RiktpunKt.nu
Posted by klasskampen på augusti 16, 2014
Här nedan kan man se en intressant video som visar hur Ukrainas National Guard och armén samarbetar med nazisterna. I många fall är nazisterna en del av dem. Märk väl att EU, USA och andra imperialistiska länder stödjer de grupperna.
Borgerliga media samtidigt vägrar prata om vad som händer.
Posted in antiimperialism, antikommunism, English, Historia, Nyheter | Taggad: EU, Fascism, imperialism, nazism, Ukraina, USA, video | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på juli 27, 2014
International Communist Review.
Tidskriften som analyserar situationen i hela världen utifrån en marxistisk-leninistisk perspektiv.
Läs senaste nummer på engelska, franska, spanska, ryska eller grekiska
De tidskrifter som samarbetar är följande:
Etudes Marxistes» (Workers’ Party of Belgium)
«Communistiki epitheorisi» (Communist Party of Greece)
«Szabadsag» (Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party)
«Socialist. Latvia» (Socialist Party of Latvia)
«Zeitung vum Letzebuerger Vollek» (Communist Party of Luxembourg)
«El Comunista» (Party of the Communists, Mexico)
«Propuesta Comunista» (Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain)
«Sovetskii Soyuz» (Russian Communist Workers’ Party)
«Gelenek» (Communist Party of Turkey)
«Debate Abierto» (Communist Party of Venezuela)
Posted in antiimperialism, antikommunism, English, Historia, Ideologi, Nyheter | Taggad: International communist Review, media | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på juli 27, 2014
by Pedro Eusse
Workers’ Classist Current “Cruz Villegas”
The current systemic crisis of capitalism coincides with the development of progressive and revolutionary processes, fundamentally anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchic ones, particularly in Latin America, whose many inherent contradictions generate expectations in different directions.
One of the common features of such political processes, in addition to their questioning of the U.S. imperialist domination in the region, the demand for national sovereignty and a better distribution of wealth, attributes which themselves make them worthy of support from consequently revolutionary forces, is that their social vanguard has been assumed by radicalized sectors of the petty bourgeoisie and middle class professionals, including an important role of the so-called emerging national bourgeoisie, not monopolistic, interested in taking the reins of economic dynamics in opposition to the strategy of global hegemonic control of the transnational monopolies.
This inter-bourgeois confrontation has a particular definition in Venezuela, with an oil rentier economy, where virtually all the economic and social dynamics revolve around the resources generated by oil exports, activity under state monopoly, so that the various bourgeois factions try to take control directly or indirectly of the state apparatus and the management of oil revenues.
In this context emerged the diversionist approach of the ”socialism of the 21st century”, more forcefully raised by the leadership of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela, followed by the progressive governments of Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua, and also assumed by opportunist political currents from other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.
This historical fact has been the cradle of the revival of several old ”theories” and concepts, presented with original and native appearance, labeled as endogenous, but which ultimately involve the denial of class struggle and the revolutionary role of the working class, the rejection of the scientific theory of the proletariat and the need for its organic instrument, the political party founded on the principles of Marxism-Leninism.
Thus, from the leadership of the Venezuelan process, some sectors spread theoretical concepts introduced by social-reformist theoreticians, ”postmoderns” and reviewers of Marxism, bringing the ”crowds” (Antonio Negri and Paolo Virnoto), “the People” (devoid of a sense of class) and the regional communities to the category of historical subjects of the revolution. The problem with these categories is that they are generic and abstract, not historically specific and therefore lack of specific class content. Speaking of ”crowds”, for example, juggles or at least distorts the class struggle that takes place not among the many and the few, but between the exploited and the exploiters, regardless of their numerical strength. Moreover, by emphasizing in a superlative way, from the leadership of the revolutionary process and the government, the central role of territorial communities, they skip or even attempt to stop the organizational and socio-political development needed by the working class and other workers, from their workplaces and by industry branches in the dynamics of class struggle for the abolition of capitalist relations of production.
At the same time, the governing bodies of the process spread the negation of dialectical materialism and the disqualification of the operation of the laws of social development (Kohan), trying to give theoretical support to voluntarism and subjectivism, to the detriment of the materialist conception of history. Within this explosion of ideological diversion, anti-communism makes its way easily into the discourse and political practice, on behalf of the socialism of the 21st century, making concessions to bourgeois ideology and the anti-communist blackmail of psychological warfare of imperialism, weakening the political and moral force of the Bolivarian revolution against the plans of the counterrevolution.
This situation is explained to a large extent by the still insufficient quantitative and qualitative strength of the Venezuelan working class, which has so far prevented the working class to play a relevant role during the process of change underwent by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, although there are undoubted increasingly manifestations of a growing political consciousness of the working class and working people of Venezuela, which favours the development of a political line for the defense, consolidation and deepening of the revolutionary changes. Some of these positive expressions are the mass actions in favour of the approval of a revolutionary new Organic Law on Labour and the struggle to advance the establishment of a new model of corporate governance, particularly in those companies owned by the state, under the principle of workers’ control with the establishment of the Socialist Councils of Workers, as instruments for the exercise of the collective leadership of the workers in the productive processes, in struggle to dismantle the oppressive capitalist relations of production and destroy the bourgeois state, promoting the formation of a revolutionary consciousness in the working class.
