Stalin’s case cannot be settled by Khrushchevite revisionists
With or without Khrushchev, Khrushchevites remain traitors to communism
Taking their cue from Titoite experience, the Soviet revisionist leaders created conditions for the reestablishment of capitalism
Khrushchevite revisionist leaders go to their Congress as lackeys of the aggressive policy of American imperialism
Khrushchevite revisionists — splitters and enemies of the international communist movement
Soviet revisionist leaders are now giving the last touches to the preparations to set up and herald the 23d Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which will open in Moscow on the 29th of this month. The revisionist propaganda machinery is doing its uttermost to arouse among people a sham enthusiasm, a false atmosphere of important decisions and radical «changes» to come. Apparently its organizers will leave nothing undone to speculate with figures and percentages of present and future plans, with cosmonauts and atomic bombs, with kindergartens and upper schools. Revisionist masters of parades will do their best to cover up and smother, at least during the time the Congress is on, the bitter reality with fanfare and pomposity. But the great predicament and deep contradictions which have harassed the Soviet revisionist leaders cannot be easily concealed and camouflaged.
Congresses of all communist parties are extremely important events in their life, they are meetings at which a balance sheet is drawn of the work done and tasks are set for the future, at which a deep analysis is made of the successes and failures and the party i-enders account of what it has achieved and what it will achieve to its people. They draw up a scrupulous scientific verification of the line of the party in all fields, mobilize forces for fresh revolutionary battles. But what are the new Soviet leaders taking with them to the Congress, with what balance sheet of achievements do they come before the Soviet people, what do they urge them to work and fight for?
The Khrushchevite line, formulated and canonized at the 20th and 22nd Congresses, adopted and totally upheld by the new leaders of the party, failed completely and in all fronts. Their persistent and foolhardy pursuance of the policy of betrayal to Marxism-Leninism, to the revolution and socialism has placed the Khrushchevite revisionists before serious predicaments, failures and contradictions which become more and more widespread and complicated. The state of Soviet workers has deteriorated, the country has been swept by a spirit of pessimism and defeatism, the prestige and international authority of the Soviet Union have been lowered.
Only ten years have passed by since the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, when Nikita Khrushchev unfurled his ragged banner of revisionism. But what hard blows have the Soviet people had to receive, what hardships they had to endure, what traumata their conscience had to experience! In congresses and plenums their leaders promised them the communist paradise, whereas in practice they plunged them into Khrushchevite hell. They were subjected to reform after reform, to experimental organizations and reorganizations, to corrections and changes, which led to a great disorganization and unparalleled confusion. They were repeatedly promised that, if not this year, the next the state of the Soviet workers would be «improved» in a most radical way,-that abundance would be created, that people would eat out of golden spoons and that Khrushchevite chiefs would sleep on laurels of «victory», thanks to «measures» taken by the leadership, to «the scientific analysis» it had made of the situation, thanks to «the Leninist spirit» which it had established in the party and in the government, thanks to the «corrections» of defects, to the «Leninist style» in work and so on. But the day-to-day life of the people cannot be adjusted by words, it cannot be kept going by illusions and lies. Reality, concrete facts soon laid bare all the demagogy, falsehood and charlatanry of those persons who usurped the leadership of the party and of the state in the Soviet Union by devilish, putschist methods and intrigues and plots. The idealistic, pragmatist and opportunist methods which they adopted turned to hard blows on their authors themselves. They themselves fell into the traps they had laid against Leninism, against the Soviet people and the world revolution. Khrushchev’s ouster was a clear indication of the failure of the whole of his treacherous line, of his methods and reforms, his failure to force Khrushchevite revisionism on the Soviet people and the on international communist movement.
The persons who replaced Khrushchev and who are his closest companions and collaborators resorted to all kinds of maneuvers, after his ouster, to repair the serious fractures he had caused to their line. But so long as there are crooked foundations the building cannot be erected to stand upright. By eliminating Khrushchev’s extravagances, precipitations and quackery they did not go further than make a slight correction of style which may have a certain significance for the individual but no significance whatsoever for the line he represents. The opportunist treacherous and anti-Marxist line of the 20th and 22nd Congresses and of the Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union remained, the political and economic difficulties and contradictions remained, the heavy failures of the Khrushchevite course remain. Khrushchev’s removal has even brought them more to the fore, has even deepened them more. The new leaders made no reply to the many questions asked after his removal. They tried to silence people through certain general assertions and usual sophisms but the results were deplorable. The fundamental problems of the present political and economic life which have preoccupied Soviet society these recent years have not been solved.
