Monday, July 31, 2017

WP of Korea, DPRK Warns U.S. to Wake up from Foolish Dream of Doing Any Harm to DPRK: FM Spokesman

Pyongyang, July 30 (KCNA) -- A spokesman of the DPRK Foreign Ministry made public a statement on Sunday. It said:
The resounding success in the second test-fire of ICBM Hwasong-14 conducted on July 28 is a great victory of the DPRK that demonstrated once again the independent prestige and dignity of Juche nuclear power, the world-level rocket power.
The test-fire confirmed the DPRK's capability of making surprise launch of ICBM in any place and location any time, and clearly proved that the entire U.S. mainland is in the firing range of the DPRK's missiles.
The maximum range simulation test-fire of ICBM conducted by the DPRK this time is meant to send a stern warning to the U.S. making senseless remarks, being lost to reason in the frantic sanctions and pressure campaign against the DPRK.
The policy-makers of the U.S. who must have closely observed the successful second ICBM test-fire would now properly understand that the U.S., an aggression-minded state, would not go scot-free if it ever dared provoke the DPRK.
The U.S. trumpeting about war and threat to impose extreme sanctions on the DPRK only emboldens the latter and provides further justification for its access to nukes.
To the Korean people who experienced disastrous disturbances of war on this land by the U.S. imperialist brutes, the powerful war deterrence for defending the state is an inevitable strategic option and it is a precious strategic asset that cannot be discarded or bartered for anything.
If the Yankees, who have imposed pain and misfortune upon the Korean people for over half a century through their bloody war of aggression and heinous hostile policy against the DPRK, dares brandish the nuclear stick on this land again despite the DPRK's repeated warnings, the DPRK will clearly teach them manners with the nuclear strategic force which it had so far shown the U.S. one after another.
The U.S. should clearly understand the strategic position of the DPRK which has become a world nuclear power and a rocket power and the resolve of its army and people for retaliation, and wake up from the foolish dream of doing any harm to the DPRK.
In case the U.S. fails to come to its own senses and continues to resort to military adventure and "tough sanctions", the DPRK will respond with its resolute act of justice as already declared.

Thursday, July 27, 2017

Message of the C.C. of AKEL TO THE C.C. of the Communist Party of Cuba on the anniversary of 26th July 1953

The Central Committee of AKEL sent the following message to the 
Communist Party of Cuba on the occasion of the Moncada anniversary:
Dear comrades,
The Central Committee of AKEL addresses a greeting of struggle and solidarity to the people, the Communist Party and the government of Cuba on the occasion of the 64th anniversary of the attack on the Moncada barracks. The 26th July is the starting point of the Cuban people’s anti-dictatorship struggle against the Batista regime subservient to the United States. It is the precursor of the 1959 Cuban Revolution that paved the way for independence, national sovereignty and the beginning of socialist construction on the Island of Revolution.
As Fidel had predicted, in his defense in court where he was dragged against the charges brought against him for the attack on the Moncada Barracks, History vindicated the revolutionaries who participated in the 26th July Movement, as it vindicates everyone who participated in the Cuban Revolution and all those who stand in solidarity with Cuba and its struggle today because in combating the aggression and subversion, Cuba remains the living proof that socialism is not only just and timely, but also feasible.
On this occasion, AKEL reiterates its unequivocal condemnation of the new US aggression against Cuba as announced by US President Trump. Donald Trump will soon realize – like all previous US Presidents did – that Cuba and its people do not yield and do not give up.
AKEL remains on the side of Cuba to terminate the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the US, to return the territory of the illegal naval base of Guantánamo to Cuba, to end to the efforts aiming to undermine Cuba and the Revolution.
AKEL also denounces the efforts of the ruling political forces in the European Union – headed by the right wing and the ultra-right – to exploit the beginning of the EU-Cuba political dialogue to dig up their anti-Cuban rhetoric. AKEL voted against the recent resolution in the European Parliament which constitutes a blatant attempt to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. We defend the right of the Cuban people to choose its own future, its country’s socio-economic development path and leadership.
Dear comrades,
Moncada was and will be a milestone, not only in the course of Cuba, but also in the history of the world revolutionary movement and the struggle of the peoples for freedom, national independence and socialism.
Comradely greetings,
The Central Committee of AKEL

Saturday, July 22, 2017

Interview with Pável Blanco, First Secretary of the PC of Mexico


Pável Blanco: "The only alternative to capitalism is the workers' power, the struggle for socialism-communism, any proposal that wants to stay in the middle is on the other side of the barricade"

Through the International Secretariat, we interviewed Pável Blanco, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Mexico, who comments on the political situation in his country, about the events in Latin America, the 100th anniversary of October and the challenges of International communist movement, among other interesting issues.

Our towns are twinned for historical reasons, cultural, idiomatic, etc. However, in Spain there is not much news about what happens in Mexico. Could you explain the moment in the country?

Recently, the 12th Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the PCM was held, which took stock of the social upheaval of the first days of January resulting from the petrolzo and which was characterized by thousands of spontaneous expropriatory actions of massive participation against monopolies of commerce, Roads and various forms of insumption. It is a manifestation of a situation of explosiveness, the result of 9 years of continuous crisis of the capitalist economy that have had to support workers and popular sectors for the monopolies to sustain and increase their profits. Years of hunger and misery, measures to devalue labor, such as labor, education, tax reform, cuts to public budgets in the social area, extreme poverty increase that went from 50 to 60 million people in that situation.

The Mexican State, in a preventive way, has been using repression and reinforcing the budgets of the army and police forces, which together with the so-called "drug war" and various forms of para-militarism, express a terrorist policy to try to stifle the class struggle.

In addition, we have a stage of electoral dispute for the presidential succession of 2018, and in addition will be renewed the legislative power; The grouping of monopolies is being oriented in favor of the candidate of the new social democracy López Obrador. In this plenary of our CC began a discussion on tactics. In the life of the PCM, since 1994, we sometimes participated in elections (1997 and 2000) and since 2003 we promoted abstention; Now we discuss whether it is the best option to accumulate in the direction of the revolutionary objective. We are clear that we will not give any support and will confront the parties of capital (PRI, PAN, PRD) and the new social democracy (MORENA). Neither do we feel the interests of the working class expressed in the candidacy of the CNI, which supports the EZLN. In short, we are in that discussion about this moment of political reconfiguration in the scene of the economic crisis, to accentuate the political crisis.

The general picture is of the growing division of social classes and an ongoing revolutionary perspective, which will evaluate in more detail the 6th Congress of the PCM, which began its preparations with this Plenary, and which will meet in March 2018.

For years, in Spain many people took as an example to follow some of the political processes that were taking place in Latin America, especially the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela. Today, however, these processes seem to be stagnating and even receding. What evaluation does the Communist Party of Mexico do about it?

In our Fifth Congress, we evaluated that these processes were in the dilemma of advancing or retreating. In the end, they are processes in which measures were never taken to break with capitalism, and which of course face the same difficulties as this, such as the crisis of overproduction and overaccumulation. How much phraseology about change, alternative, socialism and just a different way of managing the same mode of production that is responsible for the problems of peoples.

It is also very disturbing the probable banning of the Communist Party of Venezuela.

These progressive governments are in deep crisis, but there is no doubt that the important thing is not whether they leave or not, but the essential thing is that for the revolutionary change requires the organized participation of the working class, with its program and communist party in the vanguard.

The only alternative to capitalism is workers' power, the struggle for socialism-communism. Any proposal that wants to be in the middle, ultimately lies on the other side of the barricade, in the reinforcement of exploitation and private appropriation of the socially produced.

One of the pillars defended by this type of processes was the creation of a multipolar world order, however, that policy does not seem to be able to guarantee a world peace scenario. What is your opinion?

Multipolarity is the euphemistic way of referring to the inter-imperialist contradictions, which today have the peoples on the brink of a generalized war. In 1914 the opportunists asked the proletarians to die for their bourgeoisie, and the call of today's opportunists is to support the least evil of the disputed imperialist bureaus.

This year we commemorate the centenary of the Great Socialist Revolution of October 1917. What tasks does the PCM carry out in this regard?

From May 1st we will focus on this; A thesis will be prepared to be presented by the XIII Plenary Session of the CC and a series of activities, book publications, the copy of the International Communist Magazine dedicated to the centenary and a central event for November 12 in Mexico City.