The Socialist Councils of Workers, as conceived by the PCV, will fully comply with its revolutionary class role, to the extent that the workers who assume their construction and development raise their consciousness, from class in itself to class for itself, unlike the ”workers’ councils” that emerged at the initiative of social reformism in some European countries.
According to the analysis made by the Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV), the changes in these years in the frame of the so-called Bolivarian Revolution are, up to this point, the result of a social-reformist practice with a patriotic and progressive tendency, with a decisive role from sectors of the petty bourgeoisie. This reality will be transcended only by a new correlation of the popular and revolutionary forces led by the working class, which will ensure the consolidation of national liberation and the creation of the conditions for real progress towards the strategic goal of the seizure of power by the working class and the advance in the construction of socialism.
The Bolivarian Revolution is then approaching to a crossroads and a historical dilemma whose outcome will be determined by the correlation of class forces operating inside: or to consolidate a process of progressive reforms that preserve the foundations of the capitalist system or to move towards a transition dismantling the bourgeois state apparatus and replacing the current dominance of capitalist relations of production.
Venezuelan working class has not had, historically and in general terms, a high numerical, mainly due to the traditional mono-exporting and monoproducer model of our national economy and the characteristics of industrial backwardness of our country, the result of the dependent status and the role assigned to our country in the framework of the international division of labour under the leadership of imperialism, as almost exclusive producer and exporter of raw materials, specifically crude oil.
While between the 60’s and 70’s of the 20th century there were some important industrial conglomerates, mainly state-owned enterprises as the Corporación Venezolana de Guayana (CVG), in the 80’s the effect of the implementation of neoliberal policies began a rapid de-industrialization of the country. This trend was stopped after 1999 when the government of President Chávez broke with the neoliberal policy, but internal and external factors have prevented the activation of a sustained process of re-industrialization of the country.
While the weakness of the production has led to a relative numerical decline of the industrial proletariat (for example, the number of workers employed in manufacturing has fallen over 20% since 1990), this does not mean an absolute decrease of the working class, since there has been an increase in the labour force employed in other sectors, particularly in construction, trade and public services, including telecommunications and electricity.
However, workers in manufacturing are still very important from a qualitative point of view, despite the significant reduction in their ranks they have suffered. Their number is now below the 500 thousand, or 4 percent of the total active labour force in the country. Among them, the metallurgical industrial complex concentrated in Guyana.
Indeed there has been a process of decline of the industrial structure due to the unilateral closure of companies by their owners, either for political or economic reasons linked to the residual effects of the neoliberal policies that favoured the trends towards concentration and centralization of capital. Between 1996 and 2007, the total number of industrial manufacturing companies fell by nearly 40%, a reduction which particularly affected small and medium enterprises.
As for the Venezuelan oil proletariat, it has not historically recorded large numbers of members, although in the first five decades of the 20th century, period of establishment and consolidation of the oil economy, it was the largest, most organized and combative component of all our working class. Later, it experienced a decline and debilitation resulting from the emergence of the use of new technologies and the profusion of outsourcing and subcontracting mechanisms on labour relations, as well as the pernicious and divisive influence of the corrupt currents of pro-imperialist social-democracy which dominated the oil trade unions for many years.
Today, with the intensification of the activities in the Orinoco Belt and the recent nationalization of the services linked to primary activities such as transportation, drilling and general services, among others, the state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) has increased its staff to one hundred thousand workers, including the bloated administrative payroll and the social services that the Bolivarian government has assigned to the national oil corporation
Regarding the subjective aspects that define the hitherto insufficient revolutionary role of our working class, we can note the traditional organic division of the Venezuelan labour movement, its weak organization and the dominance of reformist and bureaucratic tendencies within its leadership, although there have always been very active and militant tendencies claiming classism within our labour movement, with outstanding participation of the communist militants.
The confrontation in Venezuela between class-oriented and reformist trade unionism and their organic groupings is not outside the universal historical struggle to win over the working masses, either to fight to break the chains of capitalist exploitation and gain the full social liberation, or to meekly accept the modern wage-slavery and condemn all humanity to the oppression exercised by the capital.
It is well known that the organic and political division of trade unionism has its origins in the very history of international labour movement, from the moment when the class enemy suceeded in developing the reformist and opportunist trends within the movement and they acted strongly within the same. Thus, with the division of the Second International in 1914, the contemporary bourgeois social-democarcy, the bearer of class collaboration, was born,.