Brezhneev, Kosygin, Mikoyan, Suslov and others have now convened the 23d Congress of the party. But how will they justify their utterly hostile attitude towards the case of Stalin, to the members of their party, to the Soviet people, to the communists and progressive people of the world, how will they justify Khrushchev’s removal or their contact and collaboration with American imperialism, their chauvinistic policy toward socialist countries, their outright hostile attacks on the Party of Labor and the People’s Republic of Albania, their anti-Chinese assaults and divisive interferences in communist parties? What will they say about the Soviet economy marking time and agricultural production falling, about undermining socialist virtues and bourgeois degeneration of Soviet society? Of course they may combine in this Congress, as they have done on other occasions, a number of «figures and facts» to «confirm» their «successes», but the matters we referred to above are problems which cannot be overcome. Demagogy can in no case be successful, but when it constitutes the basic method of work and of conduct, as it is now happening with the new Soviet leaders, it turns into a death blow to the very ones who use it. It suffices to cast a glance on the present state of affairs in the Soviet Union, on the trends of the internal and external policy of its leaders, to acquire a clear idea of the grave crisis which the Khrushchevite revisionist line is experiencing.
Stalin’s case cannot be settled by Khrushchevite revisionists
Stalin’s case has remained as a hard lump in Khrushchevite revisionists’ throat. They have turned and returned to this matter over and over again because they have come up against the growing disapproval and firm resistance of the communists and the Soviet people as well as of the workers and revolutionaries of other countries. The Soviet people have never been persuaded of the validity of the frenzied assaults and base and false accusations against Stalin. Moreover, as time went by, even those who were at first deceived began to wake up and learn the truth. Through their own experience people came to realize that the line which emerged under the slogan of fighting Stalin and «Stalinism» was an anti-Marxist, revisionist and treacherous line from top to bottom. They saw that most monstrous slanders were launched, under the guise of fighting «the cult of the individual and its consequences», against the socialist order, against the dictatorship of the proletariat and the communist party, that the historic achievements of the Soviet people fighting to build socialism and to defend their country were pictured in dark colors, that the enemies of Soviet rule and socialism were re-habilitated, that many sound revolutionary cadres, loyal to the cause of the people and of socialism, were eliminated, that gross banalities and vulgar insults were hurled on all the Soviet people who, under Stalin’s leadership, had accomplished heroic tasks and had written glorious pages in their revolutionary history. Communists and all honest people became more and more convinced that the battle against Stalin served the Khrushchevites to do away with Leninism, to revise all the revolutionary theory of the communists in order to pave the way to the bourgeois degeneration of socialism.
The inglorious downfall of N. Khrushchev, the principal author of the anti-Stalinist campaign, was a great failure and a crushing blow to the bluff against Stalin. People began to put many question marks, they began to question everything that had been said against Stalin, and of the period of his leadership, by bankrupt Khrushchev and his anti-Marxist collaborators, they began to cast, a skeptic eye on all the measures taken by Khrushchevite leaders in all fields under the framework of the so-called «fight against J. V. Stalin’s cult of the individual and its consequences». The wave of protest mounted high and there were even persons who began to speak and speak openly. This situation placed the Soviet revisionist leaders in a very critical position. That is why they felt obliged to maneuver, to create illusions that some changes were taking place, that the group of traitors composed of Brezhneev, Kosygin, Suslov, Mikoyan and Co. were «objective» and so on and so forth.
The present Soviet leaders felt obliged to maneuver in Stalin’s case, by spreading word about an «object.ive» examination of his role, for yet another reason. The question is that all assaults against Stalin began to turn against their very authors themselves. The frenzied anti-Stalinist campaign brought to the top the scum of Soviet society, all kinds of degenerated, bourgeois and career-seeking persons of extremely counter-revolutionary, anti-Soviet and anti-socialist trends. They became blatant spokesmen of the anti-communist propaganda of imperialism, they openly opposed the basis of the socialist order going as far as to publish their sordid slanderous books in the reactionary press of the West, calling to account even the Soviet revisionist leaders, Khrushchev, Mikoyan, Brezhneev, Kosygin, Suslov and others for the «crimes» which seem to have allegedly been committed at the time of Stalin when they too had been in the leading organs of the party.
