Editorials » Marxist-Leninism

More on my Personal Opinion of a Marxist-Islamic Alliance

Metal Gear — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 07:02:34 +0000

Aside from whether it is desirable to ally Muslims with Marxists, separately from that question, there is the question of the capability of such an alliance to actually work and not among just a few internet posters, but among the masses. Personally, I do not think it is possible to continue such an alliance as soon as America is weakened and Islam is stronger. Until that point the alliance could probably work, but with high tension. Without the work of a skilled dictator, it is hard to see the uneducated masses keeping such an alliance alive. If a dictator endorses a position on religion, whether atheistic like Stalin or Islamic like the Taliban, then the alliance automatically crumbles. Regimes that repress atheists in the name of Islam cannot be supported by any atheists long term, and regimes that repress religion in the name of atheism (like Stalin’s) cannot be supported long term by the religious or those who pose as religious.

I learned when trying to discuss politics with Kahanists that people who merge politics with religion (often they are faking their religion) tend not to reciprocate support from secular people. There are many people who are essentially secular in their viewpoints, but they pretend to be religious to achieve some political gain. These people, being hypocrites, can never be trusted. For instance, the Croatian Ustaše leaders attempted to incorporate Catholic hierarchy into their ruling order as a political ideology. To them religion was political, not a natural belief system. To these people, religion is not just a philosophy or a conviction, but a cover for an ambitious rise to power which uses adherence to the religion in a discriminatory manner. Someone who openly advocates atheism strongly would have trouble gaining any influence, because the hypocrites monitor their own reputations and do not want to be questioned by the masses. If the hypocrites were shown to be liars, they fear they would lose their influence. To the extent such a thing as Islamo-Facism exists (vs. real Islam), it will never ally with openly secular people because to do so would cause status anxieties. These people fear being unmasked as illegitimate interlopers of a religion. It would be like Hitler allying with Jews. He would never do it because people would then question if he really was a Nazi.

Then there are people who believe their religion the same way the average person believes the sky is blue. These people are mystics as opposed to scholars usually and do not view themselves as being political. A true Muslim believes he is going to heaven, believes he is following the koran, and believes his views are right. But an Islamo-fascist uses religion as a means of separating “us” from “them” to gain power politically. Legitimate Muslims who believe their religion as a matter of truth and falsehood (as opposed to hypocrites who are pretending to be religious) can at least be taken at face value, but I think if Marxists are truly Marxists and not closet infiltrators, their secular view will ultimately make the alliance crumble among the masses of anything but extremely moderate Muslims.

Good Saloth Sar Video

Metal Gear — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 03:55:50 +0000

It is interesting that before teaming up with the former Prince Sihanouk, Pol Pot used to hate him. This reminds me of the Lyceum. This, however, is a bit more serious than web words! Early on, Pol Pot fought with Sihanouk, but was willing to adapt his alliances when it became necessary to do so.

I understand that some of the comments by viewers are very “one-sided,” but in general the video is pretty good. It shows that Pol Pot was focused but very secretive and determined. He was calculating, but appeared very gentle. He worked his way from the bottom to the top. He was sold out by the Vietnamese. I didn’t know that. That’s why he hated the Vietnamese. Cambodia was sacrificed to France when other Southeast Asian countries collaborated for Independence.

It noted that he adopted some aspects of Marx, but was really not a hardliner “anti-revisionist” Marxist. In truth he was more of a progressive nationalistic type.

His rejection of urbanization is important too. Mao was similar in his approach though for Mao it was pragmatic. For Pol Pot it was a matter of principle.

What do you think? Was Pol Pot himself a criminal, or is he the ultimate victim of American, Soviet, Vietnamese and French imperialism?

Noam Chomsky defends Pol Pot. Pol Pot may have saved more people than he killed. Nobody said anything negative during the Cold War. It was only after Russia fell, when China became the next “big Satan,” that the “Maoist” Pol Pot was demonized by America.

On Marx, Marxism, Capitalism and Globalization

Metal Gear — Mon, 03 May 2010 04:39:17 +0000

First of all what was thought by Marx is not always thought by Marxists. And what is thought by Marxists was not always thought by Marx. Marx said he was not a Marxist, but that is beside the point. While Marx and Marxists viewed globalism as inevitable, they did not explicitly view “ethnic replacement” and “free movement” as inevitable. Only Trotsky viewed “ethnic mixing” as an important Communist goal.

Globalism means spreading revolution. It does not mean free movement.