The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), founded in 1945 as the international center that expresses the genuine interests and objectives of the workers of the world, was divided a few years after its creation as a result of a conspiracy orchestrated by U.S. imperialism. In recent years, the right wing of the trade union movement at a global level, responding to the global strategy of domination of transnational capital, decided to unite in a single center, founded in November 2006, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), resulting from the merger of the social-democrat ICFTU and the social-christian WCL. In America, they united the Inter-American Regional Labor Organization (ORIT), continental ICFTU affiliate, and the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT), a continental CMT affiliate, in the Confederation of Workers of the Americas (CSA). In Venezuela, the right-wing trade union confederations, CTV, CGR and CODESA – the last two almost extinct – joined the ITUC and the CSA.
Meanwhile, the Unity Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CUTV) has been a member of the WFTU since the 60’s. For decades, this confederation, even relatively weak in the organic sphere, was a class-oriented reference in the struggles of the Venezuelan workers, particularly in the 80’s and 90’s, when denouncing and fighting against the neoliberal policies of labour flexibility, removal of social security and company privatizations, being the counterpart of the pro-imperialist bosses and the CTV, which since the 60’s became a trade union instrument in the service of the Venezuelan oligarchy and their governments.
The beginning of the Bolivarian revolutionary process, with the election of President Chávez and the adoption of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, intensified the class struggle but also created conditions for the displacement of the hegemony exercised by the CTV union and the search of trade union unity, from the regrouping of the very diverse occupational factors supporting the revolutionary process. The National Union of Workers (UNETE), linked to the WFTU and which supports the revolutionary process from a position of class independence, is born under these dynamics.
Despite the progress meant by the anti-neoliberal and anti-imperialist process developing in Venezuela, despite the existence of the UNETE, the Venezuelan labour and trade union movement still faces the historic tendency of the bourgeoisie and the state to submit it to their guardianship and subordination. In addition to the openly counterrevolutionary trade union currents, there are other currents that, while touting a position in favour of the revolutionary process, have a reformist and opportunist vision and practice, choosing an employer-oriented and officialist trade unionism, and advocate the division of UNETE and the formation of another trade union confederation, bureaucratically constructed from areas of the state power. This situation complicates the struggle of the workers against the public and private employers, even when from various levels of the political power there is a tendency to assume an openly anti-union position, or in any case, contrary to the independent existence of the workers’ organizatons.
For PCV, the need to defend and strengthen the autonomy and independence of the labour and trade union movement, as well as all the mass organizations, against the employers, the State and the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois parties becomes the first priority for the class-conscious workers, both from the unions and the activity of the prevention delegates (representatives of the workers to defend the health and safety at work) and the Socialist Councils of Workers, which arise as a result of the constitutional premise of participatory democracy and as tools that claim the exercise of worker’s control in processes of the production, administration and distribution of goods and services from every workplace and in the various branches of production.
This need is highlighted by the fact that a widespread tendency to place all social organizations under the subordination of the national government and other bodies of state power is developing. The issue is particularly serious in the case of working class organizations: as the petty bourgeoisie has the hegemony in the leadership of the process and the national government, it is intended that the workers decline their class independence, indispensable to demand their rights and claim their individual and collective economic, social and political interests, which are basically the same of the popular majority of the towns and countryside and, at the same time, are contrary to the interests of the sectors that basically exert much of the political power. This situation is generating continuous and increasing conflicts.
So, the struggle to move towards programmatic and organizational unity of the workers’ movement is part of the struggle to transform Venezuelan trade unionism, rearming it with the principles that should guide the liberating action of our class, essentially defeating reformism within itself and serving, in its different struggles and achievements, to the formation of class consciousness and the rise of the proletariat to the condition of ruling class, in strategic alliance with other classes and strata which also exploited and oppressed.
As stated by the 13th Extraordinary Congress of the PCV (March 2007): “… among the most significant tasks of the party of the revolution is designing a policy capable of conquering the trade union movement to clean it up, to eradicate the enormous incubated vices which result of the tremendous perversion of reformism, the practices developed by the company unions, and the effects of patronage, to definitely break with their fragmentation, to become a frontline force in building a new society.”
Those from the Bolivarian process who believe that the working class is not the subject of history of social revolution, either because of the ignorance of the theory of scientific socialism or because they consider that their class interests are under threat, conclude that the working class must not organize itself independently, as a class. Therefore, they disdain and question the validity of the revolutionary party of the working class, trying to discredit the Communist Party of Venezuela, trying to make it invisible, pushing for its liquidation.
In this respect the Theses on the Party of the Revolution, issued by the 13th Extraordinary Congress of the PCV, held in March 2007, at a time when our party was proposed to integrate the nascent United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), a party with a multi-class character, integration that would lead to its liquidation, reads as follows:
“In referring to the participation and involvement of the masses, we must make a special emphasis on organic effort for us to meet the working class and other sectors of workers. If we consider eradicate capitalism, we must become the political organization, the genuine interpreter of the interests of the social class which, by its position in the socioeconomic structure, is not only the most directly affected by capitalist exploitation and, therefore, objectively more interested in the suppression of wage slavery, but also the one that, by achieving this ultimate goal, frees the rest of society of the exploitation regime because, devoid as it is of the means of production, does not want to conquer them for the exploitation of other classes.”