But is it possible to correct the attitude towards J. V. Stalin and to re-habilitate J. V. Stalin from revisionist positions? Nothing of this kind can ever happen. Because re-habilitating Stalin, correcting, in the full sense of the word, the attitude towards Stalin, carries with it the denial of revisionism, the wiping out of Khrushchevite treason. The present Soviet leaders are the authors of the attack against Stalin, against the revolution, against communism. It was through their assaults on Stalin that they embarked on the road to open betrayal, it was through their assaults on Stalin that they began their work of diversion against the Soviet Union and the international communist movement. Therefore, to think for a moment that the Khrushchevites themselves can re-habilitate Stalin is the same as to admit that they would tie the rope around their neck of their own free will. Because by so doing they would do away with the whole structure of their bastion, they would blow up the whole line of the 20th and 22nd Congresses which has anti-Stalinism at its root.
With or without Khrushchev, Khrushchevites remain traitors to communism
One of the most acute problems which the Soviet leaders are at a loss as to how to solve, is Khrushchev’s case itself, that is, the reason and justification for the ’coup d’etat’ which his former pupils and closest collaborators dealt to him. So far, they have repeatedly denounced, in speeches and in the press, such evils as «subjectivism», «bombast», «precipitation in reviewing important issues», «departure from scientific grounds» and so on, but they never link these «maledictions» with Khrushchev’s name though everybody knows that they are attributed to him. Something may be said against him at the Congress but no one can expect that more will be said than some general insignificant condemnations. If they were to tell the truth they would have to disclose the great plots they, together with Khrushchev, had concocted against the party and the Soviet people, they would have to disclose their backstage dealings, intrigues and putschist methods they used in changing guards at the top leadership of the party and state. A broad treatment of the case of Khrushchev’s removal would lead to the source of Khrushchevism, would lead to disclosing what they hush, up so carefully, for they removed him because he failed both in internal and external policy. But all of this is a ridiculous situation. On one hand they uphold the 20th and 22nd Congresses, the entire revisionist line of Khrushchev, on the other, they reproach their mentor and inspirer with «subjectivism», «ignorance of reality», «immature conclusions» and so on. Just who Khrushchev has been and what dirty work he has done is now familiar knowledge for all. But if he has been such a one as his substitutes call him now, haven’t his shortcomings been reflected, however slightly, in the resolutions of the 20th, 21st and 22nd Congresses, in the program of the party and in other important decisions which they abide by to the letter? So far we have not heard that his successors have made even the slightest corrections to these documents except pledges of loyalty to the last, and assurances that they are determined to carry them out persistently and at any time and under any circumstances.
Communists and the Soviet people cannot fail to see in what predicaments the Soviet leaders have placed themselves in their desperate efforts to conceal the great bluff in the game of Khrushchev’s removal. With or without Khrushchev, Khrushchevism remains always Khrushchevism. Fraudulent tactics, hypocrisy and play of words do not at all change the situation. This truth is too well known to all the members of the Communist Party and the Soviet • citizens. Through manipulations they may resort to at the Congress on this matter their leaders, far from persuading anybody, will, on the contrary, expose themselves more openly, and will emerge once again in public as persistent carriers of the Khrushchevite anti-Marxist, opportunist and treacherous line.
Taking their cue from Titoite experience, the Soviet revisionist leaders created conditions for the re-establishment of capitalism.
If a balance sheet is drawn of the activities of the new leaders from Khrushchev’s removal to this day, one can very easily see that his successors have gone further ahead along the path of revisionism, that they have caused further and greater damage to the Soviet people, that they have intensified their attacks on the socialist camp and their divisive acts in the international communist movement, that they have come closer to and have increased their collaboration with the American imperialists and various other reactionaries.
The new economic reforms which are now being put into effect in the Soviet Union lead to the establishment of forms of capitalist relations in production. By adopting the experience of Tito’s clique in management and direction of economy, revisionist leaders created all the premises and conditions for the re-establishment, of capitalism. In spite of the loud propaganda Khrushchevite revisionists have made to convince public opinion that the new «reforms» are a practical application of «the last word» of the economic science of socialism, that they mark a «turn» to Lenin, that they reflect objective reality and trends of development of present Soviet society, one comes across a perceptible distrust, resistance and skepticism throughout the Soviet Union. This state of mind of the masses of workers compelled Kosygin, Brezhneev and others themselves to admit publicly in plenums and recent public utterances that the level of national incomes has lowered, that increase of yield is making no headway, that the rates of increase of industrial production is getting smaller and smaller from year to year, that the quality of commodities continues to be bad and so on. As to agriculture it is now in a very critical situation. From being an exporter the Soviet Union has now become the greatest importer of cereals in the world; the daily bread of the Soviet people is now at the mercy of the whims of American or Canadian merchants dealing in grains.