Hardcore capitalism however requires free movement. Therefore, aside from the Trotskyites, the Jewish Bolsheviks are preferable to the liberal capitalists.

Trotsky and Zionism

Free Media Productions Staff — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:14:56 +0000

Giovanni Gentile (founder of Fascism) admired Karl Marx

Metal Gear — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 21:23:53 +0000

The Link
It is my opinion that genuine fascism is influenced by Marxism but aims to unify the nation and avoid class struggle instead of advocating the class struggle. But it is still a class conscious ideology. Nazism is not really fascism but just racialism that is very unscientific.

Giovanni Gentile (1875-1944) described himself as “the philosopher of Fascism.” He ghostwrote A Doctrine of Fascism (1930) for his country’s prime minister and dictator, Benito Mussolini.

Philosophically he drew from Kant, Hegel and Marx — system builders. He had some admiration for Nietzsche, and he had a romantic view of historic leaders of Italian nationalism.

He had been an academic. the Chairman of the Department of Philosophy at Palermo University from 1907 to 1914 and later at the University of Pisa. In 1923 he accepted Mussolini’s offer of the post of Minister of Education.

Gentile admired Marx, but he and his fellow fascists were opposed to class struggle. Their nationalism embodied a unified patriotic devotion to the state. He and fellow fascists viewed Italy as a single organic entity and unifying force that bound people together by their ancestry. Mussolini, fascism’s great leader, said:

For us the nation is not just territory but something spiritual… A nation is great when it translates into reality the force of its spirit.

Gentile’s admiration for Marx can be compared to the youthful Adolf Hitler’s admiration for the socialist labor movement marching together in a seemingly endless file through the streets of Vienna. What Hitler admired was the labor movement’s mobilization for the sake of power. What Gentile admired in Marx was the unity of his system of thought, including its historicity. Gentile wanted to consider the fascist movement as progressive within a historical context.

Fascist philosophy held to the idea of struggle and conflict moving history forward, but rather than between classes it was between weak and strong nations. In The Origins and Doctrine of Fascism, Gentile wrote that “mankind only progresses through division, and progress is achieved through the clash and victory of one side over another”

The Fascists believed in a national rebirth and in a new fascist man, Uomo Fascista as Gentile called it. This is vaguely similar to Nietzsche’s Übermensch, which some have translated to Superman. But Gentile was misreading Nietzsche. In Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra, the protagonist contends that “man is something which ought to be overcome,” that apes are a laughingstock to man and that man would be a laughing stock for Übermensch. Meanwhile, in the minds of some people in the world, Mussolini and fascist men displaying their superiority through pompous displays, swagger, bullying and chest beatings were in appearance ape-like.

The Fascist philosophy held that fascism was filling the need for purpose in the world that would otherwise be absurd. The philosophy of Gentile stood against the positivist philosophy, the philosophy that limited authentic knowledge to that based on sense experience. Fascist philosophy, claimed Gentile, was not skeptical, nor agnostic, nor pessimistic, nor passively optimistic. Fascism, he claimed, was man engaged in a moral and intellectual struggle in an exercise of free will in the creation of a new world.

Giovanni Gentile would remain loyal to Mussolini until his own assassination in April 1944, eleven months before Musolini’s assassination.

In support of Marx but not “Marxism”

Metal Gear — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:15:31 +0000

Marx laid down a number of important hypotheses. Some of them were correct, others were incorrect, but at least he paved the way for more thought. Marx should not be viewed as “perfect” but in the same way that Plato or Socrates is viewed. To make an analogy, one does not have to be a Christian to praise the human being named Jesus of Nazareth that supposedly existed. One does not have to be a Buddhist to learn from reading philosophy of Buddhists.

Marx’s role in raising awareness of important issues should be appreciated by any self-respecting, enlightened and pragmatic person. He may have not scored on every shot, but at least someone got the rebound. Juche (North Korea’s ideology) may not be Marxism, but it owes some of its influence to Marx. Benito Mussolini was a Marxist before he developed into a fascist. Mao may have modified Marx to be more agrarian and idealistic, and adapted to Chinese characteristics, but still was influenced by Marx. The Ba’athists with which I converse see Marx as an influence but not the “seal of the prophets.”

Marx also hated oppressive religious fanatics (of any religion) and considered religion to opiate. I salute him on that stance too!