Afterwards, the document follows: “… the party of the revolution must be in its content, its politics, its composition, its ideology, the interests that it embodies, the party of the working class and all working people. Of course, this party would also accept members of other classes and strata of society, but on condition that they assume as its own the interests representd by the party, which would be the interests of the working class, if we want to be consistent with the programmatic objective of strategic nature that we pursue, socialism.”
“The precise definition of the class content of the party of revolution is a historical necessity, and is not at odds with the anti-imperialist character of the Bolivarian Revolution today. This phase of our revolution demands, in effect, a broad alliance of classes around the objectives of national liberation. Taking advantage of all the contradictions and differences that may exist between sectors of the large and petty bourgeoisie, on the one hand and imperialism on the other, is one of the primary tasks of the anti-imperialist alliance, but this alliance should not occur within the party of the revolution, especially when we recognize that the course of this revolution aims to socialism.”
“The party of socialist revolution can not fulfill its historic purpose if it is shaped under a multi-class concept that ultimately subordinates all classes, social strata and sectors of popular character to the interests of dominant economic bloc within the respective organization. The limitations of this type of party are well known in our history: the revolutionary character of the party is diluted, the anticapitalist interests of the working people are subordinated to the interests of capital based on rearrangements, concessions and handouts, the class struggle as a mechanism of transformation is substituted by class conciliation in order to stabilize the system, the revolution is replaced by the reform, the historical horizon of socialism and communism, with which only the working class is organically linked, blurs.”
Thus, our party fixed position and made contributions to the debate then open around the character of the party needed by the Venezuelan revolution. In this 13th Extraordinary Congress, the PCV reaffirmed its status as the revolutionary party of the working class, based on the scientific theory of Marxism-Leninism, as assumed from its founding in 1931 and, using this theoretical and methodological tool, designed a political line based on the need to resolve the main contradiction of the historical moment, between the hegemonic interests of imperialism and the Venezuelan nation and the fundamental and irreconcilable contradiction present in capitalist society between capital and labour . Hence the need for the working class, with his party and its revolutionary ideology, to take the forefront in the struggle for national liberation and socialism in the communist perspective.
Based on the characterization that our party makes about the Venezuelan revolutionary process, particularly in its current stage, we have proposed the need to establish a Wide Anti-imperialist and Patriotic Front, involving the whole political and social factors that coincide in the need to confront and defeat imperialist domination and conquer our full national liberation
Precisely for this reason, simultaneously we advocate the creation of a Popular Revolutionary Bloc (BPR), necessarily confined to those who propose the complete abolition of the system of capitalist exploitation and, therefore, can not include absolutely any faction of the bourgeoisie or any organization that expresses their interests
The communists struggle for the Popular Revolutionary Bloc to be led by the working class, so that in the context of heightened class struggle, it can consistently assume the social and political battle against the domination of capital and the establishment of a revolutionary popular-democratic state that opens the way towards the building of genuine socialism with the working class acting as the vanguard. Building a Popular Revolutionary Bloc is of crucial importance for the working class in its struggle for power, as stated comrade Antonio Gramsci in 1926, consistent with the Leninist thought and with a full relevance for the Venezuelan communists today: “The proletariat can become dominant and ruling class to the extent that it manages to create a system of class alliances that can mobilize most working people against capitalism and the bourgeois state.
Posted in English, Ideologi | Taggad: reformism, revolution, Venezuela | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på juli 27, 2014
The economic crisis is harshly beating capitalism and its institutions. This is a moment when the peoples of Europe witness clearly how the European Union means misery, unemployment, destruction of the public services and repression, and the Communist and Workers’ Parties of Europe have to advance to denounce this imperialist inter-state alliance and all those organizations that defend and promote it, in order to deepen the ideological battle against opportunism, the characteristic example of which in Europe is the European Left Party.
The ELP was founded in 2004 and held its first congress in Athens in 2005. From its inception, forces participate in the ELP that have taken openly pro-imperialist positions. Through their platforms and practices, the leading forces in the ELP have demonstrated that they can not and do not want to break with the EU, calling for the EU to play an enhanced role in global affairs.
The ELP promotes the disorienting belief that the EU can emerge as a progressive political space. It speaks vaguely of the “need to transform the existing tools into tools for collaboration at the service of the people” and for a “transformation of the euro zone through a radical change of the architecture of the euro and European cooperation”. Recently Die Linke deleted a passage from its manifesto which originally had described the EU as a “neo-liberal, militaristic and largely undemocratic power”. Consequently rather than identifying the EU as an inter-state capitalist union the leading forces in the ELP, despite all the evidence to the contrary, view the EU as a potential “force for stability and peace”.