The Soviet people cannot fail to see that the new measures Khrushchevite leaders have taken are a continuation and a further deepening of Khrushchev’s disastrous reforms which plunged Soviet economy into this continual plight. They cannot fail to see that the reforms of the new leaders are the application of the experience of the Titoite clique in the Soviet Union.
He who has made a close study of the essence of the recent reforms applied in Soviet economy will surely have noticed that they are as like as two drops of water with the economic reforms of the Titoites, that the way of future development in Yugoslavia and the consequences that are being felt there as a result of the application of the decisions of the 8th Congress of the League of Jugoslav Communists and of the economic reforms of the Titoites, foretell also the future development and total degeneration into which the new treacherous revisionist leaders are plunging the Soviet Union. As to the problems of future development of the Soviet Union, the 23d Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union will be a replica of the 8th Congress of the Titoites. What results were achieved by the Congress of the Titoites, what opportunities and perspectives did it open up for the Yugoslav people?
It is now a known fact that Yugoslavia has been placed entirely under the political and economic control of the imperialists and the bourgeois reactionaries represented by Tito’s clique. The country is in a critical situation, a thing which was very clearly voiced at the recent plenum of the Titoites. Yugoslav economy is experiencing great adversities, enterprises are failing, other enterprises set up under instructions from the Titoite clique are submitting to foreign capital in order to keep from failing, unemployment is on the rise and the living standards of workers is continually lowering. The bourgeois capitalist policy which Tito’s clique is pursuing is giving rise to unbridled nationalism and chauvinism. Tito, Rankovich, Kardelj and other heads of Titoism themselves have sounded the alarm. They are of course disturbed because they shared the same fate as the magician who let the genii loose and could not collect them under his control again. But the Titoites are disturbed also by the fact that, knowing that Yugoslavia is a pattern for all other revisionists, the manifestations of these phenomena in such a sensational way might have a bad effect in the Soviet Union and in other countries where the Titoite experience is being applied with so much zeal and where the same evils, typical of bourgeois capitalist society, are coming to the fore.
As a matter of fact, in addition to the devastating consequences which the reforms of the Khrushchevites are bringing to Soviet economy, foreign capital is poking its nose in the Soviet Union just as in Yugoslavia. The monopolist capital of the principal imperialist countries which at the time of the October Revolution tried to penetrate into the Russian market with the assistance of armed intervention, but which failed with shame thanks to the heroic resistance of the Bolsheviki, is now legally entering more and more in the Soviet Union in a peaceful way, thanks to the auspices of the Khrushchevites. Soviet economy, regardless of its being the economy of a big country, is steadily being brought into the clutches of the monopoly capital of the USA, of Prance, England, Japan and others. Everyone knows that it was Khrushchev who called on Western monopolies to invest their capital in the Soviet Union. His successors started at once to put it into practice at first in silence, through secret agreements, whereas now more openly, re-echoing also in the press. Thus, talks have recently been going on between the Soviet Union and Japan regarding investment of Japanese capital in Siberia. The Soviet news agency TASS itself announces that the question of Japan’s participation in exploiting Siberia, particularly, of collaboration in the gas, naphtha and lumber industries, is under discussion. TASS stresses that «the exploitation of Siberian gas will help to a large extent in the development of the Japanese industrial regions on the Japanese coastline» and that «Siberia is a good market for the sale of Japanese machinery» and so on and so forth. Thus, truly important opportunities are opened up for Japanese capital. Not only economic but, first and foremost, political. In fact, by concluding agreements with Japanese imperialists and by drawing them into the Siberian market, the Khrushchevites are openly encouraging the aggressive and expansionist inclinations of Japanese militarists, first and foremost, against the People’s Republic of China and the Democratic Republic of Korea. These tendencies fully coincide with the anti-Chinese intentions of the present Soviet leaders themselves.
By encouraging the flow of foreign capital into Soviet economy Soviet revisionist leaders hope to regulate somehow their balances of payment, especially in foreign trade, to overcome the great economic handicaps they have created for the Soviet Union. But history has proven and the Yugoslav experience shows too clearly that such a procedure will cause more serious difficulties and catastrophic consequences to peoples and to the fare of the revolution in the Soviet Union.