Unlike Islamic Fundamentalist Countries, Israel is honoring the Red Army

Metal Gear — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:39:37 +0000

The link
Just to play Devil’s advocate, as many of our “Communists” think that Islamic Fundamentalism is inherently more compatible with Marxism than Zionism, it should be pointed out that the Taliban and Iranian regime curse the Red Army whereas Israel praises it. Now you can say the material conditions make ideology unimportant, but it is still ironic.

It should be noted that the SECULAR Ba’athists were pro-USSR in their original conception, whereas the counterpart regime in Afghanistan was not. And that regime was a fundamentalist regime, but not the Taliban.

Israel will erect a memorial commemorating the Red Army’s crucial role in the victory over the Nazis, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told Russian Prime Minster Vladimir Putin at a photo opportunity before their meeting Tuesday.

Netanyahu said the gesture, which he intends to move forward, is in honor of the 65th anniversary of the victory over the Nazis later this year. This move comes amid growing concern in Russia that their role and sacrifice in the victory over Nazism is increasingly being underplayed.

Putin, saying that it was forbidden to forget the Nazi victims and that the Jews and the people of the former Soviet Union suffered more than anyone else at the hands of the Nazis, said he was currently in discussion with Moscow’s chief rabbi about the possibility of establishing a Holocaust museum in Moscow.

Netanyahu said he hoped the memorial would be erected before Putin’s next visit to Israel, expected with the year, and that at the same time the Russian prime minister could also take part in the ceremony in which Russia would formally take over control of the Sergei courtyard in central Jerusalem.

After saying that Israel and Russia would increase cooperation in a number of spheres, including technology, security and agriculture, Putin joked that he hoped the agricultural cooperation would add funds to Israel’s Agriculture Ministry so that it could quickly move out of its offices in the Sergei courtyard.

Moscow was marching on Stalin’s Birthday!

Free Media Productions Staff — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:41:39 +0000

Our friends at the North Star Compass published these photographs taken from the celebrations of the 130th Birthday of Josef Stalin on Dec. 21, 2009 (from the current issue of NSC).

On December 21, 2009 – the 130th Birthday of J.V. Stalin, people gathered on the Red Square in Moscow to celebrate this great event in the history of all mankind. Then came representatives from different parties and citizens from all walks of life.

First came the patriotic forces from the AUCPB, coming to the grave of Stalin and laid flowers and held a small meeting. After that the representatives of the CPRF and RCU of Youth, Trudovaya Rossia and many other parties and multitude of people came to pay respect to Stalin with flowers and wreaths.

Even though the authorities tried to stop some people, the multitude was just too much for the present regime to stop. The columns of people grew longer and longer and it brought back memories as to how it was during Soviet times.

There was a never-ending laying of flowers and wreaths to Stalin.

The people kept coming in greater numbers as never before since the demise of the Soviet Union.

Red Square from one end to the other had people waiting in line.

Soviet War Veterans, decorated with medals, paid their respect to Generalissimo Stalin.


Putin-Medvedev police started to hold back the Muscovites, but the people kept coming to pay respect to Stalin.

Review: Glenn Beck’s ‘Revolutionary Holocaust’

Free Media Productions Staff — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:03:56 +0000

From the Red Phoenix, official organ of the American Party of Labor

Part I of VI: Beck’s Countless Lies about America & the Founding Fathers

By Marcus Winter, Farabundo Morazán and Ismail LaLanne

On January 22nd 2010, another hardened reactionary tried to attack the history of leftism and Marxism and (surprise) managed to bring nothing new to the table at all. Shock jock Glenn Beck, an admitted alcoholic and former cocaine addict, has made a career out of appealing to the most lunatic fringe of the right-wing. Even so, this week he finally managed to outdo himself, even after the time he said Obama was “a racist” and had a “deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.” Revolutionary Holocaust: Live Free or Die begins oddly—with white X-Files font letters against a crackling static background. What this has to do with or why this is the least bit appropriate for the subject matter Beck tackles is anyone’s guess. As we shall see though, this is symbolic for the entire presentation, which, while clever, is the same hodgepodge of anti-communist views that we have all seen and heard a thousand times before.

A good question for Glenn Beck: why is such radical anti-communism necessary today if communism is discredited, dead, and buried? If communism is supposedly dead in the water, a footnote of history, and so on, and if capitalism is truly the greatest system, then why is it that we are facing a wave of anti-communist hysteria not seen since the Cold War? Mr. Beck, it might do you well to remember that hysteria and desperation are signs of weakness…and liars.

