Editorial

50 Years Later

For most communists, rather communist groups, on the far left, past is deadweight while future looks gloomy. But there are communists who would like to live in the past because they have no future in a changing world order. And they are deriving comfort from self-congratulating endeavours of a bygone era. They are commemorating 50 years of the June 14, 1963 letter of the Communist Party of China (CPC) on ‘Proposals on General Line of the International Communist Movement’. No doubt communist world was in turmoil in those days as the June 14 letter galvanised the great debate against international revisionism putting China on the historical centre stage. The Soviet Party was under attack for betraying revolutionary kernel of Marxism and practising authoritarian style of functioning in relation to fraternal communist parties across the world. The Chinese party succeeded in forcing split and split in communist parties throughout the world on ideological grounds in their fight against international revisionism. But much has changed since then. Soviet Russia is history. And the Chinese are flying the red flag to build capitalism with Chinese characteristics under the able and unified party called CPC. They won’t like to live in the revolutionary past, rather they would like to disown their own glorious past. They are moving forward in the brave world of capitalism, burying communist ideals and reversing the spirit of June 14, ’63 letter in favour of revisionism or reformism. Right now they are involved in a bitter tariff war with European Union over their exports of solar panel. They are at currency war with the United States. According to the International Monetary Fund, China accounted for 14.3 percent of the world’s real GDP in 2011, almost the same as that of Eurozone. The Chinese miracle is all about how to expedite ‘reforms’, not to strengthen struggle against reformism. The Chinese presence in today’s global theatre is all about ideas and ideology in reverse gear. These days the CPC is shaping the Chinese dream by aggressively pushing global ambitions while making one take-over bid after another in the West. The Chinese offshore oil giant’s takeover of Canadian oil and gas company Nexen is billed as the acquisition of the century.

In India the great debate had its profound impact on the communist movement as the muscovites would dogmatically cling to the old Soviet line creating dissension and restlessness among the rank and file. Though revisionism was a major buzzword in the sixties, CPI did split not strictly on ideological lines. True, the Chinese factor was responsible to some extent for the split in the Indian Communist movement and subsequent formation of CPM but fight against so-called revisionism was as vague as anything else. Also, the Chinese were no less instrumental in engineering the second split by supporting the CPI(ML). At every critical juncture CPC did all this under the garb of fighting revisionism, only to further their own foreign policy interests. In other words they always promoted their national interests at the expense of international solidarity or what is called proletarian internationalism. There was no internationalism in the Chinese exercise, it was nationalism—pure and simple. Before the start of the great debate the Soviet party too did the same thing—promoting national self-interest in the name of internationalism while urging communist parties around the world to follow Moscow blindly.

Ideological slavery of Indian communists is legendary. The undivided Communist Party allegedly used to obey dictates from Moscow without any question. And the divided party didn’t really change the course. The so-called pro-Chinese Communists at one stage were so blind, if not obnoxiously dogmatic, that they would enjoy the moment by identifying China’s national interests as their own. Even before the formation of CPI(ML) which was done without clinching ideological controversies, different communist revolutionary groups would discuss stage of Indian revolution by extensively quoting Chinese ideologues like Chen po ta who got wide publicity in India’s naxalite political culture.

Many people now ask, and not without reasons, whether the great debate was actually a clash between Russian nationalism and Chinese nationalism. Both Russians and Chinese are nationalist to the core, anti-Czar Bolshevik revolution and Mao’s new democratic revolution didn’t basically alter the scenario. The Chinese supported the naxalbari uprising with much fanfare making it a turning point in Indian Communist Movement but they abandoned it in the middle forcing the movement to grope in ideological wilderness.
For all practical purposes no general line in the International Communist Movement emerged despite the publication of June 14 CPC letter and its wide circulation. The idea of Communist International lost its relevance even before the Chinese launched great debate against international revisionism. The semblance of unity developed among some Communist Parties in their common anti-Soviet agenda crumbled in due season. At one stage the Chinese used to conduct massive anti-Soviet propaganda by dubbing Soviet Union social-imperialist. Ironically when Gorbachev who presided over the demise of mighty Soviet Union, accepted the mid-course of the Usury river as the international boundary between Russia and China, Gorbachev suddenly become a ‘Comrade’ in Chinese parlance and venom against Soviet social imperialism vanished from the Chinese media.

Frontier
Vol. 45, No. 51, June 30 -Jul 6, 2013

Your Comment if any