political party has a class character. Party spirit is the concentrated expression of class character. There is no such thing as a non-class or supra-class political party and there never has been, nor is there such a thing as a "party of the entire people" that does not represent the interests of a particular class.
The party of the proletariat is built in accordance with the revolutionary theory and revolutionary style of Marxism-Leninism; it is the party formed by the advanced elements who are boundlessly faithful to the historical mission of the proletariat, it is the organized vanguard of the proletariat and the highest form of its organization. The party of the proletariat represents the interests of the proletariat and the concentration of its will.
Moreover, the party of the proletariat is the only party able to represent the interests of the people, who constitute over ninety per cent of the total population. The reason is that the interests of the proletariat are identical with those of the working masses, that the proletariarian party can approach problems in the light of the historical role of the proletariat and in terms of the present and future interests of the proletariat and the working masses and of the best interests of the overwhelming majority of the people, and that it can give correct leadership in accordance with Marxism-Leninism.
In addition to its members of working-class origin, the party of the proletariat has members of other class origins. But the latter do not join the Party as representatives of other classes. From the very day they join the Party they must abandon their former class stand and take the stand of the proletariat. Marx and Engels said:
If people of this kind join the proletarian movement, the first condition must be that they should not bring any remnants of bourgeois, petty-bourgeois, etc., prejudices with them but should wholeheartedly adopt the proletarian outlook.
["Marx and Engels to A. Bebel, W. Liebknecht, W. Bracke and Others ("Circular Letter"), Sept. 17-18, 1879", Selected Works of Marx and Engels, FLPH, Moscow, Vol. 2, pp. 484-85.]
The basic principles concerning the proletarian party were long ago elucidated by Marxism-Leninism. But in the opinion of the revisionist Khrushchov clique these principles are "stereotyped formulas", while their "party of the entire people" conforms to the "actual dialectics of the development of the Communist Party".
["From the Party of the Working Class to the Party of the Whole Soviet People", editorial board's article of Partyinaya Zhizn, Moscow, No. 8, 1964.]
The revisionist Khrushchov clique have cudgelled their brains to think up arguments justifying their "party of the entire people". They have argued during the talks between the Chinese and Soviet Parties in July 1963 and in the Soviet press that they have changed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union into a "party of the entire people" because:
1. The CPSU expresses the interests of the whole people.
2. The entire people have accepted the Marxist-Leninist world outlook of the working class, and the aim of the working class - the building of communism - has become the aim of the entire people.
3. The ranks of the CPSU consist of the best representatives of the workers, collective farmers and intellectuals. The CPSU unites in its own ranks representatives of over a hundred nationalities and peoples.
4. The democratic method used in the Party's activities is also in accord with its character as the Party of the entire people.
It is obvious even at a glance that none of these arguments adduced by the revisionist Khrushchov clique shows a serious approach to a serious problem.
When Lenin was fighting the opportunist muddle-heads, he remarked:
Can people obviously incapable of taking serious problems seriously themselves be taken seriously? It is difficult to do so, comrades, very difficult! But the question which certain people cannot treat seriously is in itself so serious that it will do no harm to examine even patently frivolous replies to it.
[Lenin, "Clarity First and Foremost!", Collected Works, FLPH, Moscow, 1964, Vol. 20, p. 544.]
Today, too, it will do no harm to examine the patently frivolous replies given by the revisionist Khrushchov clique to so serious a question as that of the party of the proletariat.
According to the revisionist Khrushchov clique, the Communist Party should become a "party of the entire people" because it represents the interests of the entire people. Does it not then follow that from the very beginning it should have been a "party of the entire people" instead of a party of the proletariat?
According to the revisionist Khrushchov clique, the Communist Party should become a "party of the entire people" because "the entire people have accepted the Marxist-Leninist world outlook of the working class". But how can it be said that everyone has accepted the Marxist-Leninist world outlook in Soviet society where sharp class polarization and class struggle are taking place?
Can it be said that the tens of thousands of old and new bourgeois elements in your country are all Marxist-Leninists? If Marxism-Leninism has really become the world outlook of the entire people, as you allege, does in not then follow that there is no difference in your society between Party and non-Party and no need whatsoever for the Party to exist? What difference does it make if there is a "party of the entire people" or not?
According to the revisionist Khrushchov clique, the Communist Party should become a "party of the entire people" because its membership consists of workers, peasants and intellectuals and all nationalities and peoples. Does this mean that before the idea of the "party of the entire people" was put forward at its 22nd Congress none of the members of the CPSU came from classes other than the working class? Does it mean that formerly the members of the Party all came from just one nationality, to the exclusion of other nationalities and peoples?
If the character of a party is determined by the social background of its membership, does it not then follow that the numerous political parties in the world whose members also come from various classes, nationalities and peoples are all "parties of the entire people"?
According to the revisionist Khrushchov clique, the Party should be a "party of the entire people" because the methods it uses in its activities are democratic. But from its outset, a Communist Party is built on the basis of the principle of democratic centralism and should always adopt the mass line and the democratic method of persuation and education in working among the people. Does it not then follow that a Communist Party is a "party of the entire people" from the first day of its founding?