No matter how hard he tries, Glenn Beck cannot sell his line about how “this story has never been told.” Horror stories about communism have been told since before communists ever came to power in the first place. The opening of the secret Soviet archives actually reveals that these claims were in fact ridiculously exaggerated, not worse, than previously claimed.

So, what are his intentions here? Many things all at once—among them licking the boots of the bourgeoisie and re-packaging old and debunked lies. We shall tackle them one by one using our own sources and information. The complete transcript of Beck’s program is available here until further notice: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583732,00.html.

Because of the length of his program, we have decided to break this presentation up into several parts. For right now, we will content ourselves with refuting the introduction to his program.
We invite you to stay tuned for a little series of our own.

Beck’s Thesis
Glenn Beck’s allegedly “groundbreaking” exposé of “progressives,” whom he conveniently lumps together, is by no means new or groundbreaking at all. Revolutionary Holocaust seeks to establish a link between Joseph Stalin and communism on one side, and Adolf Hitler and Nazism on the other. While doing this it also seeks to talk about the reign of Mao Zedong in China, along with a segment about liberal icon Che Guevara.
This same “thesis” of fascism and communism being almost exactly the same or at least sharing fundamental similarities, has been repeated for us endlessly since we were kids. For Beck to champion this as a “new and groundbreaking” idea is either foolish or stunningly arrogant. It has been the dominant narrative shoved down our throats since the publication of The Origins of Totalitarianism in 1951 by Hannah Arendt. For a closer look at this laughable “theory,” look here: http://theredphoenix.wordpress.com/2009/09…otalitarianism/

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, & Slave-Owning Freedom
The video begins with Glenn Beck praising the United States of America and its associated American Dream. “The story of America,” he pines, staring into the camera with his intellectual glasses on, “is really one of self-reliance and optimism, and profound faith.” He continues to milk this image for all its worth, bringing up the merits of the US Constitution and the Founding Fathers.

Glenn Beck has willfully ignored the history of the American Revolution. The spirit of the American Founding Fathers is only a myth and not a reality.

First, the Constitution of the United States was not set up by “the” people or any sort of popular democracy, but by financial autocrats. White males with property were the only ones allowed to vote under the system that men such as George Washington (the richest man in America), James Madison (owned enormous slave plantations), John Hancock (a rich merchant), Benjamin Franklin (a wealthy printer) and others aimed to set up. Of the 55 men who gathered to write the Constitution in 1787, most were lawyers and men of enormous wealth, making their fortunes in landowning, slave trading, manufacturing or shipping. Half loaned money out for interest, 40 held government bonds.
Regarding the writing of the Constitution:
“The manufacturers needed protective tariffs; the moneylenders wanted to stop the use of paper money to pay off debts; the land speculators wanted protection as they invaded Indian lands; slaveowners needed federals security against slave revolts and runaways; bondholders wanted a government able to raise money by nationwide taxation, to pay off those bonds” (1).

Governments are not neutral. They reflect the economic interests of the dominant class, expressed in America as men such as the Founding Fathers. The Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” and little else in reality. Women, Blacks, Indians and poor whites were not mentioned, but the defense of private property was.
The clause about the “freedom of speech” was soon enough violated, as it is today, by clauses such as the Sedition Act of 1789, which was a response to the French and Irish Revolutions. It forbid under law the practice of writing or saying anything “false, scandalous and malicious” against the United States government, the Congress or the President. It is not immediately apparent that anyone’s “liberty” should be left to a government run by the rich and powerful.

Despite this, Beck says that “[…] those seeking a different path than the ones the founders settled on realized the only way to really defeat the Constitution was for the people to stop reading it.” He then insists that the Constitution, through its supposed system of check and balances, “kept dogs at bay” for 200 years. Despite this Utopian dream, the Founding Fathers were not men seeking a “balance” in society, and certainly didn’t believe that all men were created equal. If they wanted any sort of balance, it was between the wealthy, and not between such groups as Indians and whites, blacks and whites, men and women, boss and worker, or rich and poor, slave and slaveowner, and certainly not property owner and the propertyless.

Next Article
In the next part of the series, we shall see how Glenn Beck uses the story of Nazi Germany and WWII to further his own ends, and ends up whitewashing Nazi crimes in order to attack the USSR.

Sources:
1) Zinn, Howard. Peoples’ History of the United States, page 91.

Pol Pot wasn’t Really a literal Marxist-Leninist!

Metal Gear — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:04:49 +0000

The Link
(I apologize, but I have to link to the pedophora here. This is not an endorsement!)