It is a very important moment for the history of the class struggle and for the workers of the world: the workers can take power, life continues to function without the bourgeois, because these social parasites are not indispensable. The workers' power brings humanity to a new stage, to a better life, and this is demonstrated by the construction of socialism.

The socialist revolution led by Lenin and the Bolshevik Party continues to show us the way, and is the pioneer of the socialist revolutions that will come. Of course, a point to debate with Kautsky and the new opportunists is the character of the October Revolution. I will not delude, but in conclusion it was a Socialist Revolution, possible by the entrance of capitalism to its imperialist phase, because capitalism already showed its historical limits, because the working class and its vanguard party staged the process a program for socialism. Kautsky, Trotsky, Eurocommunists, have always refuted the Leninist positions on the socialist character of the October Revolution.

Our parties share international spaces such as the International Communist Magazine or the International Meetings of Communist and Workers Parties. What do you think the remains facing the International Communist Movement?

That is the case, and we hope that the ties of cooperation between our communist parties will continue to be strengthened, and that we will move to higher levels, through our common ideological base. We think the cardinal issue is the issue of a unified strategy of the communist movement to confront capitalism, monopolies.

Another big problem is the issue of socialism and the market. Already in the USSR this debate took place in the late 1940s and early 1950s and with an unequivocal conclusion: socialism and the market are incompatible; Getting away from that conclusion led to laying the foundations of the counterrevolution, and that is not a lesson from the past, it is a matter placed on the countries that build socialism and on all communist parties.

It seems to us from the PCM that a problem is that the negative impacts of the 20th Congress of the CPSU, on peaceful paths to revolution, national roads, inter-clan alliances, broad fronts, must ultimately be overcome so that parties Communists can achieve their goals. See our experience: how many years lost looking for unity.

You are a student of the history of the communist movement in Spain and you met some of our great leaders, like Comrade Juan Ambou. In addition, he led the delegation of his party to our X Congress. Since then there have been debates in our Party that have led to the election of a new leadership. What, from your point of view, are the challenges that lie ahead to build a Communist Party at the height of the historical moment?

We are aware of the difficulties they have been through; We know how complex an internal crisis is, but when it is necessary to take definitions we have to assume them.

Our solidarity with the work that they undertake to overcome the crisis, both with the organic measures, that is to say the election of a new direction and the work for an Extraordinary Congress, like those to strengthen the Party. We understand that the organic crisis is a manifestation of an ideological crisis. Comrade Ástor is a picture with experience and capacity and we know of his militant commitment.

In recent times the relationship between our parties had tarnished, surprisingly for us, now we understand the causes. Ideological differences had arisen for issues we thought were common.

We are confident that relations with the new Political Secretariat, and with Comrade Ástor García as General Secretary, will be strengthened.

For our part, loyal to the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, we reiterate our solidarity. Count on your PCM comrades.

Do you want to transfer some other question to the Spanish communists?

We must work hard, with Bolshevik style, we must go to the working class, prioritize the ideological front, strengthen communist education, leave behind the bitter hours and work for the revolutionary future, push the CJC, the communist youth.

The only priority, we think, for all communists is working with the working class and the popular sectors in the direction of the seizure of power and revolution.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Solidarity with Bolivarian Venezuela

14 July 2017
The PCP reaffirms its solidarity with Bolivarian Venezuela and with the struggle of the Venezuelan workers and people to uphold their rights and sovereignty in view of the destabilizing and putschist campaign orchestrated by US imperialism in collusion with the internal big bourgeoisie and reaction, aimed at destroying the advances and the democratic, progressive and sovereign achievements of the Bolivarian Revolution.
Joining the International Day of Solidarity with the Bolivarian Revolution, called for July 14, the PCP denounces the escalation of external interference and the threat of imposition of new sanctions and measures of a real economic war, especially by the United States, against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, calling for the strongest condemnation and rejection of such practices, which violate the basic principles of International Law and which undermine the inalienable right of the Venezuelan people to decide sovereignly on their future.
Stressing the need to expose the real interests and objectives behind the escalation of terrorist violence in Venezuela and the intense campaign of misinformation and mystification that goes together - which serve the strategic agenda of imperialism in Latin America and the Caribbean - the PCP warns of attempts to boost the putschist plot, including the fictitious creation of parallel institutions, seeking to create conditions conducive to an external intervention in Venezuela.
The PCP stresses that any likely success of the putschist plan under way would have grave consequences for the Venezuelan workers and the people - as well as for the Portuguese emigrants in Venezuela - and would mean the materialization of the intentions of imperialism and transnationals to restore the path for the looting of Venezuela's important natural resources.
The holding of a so-called “plebiscite”, announced for July 16, in disregard and disrespect for the Constitution of Venezuela, constitutes a real provocative farce that intends to anticipate and target the elections for the National Constituent Assembly, a legitimate initiative and in accordance with the Constitution of Venezuela, convened for July 30. It should be emphasized that the same anti-democratic forces that in 2002 instigated and staged the failed coup to remove former President Hugo Chávez and liquidate the 1999 Bolivarian Constitution and the Venezuelan popular process, now come forward hypocritically as defenders of the constitutional order.
The Venezuelan situation has problems and economic and social difficulties that are an expression of the structural crisis of capitalism and, especially, of the implacable economic war carried out by imperialism and the oligarchy against the Bolivarian process, notably through the promotion of financial blockade, sabotage, hoarding and price speculation, aimed at hampering access to essential goods by the population.
The violent putschist attack against the Bolivarian Revolution is part of the counter-offensive launched by imperialism and the oligarchies to revert the advances and achievements of sovereign, democratic and progressive affirmation made in Latin America and the Caribbean, to prevent the consolidation of the regional cooperation areas created in the past - such as ALBA-TCP, UNASUR or CELAC - and to isolate and defeat the processes of social transformation that confront the hegemony of US imperialism in the sub-continent.
The PCP reaffirms its solidarity with the Venezuelan people, the Constitutional Government of President Nicolás Maduro, the PCV, the PSUV and the patriotic, progressive and revolutionary forces, expressing confidence in the resistance, unity and capacity of the organized struggle of the workers and the Venezuelan people to prevent the consummation of the violent and retrograde aims of the putschist forces, safeguard peace, sovereignty and national independence and defend and strengthen the liberating path of the Bolivarian Revolution.
The PCP calls for a widespread solidarity in defence of Bolivarian Venezuela, for peace, freedom, democracy, sovereignty, justice and social progress.

Friday, July 14, 2017



On July 4th the USA celebrated the 241st Anniversary of its break with imperial Britain. The US Declaration of Independence published on that day states:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
This statement was made at the birth of a nation whose Founding Fathers were predominantly landowners and whose First and Third Presidents, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were slave owners. The Second President John Adams, while not a slave owner was opposed to the vote being given to men with no property:
“Is it not ...true, that Men in general in every Society, who are wholly destitute of Property, are also too little acquainted with public Affairs to form a Right Judgment, and too dependent upon other Men to have a Will of their own?.. if you give to every Man, who has no Property, a Vote, will you not make a fine encouraging Provision for Corruption by your fundamental Law?” (John Adams, Letter to James Sullivan 26th May 1776)
And how did these landowners acquire their land?
By the means of systematic genocide against the former inhabitants of “their” country.
Such was the hypocrisy of those who signed the Declaration Of Independence, a document in which they had no belief.
We salute those valiant Americans who have stood up against injustice over the years; those who fought bravely against the invader, such as Crazy Horse of the Dakota Sioux and Geronimo of the Chiricahua Apache; fighters against slavery like Nat Turner, John Brown and Harriet Tubman; trade unionists like Joe Hill, Big Bill Haywood and César Chavez; civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Angela Davis; and of course communists like William Z, Foster, Gus Hall and Henry Winston.
We celebrate the fact that Bernie Sanders was able to bring the word ‘socialism’ back into the American vocabulary — but the blatant rigging of the Democratic Party Convention put the corrupt psychopath and warmonger Hilary Clinton against the simple-minded redneck Donald Trump who, due to the opaque and undemocratic voting system became US President.
We condemn the US support for Wahabi Saudi Arabia and Islamic terrorism against the people of Libya, Iraq, Syria and Yemen; for Zionist Israel against the Palestinians; and for its support of Turkey against the Kurdish people.
We see in Latin America, particularly in Brazil and Argentina that the US is funding and assisting extreme right reactionaries against the progressive governments of those countries. It has succeeded in Brazil and is trying hard to overthrow the government of Venezuela and return the whole of Latin America to its former stats as the “backyard” of the USA.
As Africans we condemn utterly the military occupation of our continent through the AFRICOM programme, the horrific looting of DR Congo and the murders of Patrice Lumumba, Pierre Mulele and Laurent Kabila under the auspices of the CIA. and the war which killed 5 million people there.
In our country Zimbabwe, we suffered from the US manipulation and interference in our affairs which began with the murder of Josiah Tongogara, the side-lining of Joshua Nkomo and the manipulation which put Robert Mugabe in power. We then were faced with the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP), the Zimbabwean version of the monetarist programme and neo-liberal philosophy which emanated from the United States and has destroyed economies worldwide.
Now, under the moronic leadership of Donald Trump, sanctions against Cuba have been reinstated and the USA has refused to acknowledge that it is the world’s dirtiest country in terms of the emission of greenhouse gasses — because of wanting to make a quick profit, the USA has demonstrated very clearly that it is the home of backward anti-scientific ideology.
America has just celebrated its Independence from Britain — but when is the rest of the world going to obtain its independence from the United States of America?
Benny Moyo
Secretary for International Relations
Zimbabwe Communist Party
Contacts : +263 77 856 9168

Labor reform: violent attack of capital against workers and youth

The time is for struggle, organization and mobilization!