Briefly, none of the arguments listed by the revisionist Khrushchov clique holds water.
Besides making a great fuss about a "party of the entire people", Khrushchov has also divided the Party into an "industrial Party" and an "agricultural Party" on the pretext of "building the Party organs on the production principle".
[N. S. Khrushchov, Report at the Plenary Meeting of the Central Committee of the CPSU, November 1962.]
The revisionist Khrushchov clique say that they have done so be- cause of "the primacy of economics over politics under socialism" [1] and because they want to place "the economic and pro- duction problems, which have been pushed to the forefront by the entire course of the communist construction, at the centre of the activities of the Party organizations" and make them "the cornerstone of all their work" [2]. Khrushchov said, "We say bluntly that the main thing in the work of the Party organs is production" [3]. And what is more, they have foisted these views on Lenin, claiming that they are acting in accordance with his principles.
[1. "Study, Know, Act", editorial of Ekonomicheskaya Gazeta, No. 50, 1962.]
[2. "The Communist and Production", editorial of Kommunist, No. 2, 1963.]
[3. N. S. Khrushchov, Speech at the Election Meeting of the Ka- linin Constituency of Moscow, Feb. 27, 1963.]
However, anyone at all acquainted with the history of the CPSU knows that, far from being Lenin's views, they are anti-Leninist views and that they were views held by Trotsky. On this question, too, Khrushchov is a worthy disciple of Trotsky.
In criticizing Trotsky and Bukharin, Lenin said:
Politics are the concentrated expression of economics . . . Politics cannot but have precedence over economics. To argue differently means forgetting the A B C of Marxism.
He continued:
... without a proper political approach to the subject the given class cannot maintain its rule, and consequently cannot solve its own production problems.
[Lenin, "Once Again on the Trade Unions, the Present Situation and the Mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin", Selected Works, International Publishers, New York, 1943, Vol. 9, pp. 54 and 55.]
The facts are crystal clear; the real purpose of the revisionist Khrushchov clique in proposing a "party of the entire people" was completely to alter the proletarian character of the CPSU and transform the Marxist-Leninist Party into a revisionist party.
The great Communist Party of the Soviet Union is confronted with the grave danger of degenerating from a party of the proletariat into a party of the bourgeoisie and from a Marxist-Leninist into a revisionist party.
Lenin said:
A party that wants to exist cannot allow the slightest wavering on the question of its existence or any argument with those who may bury it.
[Lenin, "How Vera Zasulich Demolishes Liquidationism", Collected Works, FLPH, Moscow, 1963, Vol. 19, p. 414.]
At present, the revisionist Khrushchov clique is again confronting the broad membership of the great Communist Party of the Soviet Union with precisely this serious question.
At the 22nd Congress of the CPSU, Khrushchov announced that the Soviet Union had already entered the period of the extensive building of communist society. He also declared that "we shall, in the main, have built a communist society within twenty years". This is pure fraud.
[N. S. Khrushchov, "On the Programme of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union", at the 22nd Congress of the CPSU in October 1961.]
How can there be talk of building communism when the revisionist Khrushchov clique are leading the Soviet Union onto the path of the restoration of capitalism and when the Soviet people are in grave danger of losing the fruits of socialism?
In putting up the signboard of "building communism" Khrushchov's real aim is to conceal the true face of his revisionism. But it is not hard to expose this trick. Just as the eyeball of a fish cannot be allowed to pass as a pearl, so revisionism cannot be allowed to pass itself off as communism.
Scientific communism has a precise and definite meaning. According to Marxism-Leninism, communist society is a society in which classes and class differences are completely eliminated, the entire people have a high level of communist consciousness and morality as well as boundless enthusiasm for and initiative in labour, there is a great abundance of social products and the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is applied, and in which the state has withered away.
Marx declared:
In the higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labour, and therefore also the antithesis between mental and physical labour, has vanished; after labour has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the production forces have also increased with the all-round development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly -- only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!
[Marx, "Critique of the Gotha Programme", Selected Works of Marx and Engels, FLPH, Moscow, Vol. 2, p. 24.]
According to Marxist-Leninist theory, the purpose of upholding the dictatorship of the proletariat in the period of socialism is precisely to ensure that society develops in the direction of communism. Lenin said that "forward development, i.e., towards Communism, proceeds through the dictatorship of the proletariat, and cannot do otherwise".
[Lenin, "The State and Revolution", Selected Works, FLPH, Moscow, Vol. 2, Part 1, p. 291.]
Since the revisionist Khrushchov clique have abandoned the dictatorship of the proletariat in the Soviet Union, it is going backward and not forward to communism.
Going forward to communism means moving towards the abolition of all classes and class differences. A communist society which preserves any classes at all, let alone exploiting classes, is inconceivable. Yet Khrushchov is fostering a new bourgeoisie, restoring and extending the system of exploitation and accelerating class polarization in the Soviet Union. A privileged bourgeois stratum opposed to the Soviet people now occupies the ruling position in the Party and government and in the economic, cultural and other departments. Can one find an iota of communism in all this?