The treacherous policy of the Khrushchevite revisionists to re-establish capitalism in the Soviet Union is also manifested in the rise of a number of ugly phenomena in the way of life and culture and in the national problem. A few days ago the Moscow review «Komunist» complained in one of its articles that some writers have departed from the best traditions of Soviet literature and from the principles of socialist realism. If the evil rested only on certain writers, this could be easily adjusted. But these writers did not emerge by chance. They sprang up like mushrooms after rain in the general atmosphere of the liberalist, decadent spirit which runs now through the literary and artistic life of the Soviet Union, resulting from the anti-socialist and anti-Marxist policy of the revisionist leaders in the realm of culture. As long as the gates of the Soviet Union have been opened to all currents of Western bourgeois art, as long as books, films, exhibitions and other commodities of the spiritual culture of imperialism are spreading all over the country, what can one expect more? «Cultural exchanges» with Western countries have encouraged an imitation of the American way of life, the degeneration of youth and the increase of corruption.
Sensational columns of stealth, looting, fraud, speculations and the like are increasingly filling the pages of the Soviet newspapers now. Who is to blame for this? Soviet leaders may send to court certain enemies of the Soviet people of the Sinyavsky and Daniel type who slander and insult the history and the heroic war of the people openly, but how many other secret enemies, including those who are at the head of the Party and of the State, insult and offend the Soviet people, deny and make light of their glorious revolutionary traditions? They may pass a sentence of two extremist writers for anti-communist propaganda and slanders against the Soviet Union, but this is a great bluff, for the main persons to blame are the present Soviet leaders themselves who, through their unbridled assaults and slanders against Stalin and his deeds, against the Soviet order and socialism, through their entire opportunist and treacherous line, fostered anti-Soviet trends and paved the way for these contemptible dregs of Soviet society to rise to the surface. Therefore, if it is a question of sending culprits to court, the first to pass sentence on are the Khrushchevite revisionist leaders, as sworn traitors to the great Soviet people, to Lenin’s and Stalin’s homeland. And we are certain that the day of this great judgment of the revolution is not far off.
The signs of nationalist and chauvinist manifestations appeared in the Soviet Union as early as at the time of Khrushchev. At first they burst forth in the form of anti-Semitism. But later on and particularly in recent times this feeling of national rivalry and chauvinism is high between Ukrainians and Russians, between Georgians and Armenians and so on and so forth and, in the same way in Yugoslavia between Serbs and Croatians and so on. What you sow you will reap, a proverb of the people has it. By relinquishing the Marxist-Leninist line and basing their activities on the treacherous revisionist line, the Khrushchevite leaders could not help opening up these old ugly wounds typical of capitalist development. Therefore, we will soon be hearing that in the leading organs of the Soviet Union too, the same thing will come to pass as that which occurred at the last plenum of the Titoites, that the leaders of various nationalities themselves will unsheath the dagger of chauvinism and nationalist rivalry as spokesmen of their national bourgeoisie.
Soviet revisionist leaders have spread word that they may eventually allow the republication of Stalin’s famous book «On the National Question». This, of course, is part of the general attempts of Khrushchevites to give the impression of their alleged unbiased attitude towards Stalin. But there may be still one other reason behind this: the Khrushchevites, foreseeing the coming danger of the aggravation of the national problem, intend to utilize Stalin’s Marxist-Leninist teachings to ward off a catastrophe. But neither with regard to the national problem nor with regard to any other problem can Marxism-Leninism be applied when the revisionist basis is kept, intact. Only Marxist-Leninists and genuine revolutionaries of the Soviet Union, guided by Lenin’s and Stalin’s teachings, can turn the Soviet Union on the right road to socialism, and communism, provided they overthrow the Khrushchevite revisionist leaders.
Brezhneev, Kosygin, Suslov, Mikoyan and their companions are to blame for the great economic and political difficulties experienced by the Soviet people. They have to render account to the party and the Soviet people for their treason. But no one can expect that these Khrushchevite revisionist leaders can openly admit their responsibility at the present Congress. This would be tantamount to undersigning by their own hand the warrant of capitulation and bankruptcy of the revisionist line which they have put into effect. No doubt they will try this time as usual to shift the responsibility by accusing Stalin, probably hurling a word or two at Khrushchev, for not having taken, at their time, the «measures» that are being taken now. But this is an out-dated, long faded tactic. Failures in the economic, cultural and political fields, in the national problem and so on, affect every citizen directly, they are soon felt and felt to a high degree by all the people and no demagogic maneuvers can keep them in the background. One cannot always blame the past for the present, more so when one sees very clearly that the sole concern of the Soviet leaders is to form and consolidate a new class, a new bourgeoisie, which constitutes the prop of the revisionist regime, the main force which inspires and upholds the treacherous, capitulating, anti-Marxist policy Khrushchev’s successors pursue.