The biggest blow to labor rights has just been celebrated by Congress. The Federal Senate approved, by 50 votes in favor and 26 contraries, the text of the Labor Reform that definitively tears the achievements and guarantees that still remained to the Brazilian workers, all in the name of the profit that the bourgeoisie wants to have, throwing on the backs of workers the consequence of the systemic crisis of capital.

The text approved, among other points, imposes the agreed on the legislated, reduces the lunch time to only 30 minutes; Parcel the vacations in up to three periods in the year, leaving the company with the right to determine the periods; Pregnant and nursing women will be able to work in unhealthy places; Establishes intermittent contract work (ie the employee is hired for hours or pre-established days, receiving only hours worked), working hours can reach 12 hours a day and overtime compensation can be negotiated without additional payments . And still, it breaks with the retirement of the worker.

Following the legalization of unrestricted outsourcing, the approval of the PEC of public spending and the Reform of High School, all voted by an unscrupulous Congress, composed of a gang of lobbyists and mafiosi of all strains, with very few exceptions, the approval of the Labor Reform Saddle A further repulsive chapter in the series of attacks on the minimum guarantees that the working class still possessed in the face of the voracity of capital to accumulate more and more wealth at the expense of the exploitation and misery of the workers. To all this is added the scrapping and progressive dismantling of public services, deepening privatizations and aiming at total insolvency and subordination of the state to the financial system.

This cycle of attacks, the most brutal and destructive that the Brazilian working class has ever experienced, will significantly increase the degree of precariousness in the world of work, increasing misery, inequality and social violence in all its aspects. Contrary to what the bourgeois media has been preaching, much more unemployed will add up to the almost fifteen million already existing.

We are facing a violent offensive of capital, which is striding towards the restriction of the meager social and democratic achievements and the intensification of conservatism at all levels, promoted by a clique that has taken control of the Legislative Branch with the complicity of the mainstream media And of the Judiciary, and which operates its policy of attacks under the baton of the shadowy interests of the latifundio, the bankers, the miners, the big businessmen and the multinationals operating in the country. The Temer Government was ready to operate in an accelerated way the neoliberal agenda that had been adopted in a piecemeal way by the conciliation of classes in the PT period. With the worsening of the social crisis (unemployment, public debt, social conflicts) and the escalation of corruption allegations, it seeks to accelerate the implementation of reforms as a condition of survival of its demoralized and increasingly weakened government.

The approval of the Labor Reform undoubtedly represents a defeat for the working class. We can not ignore its harmful, objective and subjective effects, which will impose even greater challenges in the field of resistance that the reconciliation of classes and the ideological disarmament of recent years has meant for the class struggle in Brazil.

But it is important to note that despite the set of attacks, a new level of class struggle is being built, especially with the resumption of social struggles, as an example: the major national strikes and the largest occupation movement in Brasilia since 1998 , Which brought together more than 150,000 demonstrators, revealing at the same time the reinvigoration of the popular struggle and, on the other hand, the increasingly repressive and criminalizing facet that the State tends to adopt from now on.

All this scenario of crisis will generate even more elements of tension and contradictions, imposing on the revolutionaries the necessary perception, unity and ideological firmness to stop the fight against capital and its agents in a new stage. We have no alternative, and there is no other way out: if the bourgeoisie decided to declare war on the working class, it is time to continue fighting on the streets, in the workplace, housing and study, mobilizing workers, the youth. And plan the next actions to defeat the counter-reform of the Social Security. The opposing demonstrations from various sectors of society indicate that this struggle tends to mobilize the population more incisively, provoking fissures in the power bloc and further eroding the coup government.

Our struggle, which had already expanded into national acts and provided us with unity of action with various segments of the population, and which has given us the unity of action with various segments of the population, must firmly maintain its determination to further curb this project of dismantling public services and social rights, seeking to conquer more forces and pressure on a Congress that wears down deeply on its complicity with The mistrust Temer and feels the weight of the proposal's unpopularity, which seeks, in practice, to prevent the retirement of the Brazilian people.

The PCB remains firm in denouncing and combating the Temer Government and its allies and invests all its energies in the days of struggles that we must fight against conservatism and attacks on the working class. It is necessary to advance the reorganization of the working class without more conciliations, striving to transform trade unions and representative entities of the popular classes into effective organs of combat and radical confrontation to the bosses and governments subservient to the capital.
This historical process imposes on the revolutionaries the maturity and responsibility of consolidating an Anti-capitalist Struggle, a permanent front, beyond electoral processes, that can become a real alternative of reorganization and direction of the struggle of the proletariat towards Popular Power and To Socialism.


Friday, July 7, 2017

Declaration of the Central Committee of the KKE on the 100th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution

The Central Committee of the KKE honours the 100th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution. It honours the climactic world-historic event of the 20th century which demonstrated that capitalism is not invincible, that we can construct a superior organization of society, without the exploitation of man by man.
The October Revolution highlighted the strength of the revolutionary class struggle, the strength of the exploited and oppressed, when they take centre stage and turn the wheel of history forwards in the direction of social liberation. In historical terms, it was the continuation of the uprisings of the slaves, of the peasants in the Middle Ages, of the bourgeois revolutions, but it also constituted the climax of this process and went beyond it, as for the first time the goal of the revolution was the abolition of the exploitative class society. 46 years after the "storming of the heavens" by the heroic Paris Commune, the Russian working class through the October revolution came to incarnate the vision of the working class-popular masses, millions of people, for a better life.
The October Revolution demonstrated the correctness of the Leninist analysis that the victory of socialism is possible in one country or a group of countries, as a consequence of the uneven development of capitalism.
October 1917 was an event of global and lasting significance. It confirmed the potential of the working class (as a social force that can and must lead the revolutionary struggle, for a society without exploitation, insecurity, poverty, unemployment and wars) to fulfill its historic mission. It also confirmed that the realization of the historic mission of the working class is not determined by its percentage in the economically active population, but by the fact that it is the vehicle for the new socialist relations of production.
At the same time, October highlighted the irreplaceable role of the revolutionary political vanguard, the communist party, as the leading factor not only in the socialist revolution, but also during the entire struggle for the formation, strengthening, and final victory of the new communist society.
The flame of October led to and accelerated the establishment of a number of communist parties, revolutionary workers' parties of a new type, in opposition to the social-democratic parties of this era, which had betrayed the working class and revolutionary politics, choosing the path of the co-option of the labour movement under the banner of the bourgeois class, as well as the support for the imperialist military assault against the young workers' state in Russia.
The victorious October Revolution was the continuation of all the previous workers' uprisings and paved the way for the historical passage of humanity "from the Kingdom of Necessity to the Kingdom of Freedom." Codifying its historic importance, Lenin wrote:
"We have made the start. When, at what date and time, and the proletarians of which nation will complete this process is not important. The important thing is that the ice has been broken; the road is open, the way has been shown."
The lessons of October are of particular importance today when the wheel of history seems to be moving backwards, today when the international communist movement is in conditions of crisis and retreat, today when the long-term consequences of the counterrevolution (since the beginning of the 1990s) are reinforcing the mistaken view held by many workers that there is no alternative solution to capitalism.
Historical development itself helps us expose the bourgeois propaganda that claims that the socialist-communist project had a utopian character. No socio-economic system in the history of humanity was established in one moment, once and for all, with a linear course of victories of those class forces that were the vehicles of social progress in each specific phase. After the great slave uprising, Spartacus was crucified, but slavery eventually passed into history. After the French bourgeois revolution of 1789, Robespierre was guillotined, but feudalism's days were numbered.
The bourgeois class deliberately conceals the fact that it took about 4 centuries to consolidate its power. It took several centuries, from the first attempts of the bourgeoisie in the trading cities of Northern Italy in the 14th century to the bourgeois revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries, until capitalist relations had developed to a satisfactory level so that it could impose the complete abolition of feudal relations of production. The political defeats suffered by the bourgeois class in this period do not negate the fact that its was historically necessary for the outdated relations of production between the landowner and the serf to be replaced by bourgeois relations between the capitalist and the worker.
The political representatives of the bourgeois class vainly claim that capitalism is irreplaceable, eternal and that the revolutionary class struggle is no longer the instrument for historical development.
The decades-long existence and successes of the socialist society, which was inaugurated by the October Revolution, demonstrated that a society without bosses, without capitalists owning the means of production is possible. This conclusion is not negated by the fact that in this specific phase it was not able to defeat once and for all capitalist ownership and capitalist profit.