Going forward to communism means moving towards a unitary system of the ownership of the means of production by the whole people. A communist society in which several kinds of ownership of the means of production coexist is inconceivable. Yet Khrushchov is creating a situation in which enterprises owned by the whole people are gradually degenerating into capitalist enterprises and farms under the system of collective ownership are gradually degenerating into units of a kulak economy. Again, can one find an iota of communism in all this?
Going forward to communism means moving towards a great abundance of social products and the realization of the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". A communist society built on the enrichment of a handful of persons and the impoverishment of the masses is inconceivable. Under the socialist system the great Soviet people developed the social productive forces at unprecedented speed. But the evils of Khrushchov's revisionism are creating havoc in the Soviet socialist economy.
Constantly beset with innumerable contradictions, Khrushchov makes frequent changes in his economic policies and often goes back on his own words, thus throwing the Soviet national economy into a state of chaos. Khrushchov is truly an incorrigible wastrel. He has squandered the grain reserves built up under Stalin and brought great difficulties into the lives of the Soviet people. He has distorted and violated the socialist prin- ciple of distribution of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his work", and enabled a handful of persons to appropriate the fruits of the labour of the broad masses of the Soviet people. These points alone are sufficient to prove that the road taken by Khrushchov leads away from communism.
Going forward to communism means moving towards enhancing the communist consciousness of the masses. A communist society with bourgeois ideas running rampant is inconceivable. Yet Khrushchov is zealously reviving bourgeois ideology in the Soviet Union and serving as a missionary for the decadent American culture.
By propagating material incentive, he is turning all human relations into money relations and encouraging individualism and selfishness. Because of him, manual labour is again considered sordid and love of pleasure at the expense of other people's labour is again considered honourable. Certainly, the social ethics and atmosphere promoted by Khrushchov are far removed from communism, as far as can be.
Going forward to communism means moving towards the withering away of the state. A communist society with a state apparatus for oppressing the people is inconceivable. The state of the dictatorship of the proletariat is actually no longer a state in its original sense, because it is no longer a machine used by the exploiting few to oppress the overwhelming majority of the people but a machine for exercising dictatorship over a very small number of exploiters, while democracy is practiced among the overwhelming majority of the people.
Khrushchov is altering the character of Soviet state power and changing the dictatorship of the proletariat back into an instrument whereby a handful of privileged bourgeois elements exercise dictatorship over the mass of Soviet workers, peasants and intellectuals. He is continuously strenghtening his dictatorial state apparatus and intensifying his repression of the So- viet people. It is indeed a great mockery to talk about communism in these circumstances.
A comparison of all this with the principles of scientific communism readily reveals that in every respect the revisionist Khrushchov clique are leading the Soviet Union away from the path of socialism and onto the path of capitalism and, as a consequence, further and further away from, instead of closer to, the communist goal of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".
Khrushchov has ulterior motives when he puts up his signboard of communism. He is using it to fool the Soviet people and cover up his effort to restore capitalism. He is using it to deceive the international proletariat and the revolutionary people the world over and betray proletarian internationalism. Under this signboard, the Khrushchov clique has itself abandoned proletarian internationalism and is seeking a partnership with U.S. imperialism for the partition of the world; moreover, it wants the fraternal socialist countries to serve its own private interests and not to oppose imperialism or to support the revolutions of the oppressed peoples and nations, and it wants them to accept its political, economic and military control and be its virtual dependencies and colonies.
Furthermore, the Khrushchov clique wants all the oppressed peoples and nations to serve its private interests and abandon their revolutionary struggles, so as not to disturb its sweet dream of partnership with imperialism for the division of the world, and instead submit to enslavement and oppression by imperialism and its lackeys.
In short, Khrushchov's slogan of basically "building a communist society within twenty years" in the Soviet Union is not only false but also reactionary.
The revisionist Khrushchov clique say that the Chinese "go to the length of questioning the very right of our Party and people to build communism".
[M. A. Suslov, Report at the Plenary Meeting of the Central Committee of the CPSU, February 1964.]
This is a despicable attempt to fool the Soviet people and poison the friendship of the Chinese and Soviet people. We have never had any doubts that the great Soviet people will eventually enter into communist society. But right now the revisionist Khrushchov clique are damaging the socialist fruits of the Soviet people and taking away their right to go forward to communism. In the circumstances, the issue confronting the Soviet people is not how to build communism but rather how to resist and oppose Khrushchov's effort to restore capitalism.
The revisionist Khrushchov clique also say that "the CPC leaders hint that, since our Party has made its aim a better life for the people, Soviet society is being bourgeoisified, is 'degenerating'".
[Open Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to Party Organizations and All Communists in the Soviet Union", July 14, 1963.]