Here is an interesting post about Pol Pot and how he was really a Khmer nationalist and not a Communist. He adopted some Marxist rhetoric but followed his own line. And he sided more with Mao than with USSR. USSR of course had backed off from its Stalinist line, but still Maoism is strongly adapted to Chinese characteristics and quite different from Russian Bolshevism.

I already knew this, but it adds some extra angles to the discussion.

Words for the Faithful

Free Media Productions Staff — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:22:55 +0000

Fold your little hands,

Bow your little head,

Think for five minutes

On Stalin.

J.V. Stalin is the brilliant leader and teacher of the Party,

The great strategist of the socialist revolution.

He is implacable in facing the enemies of socialism,

Absolutely true to principle.

He is the union of clear revolutionary perspective,

And clarity of goal in all His activities,

Combining them with extraordinary firmness and persistence.

The name Stalin is the symbol of the moral and political unity of the working class.

The Great Dream of White Proletarian Liberation

John Paul Cupp — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:48:17 +0000

Revolutionaries are dreamers and must always remain dreamers or they become borderline suicidal, uncontrollably angry and can’t even function marginally in the world. Having had the secular religious experience in our hearts, we can never possibly go back, because the People are our god and the Revolution is our path to the heavenly prospect of national, proletarian, and racial liberation. We must keep the deep feelings of youth in our hearts, but also become wise with age and experience. Always knowing that we are ready to find martyrdom at the hands of the Zionist Occupied Government, we must become scientific and materialist dreamers, not idealist or Utopian dreamers, for we live in an evolutionary and dialectical world.

Imagine a racial communist super-State comprising all of Europe and Russia and stretching across the reclaimed Siberian Land Bridge Project into White North America and includes Australia, New Zealand, Chile and Argentina in its project. Bloodline shall supersede geographical boundaries. This shall be the greatest civilizationational accomplishment in the entire history of the world. We are talking about the total victory of White Power over the conspiracy for our genocide, more than just racialism, but true socialism, and the rebirth of the neighborhood and family again.

Only within the racial communist super-state within a vast regionalist and ethno-nationalist framework and an organic ethnic local character can our people be saved and find their truly greatest era. Nationalism will only die when it is outmoded by racialism, and even then nationalism is an intricate part of our framework, not rootless cosmopolitanism. Our project to Pan-Africanism, Pan-Arabism, the Bolivarian project, is a brother in a common trench, but it goes deeper than theirs and reflects our true potential and the vanguard role which Darwinism demands of our people who constitute the biological aristocracy of world history.

For now we must address the miserable state of existence our people wallow in. We must painfully internalize the pain of knowing that as things stand now the White race may not even exist in years to come. We must feel the troubles and the brokenness of the middle aged crisis and the nihilistic teenager, the single mother and the white man down the street who just lost his job.

More than that we need to be beacons of light and hope. My own European-American nation already knows they are fucked, double fucked and then kicked in the head just for fun. They may not have some deeply advanced political analysis of how this is happening, but we don’t need to be doomsday prophesiers fullfilling a self-prophesying picture of defeat. We already have enough defeat. We need VISIONARIES.

The fact is the White race is NOT going to be exterminated and neither are we going to wind up being permantly ruined financially either, no matter how damn miserable things get. We haven’t survived since at least the Ice Ages and built some of the greatest civilizations the world has ever known just to go the way of the dodobird, and it isn’t going to happen as a result of Zionism, liberalism, finance capital or “globalization”, a vulgar euphenism for imperialism, today either.

In the end our people will fight!

Getting away from the areas closest to Hollyweird and Jew York and into the heartland, our masses own guns more than any other citizenry in the world per capita except north Korea. ZOG isn’t going to take our guns away, because the gun was brought into our psychology as small children learning the first and second amendment in school as if memorizing and idealizing bible versus. Our people still have some level of strong family life even though everything from meth to poverty to a lack of committment from men for our women and children is really blowing it for us big time. Unlike Jews, our people work for their money. They still know that it is important to have a self-reliant economy, community and healthy Teutonic work ethic and Celtic sense of identity. Even Lenin in his day admired our people’s powerful work ethic. Not only are we brilliant and creative, but we have the drive, muscle and determination to do something truly fanatastic. Things seem so aweful for us because we really are such a gifted and incredible people and anything but the best, especially the wallowing backwardsness of the era, is completely intolerable for our spirit. Drink can’t take that feeling away nor drugs nor finding a healthy partner who loves us to fill such void. The void comes from the need to freely express our intrensic nature for creative development, and hyper-alienation of the hour can only be eliminated with the new connect, the renassiance.