The necessity and timeliness of socialism, the potential of abolishing private ownership over the concentrated means of production flow from the development of capitalism which leads to the concentration of production. Capitalist ownership puts a brake on the social character of production. Capitalist ownership cancels out the potential for all workers to live in better socially organized conditions that correspond to their increased human needs:so that all have work without the nightmare of unemployment, working for less hours, enjoying a better standard of living, with a high level of exclusively public and free education and similar services in health and welfare.
The working class creates these possibilities through its work inside capitalism, possibilities which are expanded by the development of science and technology. However, in a society where everything that is produced is determined on the basis of private, capitalist profit, the needs of the working class and the popular strata are crushed. The essence of the problem is that those who produce are not those who decide on the goals and organization of production. The cyclical economic crises are in the DNA of capitalism and are becoming increasingly deep and synchronized, resulting in the sharp increase of unemployment, the further expansion of badly paid work without social security cover, life with rights hat have been destroyed, with imperialist wars for the division of markets and territories.
The deterioration of the working and living conditions, despite the rise of labour productivity, concerns the entire capitalist world and indeed the most developed capitalist states. The capitalist states themselves, their research centres, admit that the workers' income is shrinking, while the wealth of the capitalists is increasing.
Just as in the previous periods of social revolutions, a decisive factor today for the corrosion of the strength of the old exploitative system is always its internal contradictions and their intensification.
This provides the potential for the development and escalation of the class struggle and its acquisition of a revolutionary character. Today, in the era of monopoly capitalism, the basic contradiction of the system is sharpening, while labour and production have been socialized to unprecedented levels, the largest part of their results are enjoyed by the shareholders of the business groups. These are the big shareholders-parasites of economic life, who despite being surplus to the organization and direction of production, exploit the working class. Shareholders who often do not know what the companies they have shares in and receive dividends from produce or where they are located.
At the same time as the dominance of the monopoly groups, there the trend to relative stagnancy is being reinforced, i.e stagnancy in relation to the potential and dynamism created by the current level of development of the productive forces, in relation to what could be produced quantitatively and qualitatively if society removed profit as the motor force of production. Features of parasitism and relative stagnancy are:the so-called in-built obsolescence of commodities (the use of scientific knowledge to limit the life-span of products), the restrictions on the spread of technology due to the patents owned by the business groups, the underdevelopment for various periods of time of sectors that are not profitable enough (e.g. anti-earthquake protection), the destruction of the environment due its irrational utilization for the maximization of capitalist profits, the enormous spending on scientific research for the production of weapons and means of repression etc.
Today, the negative correlation of forces for the working class reproduces the impression (due to the dominance of bourgeois ideology) that the power and aggression of capital are invincible. However, it cannot conceal the decay of capitalism and the objective potential for the abolition of the private ownership of the means of production, for their socialization by workers' power and their utilization on the basis of central planning and the benefit of society.
The entire history of the October Revolution and what preceded it demonstrate that the negative correlation of forces is not eternal and unchanging.


The fact that the preconditions have been formed for the construction of the socialist-communist society does not automatically entail its realization. An important reason for this is the fact that, in contrast with the laws of nature, social progress requires the relevant activity of humans, in this case the class struggle for the abolition of the old society and the construction of the new one.
The outbreak of the socialist revolution (just as every social revolution in human history) presupposes the emergence of a situation where the ability of the ruling class to co-opt, repress and subdue the people is weakened.
Lenin formulated the definition of the revolutionary situation and identified the main objective and subjective characteristics, which are are accumulated in society on the eve of the revolution.
-Those "above" (the ruling class of the capitalists) cannot govern and run the administration as they did in the past.
-Those "below" (the working class and the popular strata) do not want to live as they did in the past.
-An extraordinary rise in the activity of masses is observed.
Thus, the destitution of those "below" and their discontent increases their political activity, while confusion, weakness, contradictions, indecisiveness prevail amongst those "above".
The emergence of such a favourable situation for the revolutionary overthrow of capitalist society has an objective character; it flows from the sudden sharpening of its contradictions.
However, as Lenin aptly stressed, this does not means that every revolutionary situation is converted into a revolution. Neither the reaction of those below, nor the crisis of those above will trigger the overthrow, if there is not a planned revolutionary uprising of the working class, led by its conscious vanguard.
In other words, for a workers' revolution to break out there must be the presence of the revolutionary political vanguard, the communist party, equipped with the theoretical elaborations and ability to predict the developments, based on the Marxist-Leninist world-view and capable of leading the revolutionary uprising of the working class.
Of course, it is not possible to predict all the factors that can lead to a revolutionary situation. Historical experience highlighted the manifestation of a deep and synchronized capitalist crisis, combined with the outbreak of an imperialist war as being important factors.
The first victorious workers' revolution in Russia was the result of the ability of the working class, guided by its party, to undertake this role in similar conditions. Lenin successfully predicted the potential for a revolutionary situation in Russia, the possibility of Russia emerging as the weak link in the imperialist chain in the conditions of the 1st World War.