This trick of deflecting the Soviet people's dissatisfaction with the Khrushchov clique is deplorable as well as stupid. We sincerely wish the Soviet people an increasingly better life. But Khrushchov's boasts of "concern for the well-being of the people" and of "a better life for every man" are utterly false and demagogic.
For the masses of the Soviet people life is already bad enough at Khrushchov's hands. The Khrushchov clique seek a "better life" only for the members of the privileged stratum and the bourgeois elements, old and new, in the Soviet Union. These people are appropriating the fruits of the Soviet people's labour and living the life of bourgeois lords. They have indeed become thoroughly bourgeoisified.
Khrushchov's "communism" is in essence a variant of bourgeois socialism. He does not regard communism as completely abolishing classes and class differences but describes it as "a bowl accessible to all and brimming with the products of physical and mental labour".
[n. S. Khrushchov, Speech for the Austrian Radio and Television, July 7, 1960.]
He does not regard the struggle of the working class for communism as a struggle for the thorough emancipation of all mankind as well as itself but describes it as a struggle for "a good dish of goulash". There is not an iota of scientific communism in his head but only the image of a society of bourgeois philistines.
Khrushchov's "communism" takes the United States for its model. Imitation of the methods of management of U.S. capitalism and the bourgeois way of life has been raised by Khrushchov to the level of state policy. He says that he "always thinks highly" of the achievements of the United States. He "rejoices in these achievements, is a little envious at times".
[N. S. Khrushchov, Interview with Leaders of U.S. Congress and Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sept. 16, 1959.]
He extols to the sky a letter by Roswell Garst, a big U.S. farmer, which propagates the capitalist system; actually he has taken it as his agricultural programme.
[N. S. Khrushchov, Speech at the Plenary Meeting of the Central Committee of the CPSU, February 1964.]
He wants to copy the United States in the sphere of industry as well as in that of agriculture and, in particular, to imitate the profit motive of U.S. capitalist enterprises. He shows great admiration for the American way of life, asserting that the American people "do not live badly" under the rule and enslavement of monopoly capital.
[N. S. Khrushchov, Talk at a Meeting with Businessmen and Public Leaders in Pittsburgh, U.S.A., Sept. 24, 1959.]
Going further, Khrushchov is hopeful of building communism with loans from U.S. imperialism. During his visits to the United States and Hungary, he expressed on more than one occasion his readiness "to take credits from the devil himself".
Thus it can be seen that Khrushchov's "communism" is indeed "goulash communism", the "communism of the American way of life" and "communism seeking credits from the devil". No wonder he often tells representatives of Western monopoly capital that once such "communism" is realized in the Soviet Union, "you will go forward to communism without any call from me".
[N. S. Khrushchov, Talk at a Meeting with French Parliamenta- rians, Mar. 25, 1960.]
There is nothing new about such "communism". It is simply another name for capitalism. It is only a bourgeois label, sign or advertisment. In ridiculing the old-line revisionist parties which set up the signboard of Marxism, Lenin said:
Wherever Marxism is popular among the workers, this political tendency, this "bourgeois labour party", will swear by the name of Marx. It cannot be prohibited from doing this, just as a trading firm cannot be prohibited from using any particular label, sign, or advertisment.
[Lenin, "Imperialism and the Split in Socialism", Selected Works, International Publishers, New York, Vol. 11, p. 781.]
It is thus easily understandable why Khrushchov's "communism" is appreciated by imperialism and monopoly capital. The U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk has said:
. . . to the extent that goulash and the second pair of trousers and questions of that sort become more important in the Soviet Union, I think to that extent a moderating influence has come into the present scene.
[Dean Rusk, Interview on British Broadcasting Corporation Television, May 10, 1964.]
And the British Prime Minister Douglas-Home has said:
Mr. Khrushchov said that the Russian brand of communism puts education and goulash first. That is good; goulash-communism is better than war-communism, and I am glad to have this confirmation of our view that fat and comfortable Communists are better than lean and hungry Communists.
[A. Douglas-Home, Speech at Norwich, England, Apr. 6, 1964.]
Khrushchov's revisionism entirely caters to the policy of "peaceful evolution" which U.S. imperialism is pursuing with regard to the Soviet Union and other socialist countries. John Foster Dulles said:
. . . there was evidence within the Soviet Union of forces toward greater liberalism which, if they persisted, could bring about a basic change in the Soviet Union.
[J. F. Dulles, press conference, May 15, 1956.]
The liberal forces Dulles talked about are capitalist forces. The basic change Dulles hoped for is the degeneration of socialism into capitalism. Khrushchov is effecting exactly the "basic change" Dulles dreamed of.
How the imperialists are hoping for the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union! How they are rejoicing!
We would advise the imperialist lords not to be happy too soon. Notwithstanding all the services of the revisionist Khrushchov clique, nothing can save imperialism from its doom.
The revisionist ruling clique suffer from the same kind of disease as the imperialist ruling clique; they are extremely antagonistic to the masses of the people who comprise over ninety per cent of the world's population, and therefore they, too, are weak and powerless and are paper tigers. Like the clay Buddha that tried to wade across the river, the revisionist Khrushchov clique cannot even save themselves, so how can they endow imperialism with long life?