Khrushchevite revisionist leaders go to their Congress as lackeys of the aggressive policy of American imperialism
On the eve of their 23d Congress Khrushchevite revisionists feel very uneasy because they see an ever deepening contradiction between them and the communists and the Soviet people and the communists and people of the whole world, who are awakening and becoming aware of the downright treachery of the Soviet revisionist leaders. Khrushchev’s successors are also well aware that at such moments as these, when people reflect on the betrayal of revisionists, the order of the day must include such key problems as the case of the attitude towards J. V. Stalin, towards imperialism, towards socialist countries and towards the international communist movement. Therefore, pinning their hopes on deceiving the naive, the Soviet leaders try to steal a march, feigning as if they want to rectify something of the former line, by divesting it of Khrushchev’s excesses and brutal methods. Through this new demagogical maneuver Khrushchevite revisionists think they will win time, at least till the 23d Congress is over.
The maneuver of Khrushchevites for alleged rectifications is a very familiar method and a constituent part of the general tactics of the present Soviet leaders to continue their treacherous Khrushchevite line, the inglorious line of the 20th and 22nd Congresses, by a more refined demagogy. This is evident not only in the internal but also in the international field. They strive to create the impression that some corrections have been made and are being made also in their foreign policy, coming forth with their slogans of «anti-imperialism», of «unity of action» and of «upholding the war of peoples». But all these false slogans and all this insidious tactics have already been badly exposed, for people do not judge one by his words but by his deeds. And the deeds of the present Soviet leaders are a grave indictment, they reveal their true traitorous features, they show that, far from having corrected anything of Khrushchev’s line, they are proceeding with persistence along' that line and plunging deeper and deeper into the quagmire of treason.
It is the new Soviet leaders who have intensified their all-round Soviet-American collaboration, betraying the vital interests of peoples for its sake, it is they who are doing their uttermost to subjugate the heroic Vietnamese people and to rescue American imperialism from defeat in Viet Nam by striking all kinds of ugly bargainings to the detriment of the Vietnamese people; it is they who have concluded a «holy alliances with the Japanese imperialists and other reactionary forces to set up a «circle of fire» around People’s China and to threaten the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea; it is they who are trying their best to arrive at a new agreement with American imperialists regarding their so-called «nonproliferation of nuclear weapons» as a means to keep the monopoly of Soviet-American nuclear blackmail against other countries; it is they who have let imperialism undisturbed in Europe by pursuing a policy of «conciliation» and of keeping the status quo in this region, freeing the hands of the American imperialists to escalade their aggression in the East. Far from taking any positive step to correct the fatal blunders of the past, the new Soviet leaders have further deepened the split in the international communist movement and in the socialist camp.
From contact with imperialists, where Khrushchev left them, the new leaders crossed over to open collaboration with them, to coordination of attitudes, to joint political acts, which are embodied in concrete agreements and plots to establish the sway of two big Powers over the world. They became active allies of the USA and help the latter to carry out its global strategy. The revisionist clique which holds the reigns of state in the Soviet Union now have not only increased their unprincipled assaults on the People’s Republic of China, on the Chinese Communist Party and its leaders, but they have joined in closely with the American imperialists in pursuing the policy of «containing» China and «encircling it by fire». Their policy towards Asia has already assumed a mainly and entirely anti-Chinese character. Their support for Indian reactionaries, their arming and inciting them against the People’s Republic of China, Kosygin’s maneuver at the Indian-Pakistan meeting in Tashkent, Shelepin’s visit to Hanoi, the conclusion of the Mongolian-Soviet treaty, the overt and covert agreements with Japan are only a few examples that speak clearly of the active participation of Khrushchevite revisionists in the plot against the People’s Republic of China. Soviet leaders do not hesitate to cooperate now with such bankrupt reactionaries as the representatives of the Chang Kai-shek clique with whom they sat at table together during the discussions to set up the Bank of Asia sponsored by the American imperialists.