In Tsarist Russia before the First World War, there survived intense features of the old absolutist state, headed by the Tsar, even if capitalism was rapidly developing. There existed a vast mass of peasants/small producers in the countryside, who were tormented by the significant vestiges of feudal relations.
The revolution of 1905-1907 led to the formation of the State Duma, i.e. a form of legislative representative institution with very limited rights, which in no sense meant the transition to a formal bourgeois parliamentary system. The institution of the Duma expressed a compromise between sections of the bourgeois class and the Tsarist regime. In the countryside, despite the fact that serfdom in Russia formally had been abolished since 1861, large sections of the peasants suffered from the oppression of the big landowners, who forced them to do chores for them or to hand over half their crops.
In the period of the 1905 revolution, the Soviets were born as organs for the organization of the revolutionary activity of the working class inside the conditions of the intensifying strike struggles and class confrontations. They constituted a new form of organization of the working class with elected delegates and functioned as the seeds and forms of the future workers' power.
The creation of enormous factories in the key centres of the major Russian cities, like Moscow and Petrograd (later renamed Leningrad), led to a significant growth of wage labour, rendering the working class the basic social force in the country, despite the fact that it was not a majority of the total population of the Tsarist empire.
In these complex conditions, the Bolsheviks formed a strategic line that aimed, through the development of the class struggle, to safeguard two things: a) the political independence of the working class in the impending bourgeois-democratic revolution so that the proletariat would not be transformed into the tail of the bourgeoisie. b) the leadership of the entire people's movement by the working class (i.e. the social alliance of the proletariat with the small and medium peasants) so that the revolution could have a radical character in relation to the historical era and facilitate the transition to the socialist revolution. Consequently, in the struggle to win the peasantry over to the side of the working class, the strategy of the Bolsheviks was based on the line: together with all the peasants against the Middle Ages. And then later on, together with the poor peasants, together with the semi-proletarians against capitalism, and together against the rich in the villages.
This strategy was based on the assessment that the objective development of capitalism in Russia came into contradiction with the backward political superstructure of Tsarism and with the maintenance of the vestiges of serfdom in the countryside and also on the idea of a revolutionary process at a European level. At the same time, the bourgeois class of 1905 was no longer the progressive bourgeois class of the era of the bourgeois revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. In any case, capitalism had now passed at a global level into the reactionary era of imperialism. It was more afraid than desirous of a political revolution, as its rival class, the working class, had established itself as an independent political force.
Consequently, Lenin assessed that the revolution should establish a temporary revolutionary government, the "democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry", which would implement what was contained in the "minimum" programme of the Bolsheviks (constituent assembly, universal voting rights, agricultural reforms etc.)This power would eradicate the vestiges of Tsarism, while it would spark the proletarian revolution in the advanced capitalist Western Europe, which would in turn support the proletarian revolution in Russia. The Bolsheviks in this period connected the bourgeois-democratic revolution with the socialist revolution and stressed the defense of the specific interests of the working class and the need to exert constant pressure on the revolutionary government to extend the gains of the revolution.
The "democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry", as Lenin said, could have a unified outlook in terms of smashing absolutism, but not in terms of socialism. As the revolution would develop, Lenin predicted that struggle within the alliance and within the governance of the workers and peasants itself would sharpen and would lead finally to the full separation of the working class from the medium and rich peasants, aiming at the domination of the proletarian elements over the petty bourgeois ones and the transition to the "dictatorship of the proletariat".
This line of the Bolsheviks was formed in opposition to the right opportunists of the era, the Mensheviks, and also in opposition to Trotsky who underestimated the role and significance of the peasantry. Lenin assessed that Trotsky's position would have led to the "denial of the role of the peasantry" and the crippling of the revolution.
The entrance of Russia in the 1st World War sharpened the social contradictions. The repeated defeats of the Russian army at the front, the loss of territories (e.g. Poland, Baltic countries) caused significant discontent, not only amongst the workers and peasants who were suffering due to the destruction of war, but also amongst the bourgeois class of Russia. The fact the mechanisms of Tsarism started to orient towards Germany and the possibility of signing a separate peace with it triggered the reaction of the bourgeoisie, a reaction that was supported by Britain and France and led to the organization of plans to overthrow the Tsar. In 1916, simultaneous uprisings of various nationalities broke out in the Caucasus and Central Asia against the Tsarist empire.
The plans of the bourgeoisie to overthrow the Tsar were combined with major popular mobilizations and strikes, which were carried out in February 1917, as a result of the lack of food, mass unemployment and rapid intensification of the social problems. The formation of a revolutionary situation, the mass political activity of the workers and peasants organized in the Soviets, the disintegration of the army, led in the end to the revolutionary overthrow of the Tsar.
The revolutionary situation was created on the terrain of a complex process that contained a number of important factors: the sharpening of the inter-imperialist antagonisms, the problems that the imperialist war had created for the popular strata over the 3 previous years, the disturbance of Tsarism's alliance with the bourgeoisie, which no longer allowed those 'above" to govern as before, the political and organizational work of the Bolsheviks before and during the war in the ranks of the working class and the soldiers.
The sudden intensification of the contradictions between the bourgeoisie and Tsarism in the conditions of crisis and imperialist war, the inevitability of which had been underscored by the Bolsheviks, resulted in the bourgeoisie taking the upper hand in the February Revolution.
The Provisional Democratic Government was established by representatives of the bourgeois liberal parties of Russia and constituted an organ of bourgeois power. At the same time, the mass political struggle of the workers and peasants brought to the surface the organization of the armed masses that participated in the overthrow of the Tsar via the Soviets (councils of delegates).
The Mensheviks (opportunist current) and the SRs ("petty bourgeois socialist revolutionaries") dominated the Soviets in this period and posed the issue of supporting the Provisional Democratic Government. So, a situation emerged that Lenin characterized as "dual power", in order to describe a transitional moment in the revolutionary process, where the bourgeois class has the power, but is not so strong as to be able to disperse the organization of the people's masses that were armed (e.g. the Soviets had their own guards).
Lenin, understanding the compromise between the Provisional Democratic Government and the Soviets, considered that a specific political line should be implemented in order to convince the workers through their own experience for the need:
a) To not provide support to the Provisional Democratic Government, which was the government of the bourgeois class.
b) To understand that the war which was continuing was imperialist, predatory and unjust.
c) To abandon the Mensheviks and SRs in order to change the correlation of forces in favour of the Bolsheviks in the Soviets.
d) For the Soviets to take power as a precondition for the solution of all the pressing demands of the popular strata (peace, land, bread).
In the well-known "April Theses" and in his other works from this period, Lenin made a very clear assessment of the character of the February Revolution. He assessed that power changed hands, passed into the hands of the bourgeois class. He bore in mind that the basic issue in the strategy of the Bolsheviks' strategy until then, the issue of the social alliance of the workers and peasants, had already been realized in the form of the Soviets, irrespective of the fact that in their majority of the proletariat were disorientated and trusted the representatives of the petty bourgeois strata, who acted as the tail of the bourgeoisie.
Against the position of the "Old Bolsheviks" (Kamenev, Zinoviev etc.)that the bourgeois democratic revolution had not been completed and a number of goals had not been realized (e.g. Constituent Assembly, agricultural reforms), Lenin responded that the main issue in each revolution is the issue of power. In this sense, the bourgeois-democratic revolution had been completed.
So a change in the strategy of the Bolsheviks was required. From February onwards, the first and basic issue that had to be solved was the raising of the consciousness of the proletariat, the winning of its vanguard position inside the framework of the social alliance. This required struggle inside the revolutionary organs themselves (Soviets), the rallying with the semi-proletarians and poor peasantry in order to prepare the ground for the socialist revolution.
When the Provisional Democratic Government carried out harsh repressive measures against the Bolsheviks and the labour movement in July, the Bolsheviks withdrew the slogan "All power to the Soviets." Lenin in this crucial period and especially after the outbreak of the military coup d'etat of Kornilov predicted that the objective situation would lead either to the completion of the victory of the bourgeois military dictatorship or to the victory of the armed uprising of the workers. He intensified the ideological struggle against the illusions concerning a peaceful parliamentary transition to socialism and declared that the goal of the armed uprising could only be the conquest of power by the proletariat, with the support of the poor peasantry, for the realization of the programmatic goals of the party.
In September 1917, and after the Bolsheviks had won the majority in the Soviets of Petrograd and Moscow, they returned to the slogan "All Power to the Soviets" with a new content. Not , as previously, as a slogan that would expose the compromise, the conciliation of the Mensheviks with the bourgeois government and would facilitate the change of the correlation of forces, but as a slogan for the overthrow of the Provisional Democratic Government, as a slogan for the revolutionary uprising. The Bolsheviks acted in this direction without waiting for the elections to the Constituent Assembly or the Congress of Soviets.
The decisiveness of Lenin and those from the leadership of the Bolsheviks who supported his positions led in the end to the victorious socialist revolution on October 25 (November 7, according to the new calendar) 1917.
The experience of the October Revolution highlighted that Soviet workers' power, the dictatorship of the proletariat, was what dealt with the pressing issues of the workers (land, bread, peace) and not bourgeois power or some "intermediate" form of power, which in reality cannot exist. Soviet Power paved the way for the abolition of the capitalist relations of production.
The Bolshevik party, with the decisive contribution of Lenin, in order to reach the victorious revolution made constant theoretical and political efforts to develop its strategic view, to deepen and predict the rapid changes in the correlation of forces between the rival classes, as well as to increase its political influence inside the working class itself. The changes in the revolutionary political line from 1905 to October 1917 reflect the maturing of its strategic elaboration.
It was not easy. Beginning with the separation from the Mensheviks in 1903 at the 2nd Congress of the Russian Social-democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) and the formation of a separate party in 1912, the Bolsheviks were steeled in conditions of struggle against and of ideological-political-organizational separation from the forces of opportunism.
The course to victory was the result of constant, persistent theoretical and political elaborations. A decisive contribution for the formation of the strategy of the socialist revolution was provided by the study of the characteristics of monopoly capitalism (in the work "Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism"), of the stance towards the bourgeois state and the character of workers' power, i.e. the dictatorship of the proletariat ("State and Revolution") and the more general deepening in the dialectical materialist thinking and analysis of the developments (with the work "Materialism and Empirio-criticism"), while the economic analysis of Tsarist Russia had already preceded (with the work "The development of capitalism in Russia").
These elaborations highlighted the potential for the socialization of the concentrated means of production in the era of monopoly capitalism and also the potential created by uneven economic-political development and the sharpening of the inter-imperialist contradictions in order for the weakest link in the imperialist chain to break and for the efforts for socialist construction in one country or in a group of countries to begin.
Lenin, developing the strategy of the Bolsheviks, opposed in practice the positions of Plekhanov, Kautsky, Martov, as well as of cadres of the Bolsheviks who considered that Russia should compulsorily pass through a stage of the so-called maturation of capitalism.
These positions were widespread and influential in pre-revolutionary Russia. They were based on the particular weight of agricultural production in the Russian economy, on the lack of its mechanization, on the backwardness in terms of electrification, on the pre-capitalist remnants in a large part of the Tsarist empire. Lenin shed light on the development of capitalist relations, the creation of monopoly groups in the big cities and the potential for socialist relations of production to lend great impetus to the development of the productive forces.
As was natural, the maturation of the strategy of the Bolsheviks was not something that happened quickly and easily. The party of the Bolsheviks acquired the ability to draw conclusions from the revolutionary initiative developed by the masses in moments of the sharpening of the class struggle and to utilize the institutions created by them (the Soviets) to the benefit of the revolutionary uprising.
In each phase of the development of the class struggle, it demonstrated a characteristic ability to serve its strategy with the corresponding political line, with alliances, slogans, maneuvers and also with the astutely conducted confrontation against the Mensheviks and the rest of the opportunist forces. It utilized in the best way the combative experience acquired by its members in the harsh class battles over the entire 1905-1917 period. It worked stably and decisively to change the correlation of forces in the labour and trade union movement and was able to change the correlation of forces in the largest trade unions in Petrograd and Moscow during the First World War and chiefly it was able to gradually increase its influence in the organs of the rebellious workers and soldiers (the Soviets).This theoretical readiness and combative practical ability gave the party of the Bolsheviks the ability to forge revolutionary bonds with the workers'-people's forces and to avoid bowing to the practical difficulties that it faced in its activity, such as state and para-state violence.
In the difficult course from 1905 to 1917, the Bolsheviks faced in practice both the violence of the Tsarist state and the counterrevolutionary activity of petty bourgeois and backward popular strata. A characteristic example were the Black Hundreds in the 1905 revolution, when Lenin considered that dealing with them in a practical way would provide training for workers' combat groups. The Bolsheviks made titanic efforts to deepen the class consciousness of the workers in this period. It is enough to bear in mind that in one of the largest demonstrations in Petrograd in 1905, the crowd held icons of the saints and the Tsar himself and sang hymns, before being attacked by the Tsar's guard.
Particularly in the crucial period from February to October 1917, they faced very capable bourgeois politicians, like Kerensky, who had tremendous abilities in terms of misleading the masses. The Bolsheviks were successful because they worked patiently, daringly, with a plan of political, organizational and military preparation for the revolutionary uprising.
The victorious outcome of the October Revolution confirmed the strategy of the socialist revolution as well as a number of lessons that are connected to the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism:the leading role of the revolutionary communist party, its functioning based on the principle of democratic centralism, which has as its fundamental features collectivity and the safeguarding of unified action. The need to rally the working class against the power of capital, the need to attract sections of the peasants and other middle strata to the revolution and also to render other sections neutral. The historically outdated and reactionary character of the bourgeois class, the necessity of not participating in or supporting a government in the framework of capitalism, the non-existence of transitional forms of power between capitalism and socialism, the need to smash the bourgeois state.
The study of the strategy of the Bolsheviks in the October Revolution, as well as the development of its formation (from 1905 to 1917) leads to crucially important lessons. It provides valuable experience for the way communists approach the workers and popular strata with immature levels of class consciousness. The Bolsheviks were able to successfully combine the study of the domestic and international developments, the theoretical work as well as the study of the experience from the tough class struggle in Russia. This combination is today more necessary than ever for the communists to be able to work effectively in complex and difficult conditions, where the correlation of forces is negative.