Khrushchov's revisionism has inflicted heavy damage on the international communist movement, but at the same time it has educated the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people throughout the world by negative example.
If it may be said that the Great October Revolution provided Marxist-Leninists in all countries with the most important postive experience and opened up the road for the proletarian seizure of political power, then on its part Khrushchov's revisionism may be said to have provided them with the most important negative experience, enabling the Marxist-Leninists in all countries to draw the appropriate lessons for preventing the degeneration of the proletarian party and the socialist state.
Historically all revolutions have had their reverses and their twists and turns. Lenin once asked:
. . . if we take the matter in its essence, has it ever happened in history that a new mode of production took root immediately, without a long succession of setbacks, blunders and relapses?
[Lenin, "A Great Beginning", Selected Works, FLPH, Moscow, Vol. 2, Part 2, p. 229.]
The international proletarian revolution has a history of less than a century counting from 1871 when the proletariat of the Paris Commune made the first heroic attempt at the seizure of political power, or barely half a century counting from the October Revolution. The proletarian revolution, the greatest revo- lution in human history, replaces capitalism by socialism and private ownership by public ownership and uproots all the systems of exploitation and all the exploiting classes. It is all the more natural that so earth-shaking a revolution should have to go through serious and fierce class struggles, inevitably traverse a long and tortuous course beset with reverses.
History furnishes a number of examples in which proletarian rule suffered defeat as a result of armed suppression by the bourgeoisie, for instance, the Paris Commune and the Hungarian Soviet Republic of 1919. In contemporary times, too, there was the counter-revolutionary rebellion in Hungary in 1956, when the rule of the proletariat was almost overthrown. People can easily perceive this form of capitalist restoration and are more alert and watchful against it.
However, they cannot easily perceive and are often off their guard or not vigilant against another form of capitalist restoration, which therefore presents a greater danger. The state of the dictatorship of the proletariat takes the road of revisionism or the road of "peaceful evolution" as a result of the degeneration of the leadership of the Party and the state. A lesson of this kind was provided some years ago by the revisionist Tito clique who brought about the degeneration of socialist Yugoslavia into a capitalist country. But the Yugoslav lesson alone has not sufficed to arouse people's attention fully. Some may say that perhaps it was an accident.
But now the revisionist Khrushchov clique have usurped the leadership of the Party and the state, and there is grave danger of a restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union, the land of the Great October Revolution with its history of several decades in building socialism. And this sounds the alarm for all socialist countries including China, and for all the Communist and Workers' Parties, including the Communist Party of China. Inevitably it arouses very great attention and forces Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people the world over to ponder deeply and sharpen their vigilance.
The emergence of Khrushchov's revisionism is a bad thing, and it is also a good thing. So long as the countries where socialism has been achieved and also those that will later embark on the socialist road seriously study the lessons of the "peaceful evolusion" promoted by the revisionist Khrushchov clique and take the appropriate measures, they will be able to prevent this kind of "peaceful evolution" as well as crush the enemy's armed attacks. Thus, the victory of the world proletarian revolution will be more certain.
The Communist Party of China has a history of forty-three years. During its protracted revolutionary struggle, our Party combated both Right and "Left" opportunist errors and the Marxist-Leninist leadership of the Central Committee headed by Comrade Mao Tse-tung was established. Closely integrating the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete practice of revolution and construction in China, Comrade Mao Tse-tung has led the Chinese people from victory to victory.
The Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and Comrade Mao Tse-tung have taught us to wage unremitting struggle in the theoretical, political and organizational fields, as well as in practical work, so as to combat revisionism and prevent a restoration of capitalism. The Chinese people have gone through pro- tracted revolutionary armed struggles and possess a glorious revolutionary tradition. The Chinese People's Liberation Army is armed with Mao Tse-tung's thinking and inseparably linked to the masses. The numerous cadres of the Chinese Communist Party have been educated and tempered in rectification movements and sharp class struggles. All these factors make it very difficult to restore capitalism in our country.
But let us look at the facts. Is our society today thoroughly clean? No, it is not. Classes and class struggle still remain, the activities of the overthrown reactionary classes plotting a comeback still continue, and we still have speculative activities by old and new bourgeois elements and desperate forays by embezzlers, grafters and degenerates. There are also cases of degeneration in a few primary organizations; what is more, these degenerates do their utmost to find protectors and agents in the higher leading bodies. We should not in the least slacken our vigilance against such phenomena but must keep fully alert.
The struggle in the socialist countries between the road of socialism and the road of capitalism - between the forces of capitalism attempting a comeback and the forces opposing it -- is unavoidable. But the restoration of capitalism in the socialist countries and their degeneration into capitalist countries are certainly not unavoidable. We can prevent the restoration of capitalism so long as there is a correct leadership and a correct understanding of the problem, so long as we adhere to the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist line, take the appropriate measures and wage a prolonged, unremitting struggle. The struggle between the socialist and capitalist roads can become a driving force for social advance.