Soviet leaders, in dose collaboration with American imperialism, wreck and sabotage the liberation, anti-imperialist movement of peoples. An example of the most odious kind are their attempts to set up the armed forces of the United Nations, which will be no other than an international gendarmerie in the service of the hegemonist policy of the two Powers. Khrushchevite revisionists have left no slanders unuttered against the Indonesian revolution and, through their hostile and disrespectful attitude towards the Indonesian Communist Party, they have encouraged and incited the reactionary rightist forces. They do their uttermost to drive wedges and sow dissension among the ranks of the anti-imperialist forces of Asia, Africa and Latin America and to turn them away from their fight against imperialism and colonialism.
The line of capitulation and of betrayal to the interests of other people and of collaboration with imperialism is more clearly seen in the attitude which, the Soviet revisionist leaders maintain towards the war of the Vietnamese people against American aggression. They do all they can using open and secret pressure, unbridled demagogy and most refined diplomatic maneuvers to compel the Vietnamese people to relinquish their sacred war and accept American «peace». On the surface they feign to be friends of the people of Viet Nam but on the; other hand they support the «peace offensive» of imperialism. Their aim is to place a foot in Viet Nam and then settle its problem within the framework of Soviet-American collaboration. The war of the people of Viet Nam has frustrated all their insidious schemes. It has not only dealt a death blow to the aggressive policy of American imperialism but it has also badly exposed the double-faced game of the Khrushchevite revisionists, their capitulating stand, their policy of sabotaging liberation wars and of abandoning other people’s interests. Viet Nam’s heat of battle turned to ashes and dust the empty words of the Soviet revisionists on proletarian internationalism, on support and protection of socialist countries, on aid to people who fight against imperialism and so on. It showed that the Soviet revisionists pursue but one policy, the chauvinist policy of the big nation, of bourgeois nationalism, the policy of dividing zones of influence with imperialists and of interference in the internal affairs of peoples.
Khrushchevite revisionists — splitters and enemies of the international communist movement
This line is quite clearly seen also in the attitude the revisionist leaders maintain towards the international communist movement. They strive to achieve the same end as Khrushchev but with more refined tactics and methods. It was on their initiative and under their slogans that the divisive meeting was held in March last year in Moscow, that certain communist parties of Latin America came together in Havana, that consultations were held with European communist parties where modem revisionists hold sway and so on. Today, Khrushchevite revisionists have become the greatest splitters of the international democratic organizations as well. By trying to impose on them by all methods and means their line of «Khrushchevite peaceful co-existence», their line of renouncing anti-imperialist wars and of turning into an appendage of the policy of Soviet-American collaboration, they have caused great damage to them and have heavily jeopardized the purpose for which they were set up.
At a still more rapid rate do the Soviet leaders continue their subversion and corruption among revisionist leaders of communist and workers’ parties and wage a defamatory battle against Marxist-Leninists. They have gone so far as to use even the Council of Mutual Economic Aid or the Warsaw Treaty, which was set up to protect socialist countries and to help their development towards socialism, as a means of pressure on other members, as a weapon to carry out the chauvinist policy of intervention and subjugation.
It was the present Soviet leaders who, together with Khrushchev, organized most monstrous slanders against the Party of Labor of Albania at the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, it was they who established an economic blockade against our country and ruptured even diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of Albania. They organized and continue in various ways their anti-Albanian campaign, mobilizing also all their revisionist followers for this purpose. They accused the leaders of our Party and of our State as agents of imperialism. And yet the present Soviet leaders most impudently pose as if nothing has come to pass, as if the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Government have conducted themselves with correctness towards the Party of Labor and the People’s Republic of Albania. This expresses their anti-Marxist and chauvinist view of the big state, according to which Khrushchevite revisionists can behave as they please, while others, especially the smaller countries, must be at their mercy.
Proceeding from conceptions of this sort, the Soviet Khrushchevite leaders had the impudence to invite, a few days ago, our Party to send its delegation to the 23d Congress. But the Central Committee of the Party of Labor of Albania, rightly and contemptuously, refused to accept even the letter that contained this invitation, for no relations, either on a party or state level exist between the Party of Labor of Albania and the treacherous Soviet revisionist leaders whatsoever. The Party of Labor of Albania has neither had nor intends to have in mind the establishment of relations with traitors to communism, with renegades to Marxism-Leninism. This principled stand of the Party of Labor of
Albania is directed against the Soviet revisionist traitors. Whereas towards Soviet revolutionary communists and the Soviet people the Party of Labor and the people of Albania nurture feelings of sincere affection which the Khrushchevite leaders have neither been nor will ever be able to impair. The Albanian people and their Party of Labor have been, are and will always be loyal friends and side by side with the Soviet people and revolutionaries both in days of weal and of woe.