The party of the Bolsheviks and the October Revolution were the historical continuation of the activity of the revolutionary wing of the Marxists in the framework of the 1st and 2nd International. They contributed to the outbreak of the workers' uprisings that came in the following years, in Berlin, Budapest, Turin, which were defeated. In general, the October Revolution accelerated the development of the international communist movement and led to the creation of the 3rd Communist International (1919-1943), which was established to counter the international strength of capital. The need for there to be a clear separation from the social-democratic parties that had betrayed the working class in the 1st World War, the need to intensify the struggle against them led to the formulation of the 21 conditions for the accession of a party to the 3rd International, at its 2nd congress in 1920, conditions related to safeguarding its revolutionary character.
However, later on the positive experience of the October Revolution was not taken on board and did not prevail over the duration of the history of the Communist International. On the contrary, the strategic view that, in general, posed the goal of an intermediate form of power or government between bourgeois and workers' power, as a transitional phase to socialist power, prevailed to a significant extent during its existence that was characterized by contradictions on this issue. Often, this choice was justified on the basis of the initial strategic elaboration of the Bolsheviks and indeed was applied in capitalist economies and established bourgeois states in countries that did not have conditions similar to those in Russia in 1905.
The reasons for this course clearly require deeper, detailed study, which our party is continuing. However, we can already note certain factors and difficulties that contributed to the prevalence of problematic strategic elaborations.
A few years after the victory of October, the revolutionary wave of the labour movement receded especially after the defeat of the revolution in Germany in 1918 and Hungary in 1919, while the creation of the preconditions for a revolutionary situation was not utilized by some communist parties. Later, after 1920, powerful capitalist countries temporarily overcame the economic crisis and were stabilized. The majority of the workers organized in trade unions remained trapped in social-democratic parties, in some of which there continued to be an intense inner-party conflict, as in Italy and Germany.
At the same time, the confrontation inside the All-Union Communist Party (B) intensified between forces that argued that socialist construction was impossible without the victory of the socialist revolution in the advanced capitalist West (Trotsky and others)and forces, headed by Stalin, that argued that Soviet power should prioritize the direction of socialist construction.
The increased threat of a new imperialist military offensive against the USSR in the 1930s was another factor in addition to the recession of the revolutionary wave, which was combined with the very sharp class struggle inside the Soviet Union and the obstacles that had be very rapidly overcome. The discussion about how to deal with this sharpened the contradictions and theoretical weaknesses in the elaboration of the suitable revolutionary strategy.
The complex efforts of the USSR's foreign policy to delay as far as possible the imperialist offensive and to utilize contradictions between the imperialist centres in this direction were related to significant alternations and changes in the line of the Communist International that played a negative role later in terms of the course of the international communist movement in the following decades. The changes were related to issues of how to confront the fascist current, the stance towards social-democracy, as well as towards bourgeois democracy itself. The approach of making a political separation of the imperialist alliances into aggressive ones, which included the fascist forces, and defensive ones, which included the bourgeois-democratic forces, emerged in this period.
More particularly, there was the mistaken assessment concerning the existence of a left and right wing in the social-democratic parties in the 1930s, which was the justification for an alliance with them, something that underestimated their complete transformation into parties of the bourgeois class by this point. This incorrect distinction was also maintained after the 2nd World War.
These changes, objectively, trapped the struggle of the labour movement under the banner of bourgeois democracy. Similarly, the separation of the imperialist centres into pro-peace and pro-war ones concealed the real cause of imperialist wars and the rise of fascism, i.e. monopoly capitalism. In other words, it did not shine a light on the urgent strategic tasks of the communist parties to combine the concentration of forces for the national liberation or anti-fascist struggle with the struggle for the overthrow of bourgeois power, utilizing the conditions of the revolutionary situation that were formed in a number of countries.
In general, the character of the era was underestimated in the strategic elaborations of the Communist International and the prevalent definition of the character of the revolution was based on the criterion of the position of a capitalist country in the international imperialist system. That is to say, the lower level of the development of a country in relation to the higher levels achieved by the leading powers in the international imperialist system, as well as the negative correlation of forces at the expense of the revolutionary labour movement were mistakenly adopted as criteria to define the character of the revolution.
This mistaken methodological approach underestimated the potential for socialist relations of production to lend great impetus to and liberate the development of the productive forces in a capitalist country. For example, the existing backwardness in terms of electrification that the USSR inherited was overcome very rapidly, as was illiteracy. Workers' power organized social services that were unprecedented for the era.
The uneven development of the capitalist economies and unequal relations between states cannot be eradicated in the framework of capitalism. In the final analysis, the character of the revolution in each capitalist country is objectively determined by the basic contradiction it is called on to resolve, regardless of the relative changes of the position of each country in the international imperialist system. The socialist character and tasks of the revolution arise from the sharpening of the basic contradiction between capital and labour in each capitalist country in the era of monopoly capitalism.
In many of the elaborations of the Communist Parties, the approach towards the goal of workers power was based on the criterion of the correlation of forces and not the objective definition of the historical era we find ourselves in, which is determined by the which class is at the head of social development, i.e. the motion towards social liberation.
Lenin in his work "Under a false flag" summarized the era of monopoly capitalism as follows: "The third epoch, which has just set in, places the bourgeoisie in the same "position" as that in which the feudal lords found themselves during the first epoch.(Lenin was referring to the era of the revolutionary rise of the bourgeoisie with the French bourgeois revolution of 1789).This is the epoch of imperialism and imperialist upheavals, as well as of upheavals stemming from the nature of imperialism."
The character of the era has a global dimension, regardless of the variations from country to country in terms of the extent and manner of the maturation of the material preconditions for the passage to socialism The centralization and expansion of wage labour, of the working class that undergoes capitalist exploitation is the main indicator of the maturation of capitalism.