How can the restoration of capitalism be prevented? On this question Comrade Mao Tse-tung has formulated a set of theories and policies, after summing up the practical experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat in China and studying the positive and negative experience of other countries, mainly the Soviet Union, in accordance with the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism, and has thus enriched and developed the Marxist-Leninist theory of the dictarorship of the proletariat.
The main contents of the theories and policies advanced by Comrade Mao Tse-tung in this connection are as follows:
FIRST, it is necessary to apply the Marxist-Leninist law of the unity of opposites to the study of socialist society. The law of contradiction in all things, i.e., the law of the unity of opposites, is a fundamental law of materialist dialectics. It operates everywhere, whether in the natural world, in human society, or in the human thought.
The opposites in a contradiction both unite and struggle with each other, and it is this that forces things to move and change. Socialist society is no exception. In socialist society there are two kinds of social contradictions, namely, the contradictions among the people and those between ourselves and the enemy. These two kinds of contradictions are entirely different in their essence, and the methods for handling them should be different, too. Their correct handling will result in the increasing consolidation of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the further strenghtening and development of socialist society.
Many people acknowledge the law of the unity of opposites but are unable to apply it in studying and handling questions in socialist society. They refuse to admit that there are contradictions in socialist society -- that there are not only contradictions between ourselves and the enemy but also contradictions among the people -- and they do not know how to distinguish between these two kinds of social contradictions and how to handle them correctly, and are therefore unable to deal correctly with the question of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
SECOND, socialist society covers a very long historical period. Classes and class struggle continue to exist in this society, and the struggle still goes on between the road of socialism and the road of capitalism. The socialist revolution on the economic front (in the ownership of the means of production) is insufficient by itself and cannot be consolidated. There must also be a thorough socialist revolution on the political and ideological fronts.
Here a very long period of time is needed to decide "who will win" in the struggle between socialism and capitalism. Several decades won't do it; success requires anywhere from one to several centuries. On the question of duration, it is better to prepare for a longer rather than a shorter period of time.
On the question of effort, it is better to regard the task as difficult rather than easy. It will be more advantageous and less harmful to think and act in this way. Anyone who fails to see this or to appreciate it fully will make tremendous mistakes. During the historical period of socialism it is necessary to maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat and carry the socialist revolution through to the end if the restoration of capitalism is to be prevented, socialist construction carried forward and the conditions created for the transition to communism.
THIRD, the dictatorship of the proletariat is led by the working class, with the worker-peasant alliance as its basis. This means the exercise of dictatorship by the working class and by the people under its leadership over the reactionary classes and individuals and those elements who oppose socialist transformation and socialist construction. Within the ranks of the people democratic centralism is practised. Ours is the broadest democracy beyond the bounds of possibility for any bourgeois state.
FOURTH, in both socialist revolution and socialist construction it is necessary to adhere to the mass line, boldly to arouse the masses and to unfold mass movements on a large scale. The mass line of "from the masses, to the masses" is the basic line in all the work of our Party. It is necessary to have firm confidence in the majority of the people and, above all, in the majority of the worker-peasant masses. We must be good at consulting the masses in our work and under no circumstances alienate ourselves from them.
Both commandism and the attitude of one dispensing favours have to be fought. The full and frank expression of views and great debates are important forms of revolutionary struggle which have been created by the people of our country in the course of their long revolutionary fight, forms of struggle which rely on the masses for resolving contradictions among the people and contradictions between ourselves and the enemy.
FIFTH, whether in socialist revolution or in socialist construction, it is necessary to solve the question of whom to rely on, whom to win over and whom to oppose. The proletariat and its vanguard must make a class analysis of socialist society, rely on the truly dependable forces that firmly take the socialist road, win over all allies that can be won over, and unite with the masses of the people, who constitute more than ninety-five per cent of the population, in a common struggle against the enemies of socialism.
In the rural areas, after the collectivization of agriculture it is necessary to rely on the poor and lower middle peasants in order to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat and the worker-peasant alliance, defeat the spontaneous capitalist tendencies and extend the policies of socialism.
SIXTH, it is necessary to conduct extensive socialist education movements repeatedly in the cities and the countryside. In these continuous movements for educating the people we must be good at organizing the revolutionary class forces, enhancing their class consciousness, correctly handling contradictions among the people and uniting all those who can be united.
In these movements it is necessary to wage a sharp, tit-for-tat struggle against the anti-socialist, capitalist and feudal forces -- the landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries and bourgeois rightists, and the embezzlers, grafters and degenerates - in order to smash the attacks they unleash against socialism and to remould the majority of them into new men.
SEVENTH, one of the basic tasks of the dictatorship of the proletariat is actively to expand the socialist economy. It is necessary to achieve the modernization of industry, agriculture, science and technology, and national defence step by step under the guidance of the genaral policy of developing the national economy with agriculture as the foundation and industry as the leading factor. On the basis of the growth of production, it is necessary to raise the living standards of the people gradually and on a broad scale.