The ELP has adopted the institutional framework of the EU, advocating the meaningless demand for a “Europe of Rights”. They have entered into the process of compromise firmly rejecting the need for rupture. They have failed to recognise that based on a set of highly complex institutional arrangements which serve the interests of the monopolies the EU is incapable of reform. The ELP has even nominated a candidate for the President of the European Commission, a basic anti-people apparatus. The ELP conceals the reality and tries to prevent a substantial analysis about the character of the EU.
The ELP has also facilitated and engaged in a distortion of the history of the communist movement and the socialist countries. The positions adopted by the European Left Party present workers with the false perspective that there is some middle way between capitalism and socialism. The ELP distorts the real nature of capitalism and the capitalist crisis.
The EU serves the interests of the monopolies; reinforces the bankers and other sections of capital against the workers. It collaborates with the US and NATO against the peoples, through interventions and wars, in pursuit of the interests of the monopolies.
Parties like the ELP are integrated in this strategy and foster illusions about the management of the system. Social-democracy and opportunism are opposed to the class struggle and the socialist revolution.
The parties in the core of the ELP support so-called “left governments” that manage the capitalist system, the interests of capital and impede the radicalization of the working class.
In these conditions, what is required is the strengthening of the communist parties that struggle decisively against the imperialist union, for socialism and the abolition of exploitation.
Posted in antikommunism, English, Ideologi | Taggad: EU, Europeisk vänsterparti, opportunism | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på juli 27, 2014
Giorgos Toussas, member of the CC of the KKEand MEP, participated in the “Round-table”, which was organized by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) on the 14-15 March 2014, with the topic : “the communists in the parliaments and the class struggle”.
Dear comrades,
First of all we would also like to utilize this occasion to express our solidarity with the communists of Ukraine, who are facing a very strong reactionary political “wave” in this period which was provoked by the inter-bourgeois confrontation and the open intervention of the USA and the EU in the internal affairs of Ukraine and by their fierce competition with Russia over the control of the markets, the natural resources and the pipelines of this country.
We want to condemn the effort to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine and the communist ideology. As you know, our party has taken a series of initiatives over the last period intervening in the parliament, in the European parliament, in the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe against the plans to ban the communist party and the communist ideology in the Ukraine. We carried out a mass protest at the embassy of Ukraine in Athens while the joint statement which we drafted together with the German Communist Party has been supported by almost 40 communist and workers’ parties.
The position of the KKE is that in light of these reactionary political developments in the Ukraine, given the rise of reactionary or even openly fascist forces, given the danger of the working people being divided on the basis of national and linguistic characteristics and under the “false flags” of the different sections of the bourgeois class, it is necessary for the communist and labour movement to organize their independent struggle for socialism, having as their criterion their interests and not the imperialist that the one or the other section of the plutocracy of their country chooses.
Dear comrades,
As regards the subject of the today’s event: “the communists in the parliaments and the class struggle” we would like to underline that we treat parliament as an institution of bourgeois democracy, as an instrument of capitalism for the management of the monopolies’ power with the aim of safeguarding of its interests. On this basis, we are diametrically opposed to the opportunist views which were adopted in Western Europe by the so called current of “eurocommunism”, views that foster the illusion that a “parliamentary transition” to socialism is possible through the parliaments and the participation in them. Allow me to present several fundamental positions of the KKE on the issue we are examining:
The starting position of the KKE is the Leninist position that stresses that
“democracy in general” does not exist in any capitalist country. What exists is only bourgeois democracy. In addition, there is no “dictatorship in general” but the dictatorship of the oppressed class, i.e. the dictatorship of the proletariat over the oppressors and the exploiters namely over the bourgeois class with the aim of defeating the resistance of the exploiters in the struggle for their dominance.
“…The most democratic bourgeois republic is no more than a machine for the suppression of the working class by the bourgeoisie, for the suppression of the working people by a handful of capitalists…[1]” and this suppression is being escalated when the power of capital is at stake or is being shaken or even in the case when the interests impose the use of the most reactionary, fascist forces as it is happening in this period in the Ukraine with the intervention of the USA, the EU and the NATO in competition with the bourgeois class of Russia over the control of the region.
However, the struggle against fascism cannot be trapped in the support for the bourgeois democracy, it cannot be restricted to the struggle for the upholding and the expansion of the democratic, trade union rights within the framework of the bourgeois political system as this would mean the entanglement of the struggle within the existent exploitative system. The struggle for these rights and against the open, fascist form of the dictatorship of the bourgeois class, the struggle for the defense of any democratic rights as for instance the right of the Communist Party to legal activity, its right to participate in the bourgeois elections cannot look to the past; it must look to the future. This is the meaning of the Marxist-Leninist perception regarding the smashing of the bourgeois state apparatus and all its institutions, with the passing of the means of production and the power into the hands of the working class, with the emergence of new institutions of power that will emanate from the people. Over the decades it has been proved, theoretically and practically, that the power will be either in the hands of the working class or in the hands of the bourgeois class. “Dreams of some third way are reactionary, petty-bourgeois limitations[2]”.