The October Revolution brought to the fore a superior organization of society, which was radically different from all the systems that historically had preceded it and which had as their common feature the exploitation of man by man.
In the USSR no one could have another person under their employment. The abolition of the employment of alien labour consists the most significant social result of the October Revolution, the womb of all the various achievements for the life of the workers. With central planning as a social relation of production for the use of the socialized means of production, significant social achievements were implemented for several decades.
In the USSR, the right to work was safeguarded for first time in practice, by abolishing unemployment as a social phenomenon. The foundations for the abolition of the multifaceted economic, political-ideological and social discrimination against women were established, even in regions with immense backwardness in this field. Sciences and free Education and free high quality healthcare at all levels were rapidly developed, while the people's universal access and ability to contribute to Culture and Sports was ensured.
Also, for the first time in History, institutions which ensured the effective participation of the workers in the management of aspects their society were created, thus removing the masses from the margins of political and social life. For the first time, the right of the workers and the youth to elect and to be elected became substantial, in contrast with the purely formal content that these rights have in capitalism. These achievements constituted a reference point and contributed, along with other factors, to the winning of gains by the labour-people's movement in the capitalist states. It has been proved in practice that the more communist relations of production deepen, the more social relations themselves are also revolutionized, the relations of the individual with society. It has been proved that the socialist relations of production can secure collective social rights.
The significance of the above achievements is multiplied if we take into account the conditions under which they were achieved. The distance separating the pre-revolutionary Russia from the powerful capitalist states, such as the USA, Britain, Germany, France, was very large, as these states were significantly superior in the development of the productive forces and in the level of labour productivity.
The powerful capitalist states based their development on the exploitation of their own people, as well as of other peoples (employer intimidation, colonial system, violence against indigenous people, exploitation of child labour)In contrast to this, the young soviet power tried to create the economic foundations of socialism with its own forces, in conditions of the sharpening of the class struggle, that is to say in conditions of bourgeois reaction inside the country interconnected with the active attempt to overthrow workers power from abroad. The achievements of the USSR took place in conditions of the active undermining of production, the permanent threat of foreign armed intervention, assassinations of Bolsheviks and other leading workers and farmers.
Characteristic periods are:The invasion of the 14 states- with the participation of Greece during the E. Venizelos premiership- in Ukraine in 1919 for the suppression of the revolution. The counter-revolutionary atrocities, through which the bourgeois class responded inside Soviet Russia to the so-called "offensive of socialism against capitalism's forces" during the first five-year plan of 1929-1934 (which included the industrialization and collectivization of agricultural production) and later in the period before and during the Second Imperialist World War, when the stance of the capitalist states- alongside the particular aspirations of each one- also served the common goal of the overthrowing the USSR .
The consequences of the First and Second World Wars placed additional obstacles for socialist construction, taking into account that no other country faced such large-scale destruction, while the USSR's main adversary in the global competition between socialism-capitalism, the USA, did not experience war on its territory.
As we approach the above achievements, we must bear in mind that soviet society was not a mature, fully-formed and "flourishing" communist society. But a communist society at an early stage of development, a society under communist formation.
The birth and development of the communist society can carry, to a significant extent, the remnants from its capitalist past, but also the consequences of capitalism's domination at a global level. These consequences- which were met in all sectors of the USSR's social life- were remnants of the old society within the new one, remnants which had not been radically confronted yet and not all social relations had been fully transformed into communist ones.
The bourgeois and petty-bourgeois criticism of the History of the USSR consciously conceals that it is the history of the premature level of communist society. This criticism points out weaknesses and mistakes from the point of view of an ideal communist society in order to defame and discourage revolutionary workers activity. At the same time, the multi-faceted bourgeois propaganda invents crimes, as it labels the right of workers power to defend itself from external attempts to undermine it, while at the same time, it falsifies history by equating communism with fascism.
However, bourgeois propaganda cannot hide the superiority of the central scientific planning for the development of the productive forces, on the solid ground guaranteed by workers power and the social ownership of the means of production,factories domestic energy resources, mineral wealth, land, infrastructure. The History of the USSR proves what the workers can achieve when they become masters of the means of production and of the social wealth, when they acquire political power. The latter form of democracy puts the real producers of the wealth into the driving seat, and not the hypocritical bourgeois parliamentary democracy which is a weapon of capitalist dominance for the subjugation of the working class.
The results of the central scientific planning of workers' power, such as the elimination of unemployment, the rapid and effective specialization of the workforce, its proper distribution throughout the economy, the achievements in the exploration of space, the conversion of peace-time industry into war industry on the eve of the Second World War, are unprecedented, if we also take into account the pre-capitalist backwardness in many regions and the deep asymmetry of capitalist development that was dominant in Tsarist Russia. The distance covered by workers' power in the development of the productive forces, both domestically and internationally, was really enormous.


The course of the socialist construction in the USSR did not move in a linear fashion , upwards and smoothly.
In order to critically evaluate the positive and negative experience of the History's first attempt at socialist construction, it is necessary to briefly distinguish its major historical periods.
After the disastrous for the country's productive base foreign intervention and the class-based civil war (1917-1922) and the New Economic Policy (1922-1929)- which followed as a temporary retreat in the given circumstances- the drawing up of the first five-year plan in 1929 meant the beginning of the offensive of socialism's forces. From this period and until the Second World War, in the USSR the struggle for the development of the communist relations of production, the abolition of wage labour and the dominance of the socialized sector of production on the basis of Central Planning was generally successful. This struggle was successful despite the fact that the conditions of imperialist encirclement and the threat of war- combined with the inheritance of great backwardness- required the acceleration of the process for the construction of new (productive) relations.
During that period, new institutions of workers participation were developed, the core of which was the workplace; this political relation was subsequently violated, retreating in the face of existing objective difficulties and also subjective pressures. Under the pressure of the preparation for the active contribution of all the people in the impending war, the 1936 Soviet Constitution generalized the electoral right through a universal secret ballot, based on the place of residence. The assemblies of each productive unit as the core of the organization of workers' power were downgraded. In practice, the difficulty of recalling delegates from the higher state institutions increased
After the Second World War, both the reconstruction as well as, subsequently, the further development of communist relations set new challenges and demands that required a relevant adaptation of the revolutionary strategy. In the first years after the war, the dominant direction within the CPSU was the anti-market one which- despite the theoretical weaknesses and shortcomings- remained firm in the goal of developing the communist relations, of the planned eradication of inequalities, of the commodity in agricultural production (combined with the goal of transforming the Kolkhozs-cooperatives into social ownership).
Despite the success of the first post-war economic plan, agricultural production experienced delays. Also, some problems were encountered in central planning, including in relation to the ratios between productive sectors.
Life showed that there was no collectively achieved theoretical dynamic which could adapt the communist strategy to the challenges posed by the new level of development in social production. The problems which emerged were not interpreted correctly and were not dealt with in a direction of strengthening and expanding communist relations.
They were interpreted as inevitable weaknesses existing in the nature of central planning and not as a result of the contradictions due to the survival of the old, as a result of the mistakes of the non-scientifically elaborated plan. Thus, instead of seeking a solution towards the invigoration and expansion of the communist relations of production and distribution, it was sought by looking to the past, i.e. in the exploitation of tools and production relations of capitalism. The solution was sought in the expansion of the market, in "market socialism".
The 20th CPSU Congress (1956) stands out as a turning point because in that congress, with the vehicle being ("under the pretext of") the so-called "personality cult", a series of opportunist positions were adopted on the issues of the communist movement strategy, of international relations and partly of the economy. In general, the central administration of the plan weakened. Instead of planning the conversion of kolkhozs into sovkhozs and, above all, of beginning the passage of all cooperative-kolkhoz production to state control, in 1958 the tractors and other machinery became the property of the kolkhozs, a position which had previously been rejected.
A few years later, beginning with the so-called "Kosygin reforms" (1965), the bourgeois category of "business profit" of each individual production unit was adopted and the wages of managers and workers were linked to it. The assessment of the productivity of the socialist productive units on the basis of production volume was replaced by the value estimation of their products. The process of accumulation of each socialist unit was disconnected from central planning, resulting in the weakening of the social character of the means of production and product stocks. At the same time, by 1975, all state farms, the Sovkhozs, had been under full self-management. All these measures led to the creation of the conditions for private embezzlement and ownership, relations which were legally prohibited.
The differences in labour income between workers and managers in each enterprise, as well as among workers in different enterprises, increased. The individual interest was strengthened at the expense of the social interest and the communist consciousness, the stance of defending and promoting of social ownership, was damaged.
The so-called "shadow capital" emerged as a result of enrichment from business profit but also from the "black" market, from criminal actions to usurp the social product, that sought its legal function as capital in production; in reality, the privatization of the means of production and hiring of alien labour, the restoration of capitalism. Its (shadow capital) owners constituted the driving force of the counter-revolution.
In about the same period, the Marxist-Leninist perception about the workers' state was also revised. The 22nd Congress of the CPSU (1961) described the USSR state as an "all-people's" state and the CPSU as an "all-people's party". These positions caused a rapid blunting- and consequently mutation- of the revolutionary characteristics and social composition of the party. The transformation of the CPSU's opportunist degeneration into an open counter-revolutionary force was manifested in 1987, with the passing of a law which institutionally established capitalist relations, under the pretext of the diversity of property relations, the notorious policy of "Perestroika" and "Glasnost". This fact also marks the formal beginning of the counter-revolutionary period.
As the leadership of the CPSU was adopting choices which weakened the social character of property and strengthened narrow individual and group interests, feelings of alienation from social ownership were created and the class consciousness of the workers eroded. The path to indifference and individualism was opening up, as long as practice was increasingly becoming distant from the proclamations. This course explains the passivity of a large part of the people during the period of the counter-revolutionary upheavals and, at the same time, it shows the degeneration that the ruling circles of the CPSU had reached.