EIGHTH, ownership by the whole people and collective ownership are the two forms of socialist economy. The transition from collective ownership to ownership by the whole people, from two kinds of ownership to a unitary ownership by the whole people, is a rather long process. Collective ownership itself develops from lower to higher levels and from smaller to larger scale. The people's communes which the Chinese people have created is a suitable form of organization for the solution of the question of this transition.
NINTH, "Let a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend" is a policy for stimulating the growth of the arts and the progress of science and for promoting a flourishing socialist culture. Education must serve proletarian politics and must be combined with productive labour. The working people should master knowledge and the intellectuals should become habituated to manual labour.
Among those engaged in science, culture, the arts and education, the struggle to promote proletarian ideology and destroy bourgeois ideology is a protracted and fierce clas struggle. It is necessary to build up a large detachment of working-class intellectuals who serve socialism and who are both "red and expert", i.e., who are both politically conscious and professionally competent, by means of cultural revolution, and revolutionary practice in class struggle, the struggle for production and scientific experiment.
TENTH, it is necessary to maintain the system of cadre participation in collective productive labour. The cadres of our Party and state are ordinary workers and not overlords sitting on the backs of the people. By taking part in collective productive labour, the cadres maintain extensive, constant and close ties with the working people. This is a major measure of fundamental importance for a socialist system; it helps to overcome bureaucracy and to prevent revisionism and dogmatism.
ELEVENTH, the system of high salaries for a small number of people should never be applied. The gap between the incomes of the working personell of the Party, the government, the enterprises and the people's communes, on the one hand, and the incomes of the mass of people, on the other, should be rationally and gradually narrowed and not widened. All working personell must be prevented from abusing their power and enjoying special privileges.
TWELFTH, it is always necessary for the people's armed forces in a socialist country to be under the leadership of the Party of the proletariat and under the supervision of the masses, and they must always maintain the glorious tradition of a people's army, with unity between the army and the people and between the officers and men.
It is necessary to keep the system under which officers serve as common soldiers at regular intervals. It is necessary to practice military democracy, political democracy and economic democracy. Moreover, militia units should be organized and trained all over the country, so as to make everybody a soldier. The guns must forever be in the hands of the Party and the people and must never be allowed to become the instruments of careerists.
THIRTEENTH, the people's public security organs must always be under the leadership of the Party of the proletariat and under the supervision of the mass of the people. In the struggle to defend the fruits of socialism and the people's interests, the policy must be applied of relying on the combined efforts of the broad masses and the security organs, so that not a single bad person escapes or a single good person is wronged. Counter-revolutionaries must be suppressed whenever found, and mistakes must be corrected whenever discovered.
FOURTEENTH, in foreign policy, it is necessary to uphold proletarian internationalism and oppose great-power chauvinism and national egoism. The socialist camp is the product of the struggle of the international proletariat and working people. It belongs to the proletariat and working people of the whole world as well as to the people of the socialist countries.
We must truly put into effect the fighting slogans, "Workers of all countries, unite!" and "Workers and oppressed nations of the world, unite!", resolutly combat the anti-Communist, anti-popular and counter-revolutionary policies of imperialism and reaction and support the revolutionary struggles of all the oppressed classes and oppressed nations.
Relations among socialist countries should be based on the principles of independence, complete equality and the proletarian internationalist principle of mutual support and mutual assistance. Every socialist country should rely mainly on itself for its construction. If any socialist country practices national egoism in its foreign policy, or, worse yet, eagerly works in partnership with imperialism for the partition of the world, such conduct is degenerate and a betrayal of proletarian internationalism.
FIFTEENTH, as the vanguard of the proletariat, the Communist Party must exist as long as the dictatorship of the proletariat exists. The Communist Party is the highest form of organization of the proletariat. The leading role of the proletariat is realized through the leadership of the Communist Party. The system of Party committees exercising leadership must be put into effect in all departments.
During the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the proletarian party must maintain and strenghten its close ties with the proletariat and the broad masses of the working people, maintain and develop its vigorous revolutionary style, uphold the principle of integrating the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete practice of its own country, and per- sist in the struggle angainst revisionism, dogmatism and opportunism of evry kind.
In the light of the historical lessons of the dictatorship of the proletariat Comrade Mao Tse-tung has stated:
Class struggle, the struggle for production and scientific experiment are the three great revolutionary movements for building a mighty socialist country. These movements are a sure guarantee that Communists will be free from bureaucracy and immune against revisionism and dogmatism, and will forever remain invincible. They are a reliable guarantee that the proletariat will be able to unite with the broad working masses and realize a democratic dictatorship.