In our opinion these are fundamental issues for the elaboration of the political line of the communist parties, issues which are very useful in the struggle to win over workers’ and people’s consciousness, for the maturation of the subjective factor.
On this basis the KKE intervenes in the national and the European parliament, it tries to impede the anti-people measures, it votes against the anti-people draft-laws, directives and other acts of the EU, it tables questions, draft-laws and amendments on serious issues that concern the working class, the popular strata, on issues regarding the protection of the unemployed, the relief of the popular strata from the loans and taxation, on health, education combined with the struggle which is organized by the class trade unions the labour and people’s movement.
Normally, the positions of the KKE are rejected by the bourgeois and the opportunist parties and there is no expectation that the people’s problems can be solved in this way. This intervention helps to reveal the exploitative character of capitalism and the bourgeois parliamentary democracy as the “dictatorship of the monopolies”.
It contributes to the enlightenment of the working class, the popular strata, the youth, it informs the working people, it prepares them so as to enhance the organization of their struggle.
When the anti-people measures and laws are adopted, our party insists, it calls them into question and makes efforts so that they are not legitimised in the people’s consciousness.
This activity i.e. the intervention with a question denouncing the measures that commercialize health or impose taxes on the people, the denunciation of a draft-law regarding the social security rights of the working people or the intervention in the European Parliament against the imperialist interventions of the EU can be integrated in the general mass struggle by means of combining the struggle with the organizations of the party and KNE; it can be adopted by the trade unions and the other organizations of the mass movement. Our party and our MPs are acting in this direction.
The communist MPs and MEPs have strong bonds with the workers in factories, enterprises, with the poor and medium sized farmers and self-employed. They act in the neighborhoods, in schools, universities, hospitals where our people live and work. The income of the communists MPs does not differ from that of the working class and the popular strata. They give the entire parliamentary pay to the KKE and the party, according to the possibilities of the class struggle, gives them a salary that cannot exceed that of the working people.
The communists MPs and MEPs, in consultation with the party organizations, collect material so that the interventions in the Parliament become more revealing, and more effective.
They are in the forefront of the workers’ and people’s mobilizations they contribute to the organization of the struggle.
That is to say, the working class the popular strata have an interest to strengthen the KKE in the EU parliamentary elections, in the municipal and regional elections that will take place May and we insist on this.
At the same time, we tell the truth to the people.
We tell them that this is merely an aspect of the struggle. The basic issue is to accelerate the regroupment of the labour movement, to strengthen the trade unions, to achieve a class orientation, to change the correlation of forces and defeat the forces that support the EU and the bourgeois policy, to defeat the forces of reformism, opportunism that foster class collaboration and seek to disarm the labour movement.
We say to the working people that it is necessary to create the people’s alliance, the alliance between the working class, the poor farmers, the small self-employed in urban centers, women and the youth from the working class families so as to strengthen the anti-capitalist anti-monopoly struggle, overthrow the capitalist barbarity, conquer working class people’s power and pave the way for the socialist-communist society.
It must be understood that the confrontation with the bourgeois and opportunist forces in the national and the European parliament regarding the people’s problems, which is aimed at the conflict with the bourgeois class, the bourgeois state, the EU and the capitalist system, has nothing to do with the fostering of confusion and illusions that the struggle in the parliament can lead to pro-people reforms of the system or of the EU -the imperialist union of the strong monopoly groups- as the forces of the European Left Party or SYRIZA and the other forces of opportunism do.
This view causes a great deal of damage, it erodes consciousness. It starts from the dangerous illusion regarding the humanization of capitalism while at the same time the system in its current imperialist stage becomes even more reactionary and dangerous.
The KKE supports the Leninist position that stresses that the political struggle is not restricted to our stance in relation to parliamentarianism but includes the struggle of the working class as a whole which is directed towards the overthrow of the capitalist regime.
As regards the stance of the communists in relation to bourgeois democracy Lenin noted: “Communists, expose this hypocrisy, and tell the workers and the working people in general this frank and straightforward truth: the democratic republic, the Constituent Assembly, general elections, etc., are, in practice, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and for the emancipation of labor from the yoke of capital there is no other way but to replace this dictatorship with the dictatorship of the proletariat. The dictatorship of the proletariat alone can emancipate humanity from the oppression of capital, from the lies, falsehood and hypocrisy of bourgeois democracy — democracy for the rich — and establish democracy for the poor, that is, make the blessings of democracy reallyaccessible to the workers and poor peasants, whereas now (even in the most democratic — bourgeois — republic) the blessings of democracy are, in fact, inaccessible to the vast majority of working people”[3].
The bourgeois parties “are playing at home”, they are utilizing the political, ideological apparatuses of the system, the repressive mechanisms, the intervention of the employers, they are deceiving the people, they are using false dilemmas, the rationale of the “lesser evil” in order to trap popular forces.