As to the 23d Congress of the Soviet revisionists, it is, for our Party, a Congress of political corpses, a Congress prepared and set up from top to bottom by revisionist traitors in which there is not and cannot be place for genuine Marxist-Leninists. Participation at this Congress is support for traitors, it is a mockery to consistent Soviet revolutionaries. The Congress which the Soviet revisionists will hold is a meeting of renegades, at which new schemes will be concocted to deal blows to Marxism-Leninism and to the interests of socialism. Let the Soviet leaders amuse themselves with their lackeys, the revisionist representatives of certain parties which have always been appendages of Soviet revisionism. Let them work out with them their anti-Marxist schemes and take upon themselves their responsibility for joint betrayal before the whole communist movement.
The chain of treacherous, anti-Marxist and antisocialist acts of the Soviet leaders, as well as that of their failures and insurmountable difficulties, is a very long one. For Marxist-Leninists it is clear that as time rolls on the Soviet leaders plunge deeper and deeper into the mire of treason and anti-Marxism. There is little doubt that they will try, at the 23d Congress, to pose as persons eager to rectify Khrushchev in certain aspects, as supporters of unity eager to avoid excesses. At the Congress they will probably adopt the tactics of silence, hence refraining from assailing either the Communist Party of China, the Party of Labor of Albania or any other party. But this will be one further bluff similar to that of their appeal to allegedly put an end to polemics. For it is already a familiar fact that an anti-Chinese report is being worked out these days at the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. This report has even been given also to certain other revisionist parties which have allowed no discussions by communists at the party organizations where it is being referred. This anti-Chinese report of the Soviet leaders reminds one of the ill-famed secret report which N. Khrushchev read at the 20th Congress against J. V. Stalin. It is clear that the Soviet leaders are conducting themselves as plotters even now, at the 23d Congress. They are afraid of light, they dread confrontation and polemics, that is why they resort to secret, backstage dealings.
The activities of the treacherous Khrushchevite leaders, the whole policy they have pursued so far, show that at the Congress they will ask to sanctify Khrushchevism but without Khrushchev. They will try to get a license, be it ever so formal from a congress, to proceed along the line they worked out together with Khrushchev, to proceed further along towards capitalist degeneration of the social order in the Soviet Union, towards splitting the world communist movement, towards intensifying and deepening collaboration with American imperialism for the sake of placing the world under the domination of two Great Powers.
But no matter how hard they may try, no matter what tactics and demagogies they may resort to, the Soviet treacherous leaders will never succeed to achieve their objective. Marxist-Leninists and revolutionaries the world over are intensifying their fight against revisionist treason. New anti-revisionist parties and groups are springing up everywhere which are consolidating their positions both from the point of view of organization as well as in their contention to safeguard the positions of Marxism-Leninism. These parties and groups, which are organized also in countries where revisionists hold sway, have already become a serious danger for the fare of the Khrushchevites. The Soviet communists and people are witnessing with what failures and aims the Khrushchevites are going to their Congress. Many gloomy clouds are hovering over the Soviet Communist Party and the Soviet State. The historic achievements of the Soviet people which they attained through the glorious October Revolution and their nearly 50 years of endeavors are facing a serious peril. This peril is greater than that of the intervention of the Entente and that of Hitler’s assault. But we are certain that the Soviet people, who have brilliant revolutionary traditions to their credit and who have overcome major adversities, will not be misled by the demagogy of the revisionist clique. They will become' aware that the cause of all evil, of the serious difficulties they are now experiencing of the impending danger threatening them, lies with revisionism, with the line of the 20th and 22nd Congresses. Marxist-Leninists are convinced that the great Soviet people, the genuine Bolsheviki will never stand indifferent towards the events which are taking place today in the Soviet Union. They will never tolerate that a handful of renegades will deceive and betray them for long. One day they will accomplish their historic task — they will put an end to the rule of revisionist renegades and will march ahead, shoulder to shoulder with the revolutionaries of the whole world, along the brilliant path which the socialist revolution, Lenin and Stalin, have pointed out.
Click here to return to the
index of archival material.