If, in the absence of these movements, the landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, bad elements and ogres of all kinds were allowed to crawl out, while our cadres were to shut their eyes to all this and in many cases fail even to differentiate between the enemy and ourselves but were to collaborate with the enemy and become corrupted and demoralized, if our cadres were thus dragged into the enemy camp or the enemy were able to sneak into our ranks, and if many of our workers, peasants and intellectuals were left defenceless against both the soft and the hard tactics of the enemy, then it would not take long, perhaps only several years or a decade, or several decades at most, before a counter-revo- lutionary restoration on a national scale inevitably occurred, the Marxist-Leninist party would inevitably become a revisionist party or a fascist party, and the whole of China would change its colour.
[Mao Tse-tung, Note on "The Seven Well-Written Documents of the Chekiang Province Concerning Cadres' Participation in Physical Labour", May 9, 1963.]
Comrade Mao Tse-tung has pointed out that, in order to guarantee that our Party and country do not change their colour, we must not only have a correct line and correct policies but must train and bring up millions of successors who will carry on the cause of proletarian revolution.
In the final analysis, the question of training successors for the revolutionary cause of the proletariat is one of whether or not there will be people who can carry on the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary cause started by the older generation of proleta- rian revolutionaries, whether or not the leadership of our Party and state will remain in the hands of proletarian revolutionaries, whether or not our descendants will continue to march along the correct road laid down by Marxism-Leninism, or, in other words, whether or not we can sussessfully prevent the emergence of Khrushchovite revisionism in China.
In short, it is an extremely important question, a matter of life and death for our Party and our country. It is a question of fundamental importance to the proletarian revolutionary cause for a hundred, athousand, nay ten thousand years. Basing themselves on the changes in the Soviet Union, the imperialist prophets are pinning their hopes on "peaceful evolution" on the third or forth generation of the Chinese Party. We must shatter these imperialist prophecies. From our highest organizations down to the grass-roots, we must everywhere give constant attention to the training and upbringing of successors to the revolutionary cause.
What are the requirements for worthy successors to the revolutionary cause of the proletariat?
They must be genuine Marxist-Leninists and not revisionists like Khrushchov wearing the cloak of Marxism-Leninism.
They must be revolutionaries who whole-heartedly serve the majority of the people of China and the whole world, and must not be like Khrushchov who serves both the interests of a handful of members of the privileged bourgeois stratum in his own country and those of foreign imperialism and reaction.
They must be proletarian statesmen capable of uniting and working together with the overwhelming majority. Not only must they unite with those who agree with them, they must also be good at uniting with those who disagree and even with those who formerly opposed them and have since been proven wrong. But they must especially watch out for careerists and conspirators like Khrushchov and prevent such bad elements from usurping the leadership of the Party and government at any level.
They must be models in applying the Party's democratic centralism, must master the method of leadership based on the principle of "from the masses, to the masses", and must cultivate a democratic style and be good at listening to the masses. They must not be despotic like Khrushchov and violate the Party's democratic centralism, make surprise attacks on comrades or act arbitrarily and dictatorically.
They must be modest and prudent and guard against arrogance and impetuosity; they must be imbued with the spirit of self-criticism and have the courage to correct mistakes and shortcomings in their work. They must not cover up their errors like Khrushchov, and claim all the credit for themselves and shift all the blame on others.
Successors to the revolutionary cause of the proletariat come forward in mass struggles and are tempered in the great storms of revolution. It is essential to test and know cadres and choose and train successors in the long course of mass struggle.
The above principles advanced by Comrade Mao Tse-tung are creative developments of Marxism-Leninism, to the theoretical arsenal of which they add new weapons of decisive importance for us in preventing the restoration of capitalism. So long as we follow these principles, we can consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat, ensure that our Party and state will never change colour, successfully conduct the socialist revlution and socialist construction, help all peoples' revolutionary movements for the overthrow of imperialism and its lackeys, and guarantee the future transition from socialism to communism.
Regarding the emergence of the revisionist Khrushchov clique in the Soviet Union, our attitude as Marxist-Leninists is the same as our attitude towards any "disturbance" -- first, we are against it; second, we are not afraid of it.
We did not wish it and are opposed to it, but since the revisionist Khrushchov clique have already emerged, there is nothing terrifying about it, and there is no need for alarm. The earth will continue to revolve, history will continue to move forward, the people of the world will, as always, make revolutions, and the imperialists and their lackeys will inevitably meet their doom.
The historic contributions of the great Soviet people will remain forever glorious; they can never be tarnished by the revisionist Khrushchov clique's betrayal. The broad masses of workers, peasants, revolutionary intellectuals and Communists of the Soviet Union will eventually surmount all the obstacles in their part and march towards communism.
The Soviet people, the people of all the socialist countries and the revolutionary people the world over will certainly learn lessons from the revisionist Khrushchov clique's betrayal. In the struggle against Khrushchov's revisionism, the international communist movement has grown and will continue to grow mightier than before.
Marxist-Leninists have always had an attitude of revolutionary optimism towards the future of the cause of the proletarian revolution. We are profoundly convinced that the brilliant light of the dictatorship of the proletariat, of socialism and of Marxism-Leninism will shine forth over the Soviet land. The proletariat is sure to acieve complete and final victory on earth.
Transcribed by Rolf Martens in 1997.