The participation of the communists in the elections takes place on a different basis. It is based on the defense of the truth. The communists do not flatter the masses; they fight against the rational of the “savior” from above. They point to the real revolutionary path while, when possible, they hold the election campaign along with the mobilization of the working people.
There is a crucial issue that has to do with the prospect of the struggle of the working class.
“ First let the majority of the population, while private property still exists, i.e., while the rule and yoke of capital still exist, express themselves in favour of the party of the proletariat and only then can and should the party take power”—so say the petty-bourgeois democrats who call themselves ‘socialists’ but who are in reality the servitors of the bourgeoisie.
“Let the revolutionary proletariat first overthrow the bourgeoisie, break the yoke of capital, and smash the bourgeois state apparatus, then the victorious proletariat will be able rapidly to gain the sympathy and support of the majority of the non-proletarian working people by satisfying their needs at the expense of the exploiters[4]”—say we” stressed Lenin.
The KKE in the resolution of its 18th Congress (2009) which refers to the causes of the overthrow of the socialism in the Soviet Union mentioned amongst others that “since the 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956) and its thesis for a “variety of forms of transition to socialism, under certain conditions”, the line of “peaceful co-existence” was also linked to the possibility of a parliamentary transition to socialism in Europe, a strategy that already existed in a number of Communist Parties and ended up gaining the upper hand in most of them. This thesis constituted in essence a revision of the lessons of the Soviet revolutionary experience and a reformist social democratic strategy”[5].
At its 19th Congress (2013) the KKE approved unanimously our new Programme that makes clear that today in Greece there exist the material preconditions for the construction of a socialist-communist society. The impending revolution in Greece will be socialist. Our party assesses, as in its previous Programme, that there do not exist any intermediate stages between capitalism and socialism, and no intermediate types of power. We propose to the working class, the poor popular strata, to the youth and women from the working class families to form a People’s Alliance, an alliance of social forces that have their interest in struggling in an anti-monopoly anti-capitalist direction, having as its basic slogans the socialization of the monopolies and the creation of agricultural producer cooperatives, the unilateral cancellation of the debt, the non-participation in military-political interventions and wars, the disengagement from the EU and NATO, with working class-people’s power. The KKE acts in the direction of preparing the subjective factor for the perspective of the socialist revolution, even if the time frame for its manifestation is determined by objective conditions, by the revolutionary situation. Our parliamentary activity serves this very goal. We are working for the creation of a KKE with a solid basis inside the working class, a KKE which will be capable of responding to every sharp turn in the class struggle, as we say an “all-weather party”.
At the same time we seek the regroupment of the labour movement on a class basis and we support the All-workers’ Militant Front (PAME) and the alliance with other anti-monopoly rallies of the small businessmen (PASEVE), the poor farmers (PASY), the students (MAS), the women (OGE). We believe that the formation of the People’s Alliance, which will have a social basis (and it will not be a welding together of political “leaderships”) is what is needed today. A social alliance which will struggle for all the problems of the people, for salaries, pensions, public health, education, social security, for the relief of the unemployed etc and will have a clear anti-monopoly and anti-capitalist character. This social alliance, in conditions of the revolutionary situation, can be transformed into a revolutionary workers’-people’s front, which will create organs of working class-people’s power and will have nothing to do with the bourgeois parliamentary democracy.
The foundation of working class power will be the productive unit, the social services, the administrative unit, the productive cooperatives. The structure of the organs of power will include: the Workers’ Council, the Regional Council and the Highest Organ of Working Class Power. All three levels of the organs of power – Workplace, Regional, Nationwide- will engage in the organisation of the protection of the revolution, in the People’s Judiciary and the control mechanism.
[2] Ibid.
[5] Resolution of the 18th Congress of the KKE.
Posted in English, Ideologi | Taggad: kamp, kommunister, parlament | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på augusti 3, 2009
We strongly condemn the adoption on 3 July, 2009 at the regular Parliamentary Assembly session of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Vilnius (Lithuania) of a new anti-communist resolution titled «Divided Europe Reunited» which contains a gross distortion of history and denies the role of the Soviet Union in the victory over fascism. The resolution equates communism and fascism. Those who do so fail to remember that it was the Soviet Union that made the largest contribution to the liberation of Europe from fascism. The authors of the resolution -those falsifiers of history- pretend to have forgotten who gave away Czechoslovakia in 1938 in Munich which led to the elimination of the state independence of the country and to the fascist enslavement of the Czech and Slovak peoples.
Those who voted for the adoption of this resolution actually justify and encourage “a witch-hunt” against communists in several countries of the OSCE where communists are persecuted, their youth organisations prohibited and the parties prosecuted for the use of their traditional symbols.
Furthermore, the resolution offers great opportunities for the prosecution of communist ideology and the adoption of measures against communist parties.