Following the overthrow of socialism in the USSR and the other socialist countries, as well as the outbreak of the internal party crisis of the KKE in July 1991 which led to the removal of the opportunist group that was operating in its ranks, the KKE began its revolutionary regroupment.
In difficult circumstances, due to the consequences of the counterrevolution in the international communist movement, the KKE tried all these years to study the contemporary developments, to draw conclusions from the historical experience of the class struggle in Greece and internationally and, at the same time, to deepen and expand its militant ties with the working class and the popular strata. The main conclusions of this course, after a first attempt to study it in the 1990s, were included in the Assessments on Socialism in the USSR (18th Congress, 2009) and in the Programme which was adopted at the 19th Congress in 2013. Of course, the relevant study continues. In general, the KKE constantly tries not to detach the daily economic and political struggle from the main revolutionary political task of overthrowing the power of capital.
The factors which will lead to the revolutionary situation cannot be predicted. However, the deepening of the economic crisis, the sharpening of the contradictions between the imperialist centres that even end up in armed conflicts, can create such conditions in Greece. In case of an imperialist military entanglement of Greece, either in a defensive or aggressive war, the working class, the people's movement must not find themselves under a false flag. The Party will lead the independent organization of the workers-peoples' struggle, in order to lead to the total defeat of the bourgeoisie that imposes the war or "peace" with the gun to the people's head.
The fact that the KKE has charted a modern revolutionary strategy increases its ability to organize leading sites of resistance and counterattack in every sector of the economy, every large workplace, in every region of the country.
The strengthening of the KKE at all levels, which was an important issue at the recent 20th Congress of the Party, constitutes a prerequisite for the promotion of its revolutionary policy.
Many workers wonder, in a well-intentioned way, if socialist construction can start in a country with the potential of contemporary Greece. The KKE replies:
-The needs of the people can be met, based on the productive potential and the wealth that is produced today in our country.
-Domestic production can reach great heights if it is freed from the chains of capitalist ownership and exploitation of the working class.
-Only workers' power can utilize, for the benefit of the people, the contradictions between the imperialist alliances which today are sharpening.
-We must not think statically about the correlation of forces in the wider region, since it will significantly change in revolutionary conditions, not only in our country, but more widely in the region as well.
At the same time, the KKE struggles for the regroupment of the international communist movement, according to the principles of proletarian internationalism, the internationalist solidarity of the people against capitalism and imperialist war, which is expressed in the slogan "Workers of all countries unite!".Already, some small steps towards the effort of the creation of a distinct pole based on the principles of Marxism-Leninism have been made, through the "International Communist Review" and the European Communist Initiative.
An integral part of the KKE's contemporary strategy is its programmatic perception of socialism. Socialist construction begins with the revolutionary conquest of power by the working class. The workers' state, the dictatorship of the proletariat, is an instrument of the working class in the class struggle which continues in socialism with other forms and means. It is utilized for the planned development of the new social relations, which presupposes the suppression of the counter-revolutionary efforts, but also the development of the communist consciousness of the working class. The workers' state, as a mechanism of political domination, is necessary until the transformation of all social relations into communist ones, until the formation of communist consciousness in the overwhelming majority of the workers, but also until the victory of the revolution in the most powerful capitalist countries.
The qualitatively new element of workers' power is the transformation of the workplace (production unit, administrative unit, social service, agricultural cooperative) into the core of its organization.
Direct and indirect democracy is based on the workers' assembly of each production unit as well as the ability to control and revoke the elected delegates, that is to say substantial electoral rights in contrast to today's formal electoral rights of bourgeois democracy, of the dictatorship of the capital.
The primary task of this power is the formation of the new mode of production, the predominance of which basically presupposes the total abolition of the capitalist relations, of the relation between capital and wage labour. As the Programme of the KKE states:
The concentrated means of production are socialized, but initially there remain forms of individual and group ownership that constitute the basis for the existence of commodity-money relation. Forms of productive cooperatives are formed, where the level of the relations of production still does not allow for the socialization of the means of production. The forms of group ownership constitute a transitional form of ownership, between the private and the social one, and not an immature form of communist relations.
On the basis of social ownership of the centralized means of production, the central planning of the economy develops as a communist relation that connects all the producers. Central planning also incorporates, up to a point, agricultural cooperative production. Along with the expansion and deepening of the communist relations of production, the working class gradually acquires the ability to fully understand the different parts of the production process.
Simultaneously with the distribution of a part of the product on the basis of need(Education, Health, heating etc.), socialist production distributes the remaining part of its products on the basis of the individual labour contribution of each person in social labour as a whole, without separating labour into complex and simple, manual (practical) or intellectual.
The Communist Party is the guiding nucleus of revolutionary workers' power, since it is the only force which consciously acts on the basis of the laws of motion of the socialist-communist society.


Today, the theories that characterized counterrevolution as a process for socialism's renewal, which would pave the way for friendship and peace among the peoples, have completely fallen part. Likewise, all the theories and policies for the capitalist system's "humanization" have also collapsed. At the same time, the contradictions between capitalist states, between monopoly groups of international scope, are creating more and more war flashpoints, with the existing risk of their generalization. The social cancer of capitalist ownership of the means of production "shows its bloody teeth".
All those who celebrated the counter-revolutionary overthrows of 1989-1991 have been completely exposed, they have contributed to the corrosion of the labour movement, to the prevailing attitude of fatalism and compromise. On the contrary, the KKE is proud that, at the crucial moment, the day when the red flag was lowered from the Kremlin,it had the strength to address, through "Rizospastis", the following call to the communists:"Comrades, raise the flag high".
Today, the KKE conducts a tough struggle to achieve those characteristics that will enable it to act as the "all-weather" revolutionary vanguard. In today's conditions, the struggle for the definitive abolition of the class – exploitative society and the construction of the socialist-communist one is the real way to honour the October Revolution and its goals.
Despite the domination of the counter-revolution, the words of Mayakovsky continue to show the way:
"Long live the Revolution, joyful and fast
This is the only great war of all that history has known."
The CC of the KKE