At the same time, we witness the actual rehabilitation of the Nazis in a number of countries, including the country that hosted this session of the OSCE PA.
We cannot allow anyone to insult the memory of anti-fascists, participants in the Resistance movement, who lost their lives in the fight against Nazism.
The aggravation of anti-communism in Europe is not a transient phenomenon. It shows the fear of the ruling class over the exacerbation of the capitalist crisis and of the urgency of the demand to abolish capitalist exploitation and the need for fundamental society change acquire.
The working class, all workers, regardless of the extent of agreement or disagreement with the communists, must repulse decisively anti-communism bearers, as history has proven that anti-communist attacks foretell the onset of a general offensive against the social and democratic rights of the people.
Let us reply to the provocateurs and anti-communists through our joint struggle for workers’ rights, for socialism.
The Parties
Other parties that also support the joint statement:
The statement is open for further parties’ endorsement.
The forthcoming days we will keep you informed about the updated list and the new signatories.
With comradely greetings
The International Relations section of the CC of CPRF
The International Relations section of the CC of KKE
Posted in antiimperialism, English, Historia, Ideologi, Nyheter | Taggad: anticommunist resolution, communist and workers’ parties, Fascism, kommunism, nazism, OSCE, Soviet Union, statement | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på november 7, 2008
Posted in English, Historia, Ideologi, Nyheter | Taggad: Lenin, Oktoberrevolutionen, socialism, Sovjetunionen | Leave a Comment »
Posted by klasskampen på juni 20, 2008
We would like to inform you that following an initiative by the parliamentary group of our party 80 MPs – among them party leaders, 2 out of the 5 vice-presidents of the Parliament and several former ministers – signed a petition to the Czech government and the other competent authorities, calling for the withdrawal of a ban on the operation of the Communist Youth Union of Czech Republic.
The MPs come from practically all parties in the Greek parliament, with the exception of the extreme-right Popular Orthodox Rally (LA.OS) party, and include all 22 deputies of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), 11 MPs from the ruling New Democracy Party (ND), 33 from major opposition party PASOK, and 14 from the SYRIZA party.
The petition that was submitted to the Czech Republic embassy in Athens is the following:
“To the competent Authorities of the Czech Republic
The decision of the Court of Prague to ban the action of the Communist Youth Union of the Czech Republic (KSM) constitutes a dangerous development as it calls into question the elementary political freedoms and fundamental rights. It leads to the penalization of the right to express one’s different political view.
The Members of the Greek Parliament signing this appeal demand the revocation of the banning of the KSM action.”
KKE
Papariga Alexandra
Chalvatzis Spyros
Kantartzis Axilleas
Kaneli Liana
Kafantari Lila
Mavrikos Giorgos
Protoulis Giannis
Mela Eva
Ziogas Giannis
Kalantidou Sofia
Manolakou Diamanto
Nikolaidou Vera
Karathanasopoulos Nikos
Skopoelitis Stavros
Skyllakos Antonis
Gatzis Nikos
Giokas Giannis
Moraitis Nikos
Alyssandrakis Kostas
Charalampous Charalampos
Marinos Giorgos
Kazakos Kostas
NEA DIMOKRATIA
Panagiotopoulos Panos
Giannellis Giannis
Dendias Nikos
Markopoulos Constantinos
Tzamtzis Iordanis
Regouzas Adam
Mpouras Thanasis
Patrianakou Fevronia
Manousou Ariadni
Ragiou Natasa
Canteres Nikolaos
PASOK
Kastanidis Charis
Reppas Dimitris
Tzakri Theodora
Nikitiadis Giorgos
Kartalis Kostas
Drivelegas Giannis
Koutmeridis Stathis
Nasiokas Ektoras
Papageorgiou Giorgos
Dolias Giorgos
Petalotis Giorgos
Petsalnikos Philippos
Rovlias Ntinos
Kouselas Dimitris
Amoiridis Giannis
Geitonas Kostas
Skoulakis Manolis
Saxinidis Philippos
Niotis Grigoris
Rapti Sylvana
Magrioths Giannis
Karximakis Mihalis
Pantoulas Michalis
Dragona Thaleia
Arapoglou Chrysa
Lampiris Hlias
Christofilopoulou Evi
Chaidos Christos
Exarchos Vasilis
Timosidis Michalis
Kegeroglou Vasilis
Rigas Panagiotis
Skrafnaki Maria
SYRIZA
Kouvelis Fotis
Dragasakis Giannis
Papagiannakis Michalis
Mpanias Giannis
Tsoukalis Nikos
Leventis Thanasis
Korovesis Periklis
Dritsas Thodoris
Alavanos Alekos
Amanatidou Evaggelia
Filini Anna
Kourakis Tasos
Lafazanis Panagiotis
Psarianos Grigoris
*Info by International Section of KKE
Posted in English, Nyheter | Taggad: Ban, Greek Parliament, KSM, MP | Leave a Comment »
Forum för sann historia 