The redneck hates the intellectuals who betrayed him and hates his own organic intellectualism. Actually, this is true of the vast majority of just regular good ole’ all-American working people. Our people now think they are stupid, glorify at times the lowest common denominator of mass culture and have little hope in their hearts. If they had the hope they would be as brave as any Palestinian human bomb. You can see it in their eyes. You feel it when you go on a fishing trip or watch people drink coffee in the breakroom at work. You here it in the middle of the third quarter of a boring football game when the score is 24-7 and talk turns back to reality and not the images of distraction on the television screen. Maybe we can get some sort of healing going between nerds and rednecks, or all sorts of sub-cultural “groups” whose identity will eventually become meaningless in the new society anyways since we are the same people.

Our people aren’t going to become Nazis and they aren’t going to build the Bolshevik Revolution either. Our people are going to reclaim the neighborhood, and we need the trust of those who don’t trust fancy talk and only would be willing to work with those they learn to admire over a long period of time, leaders who either are organic or at least go out of their way to be as organic as possible to our conditions today. Our Lenin is going to be wearing a flannel shirt and blue jeans with a baseball cap. Maybe he worked at Dairy Queen when he was 16 and use to have a nice construction job making $20 an hour until that fell apart, or she is going to have concerns about the future of her children and sees beyond the phoney patriotism for the real patriotism of a mother for her cubs, watches her man become less of a man in his heart because he can’t provide the level of economic comfort he once did or thinks the family deserves.

We absolutely need violent extremism, because ZOG isn’t coming down without weapons and ammunition, but it has to be at the heart and soul of our people. It needs to be able to read the direction our people are going in without becoming too depressed when our people still cling to all sorts of self-defeating ideas. Violent extremism needs to have a dialectical compass that will do the best it can to find what is useful in our people, something that provides a dynamism and gets people to feel they aren’t part of some political group, but a LIBERATION STRUGGLE.

We need the equivelant of “Allahu Akbar!” to racial national materialism, a scientific battle cry, but one with deep religious emotion.

Nothing starts automatically. Revolutions don’t come about because of spontaneous collapse of “the system” but because they are built and mature so that when conditions are ripe they can mature.

2010 has come, let’s each vow to take concrete steps towards building things on the ground, and yes we need the regular “activists” too, but let’s push for getting the bulwark of our people who aren’t in any sort of group at all and are instinctively distrustful of them. To do that we must reject politics as usual and push for an uncompromising battle cry of liberation without being sectarian and splitting hairs over stupid ass secondary differances, many of which the people may eventually agree with us on through persuasion, anyways.

Let us each brainstorm in the coming weeks ideas for what we each are going to do, even if it is just some meetings and get togethers as a first start, to actually build something on the ground. Ask yourself how you are going to get those pissed off people with radical ideas that just float back into mainstream society into our National Front. We have to build things, even small ones, because it provides the mutual support against alienation at the very least, and has unlimited upwards potential beyond just that.

Long live the White race!

Long live the communist revolution!

Let us vow to die in the trenches of combat before ever even considering the thought of surrendering our European-American Nation!

…And a Happy New Year

Free Media Productions Staff — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:41:38 +0000

East Germans Lost Very Much in 1989

Free Media Productions Staff — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:34:34 +0000

From Northstar Compass (Nov./Dec. 2009 ed).

By BRUNIDE LA MOTTE
Guardian newspaper
UK Nov/ 8/09

On November 9, 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down I realized that German unification would soon follow, which it did a year later. That meant the end of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the country in which I was born, grew up, gave birth to my two children, gained my Doctorate and enjoyed a fulfilling job as a lecturer at Potsdam University. The union brought wealth for some, but it also brought social breakdown, widespread unemployment, blacklisting, a crass materialism and an “elbow society” as well as demonisation of the country I lived in and helped shape it. Despite some advantages, for most it was more a disaster than a celebratory event.

Here are just two. My best friend, a foreign languages teacher, lost her job and was then blacklisted because, at the time the wall fell, she was teaching at the GDR Law College. She wasn’t a member of the Party or a political activist. After much searching she managed to find a job helping students who were excluded from school, because their parents were working in the GDR Government.

My brother who has a PhD in Philosophy of Science, lost his research job at the GDR Academy of Sciences, and ever since has only been able to find odd low-paying temporary jobs.

After the Wall was torn down more than 85% of industrial enterprises were sold to private firms in West Germany. More than 1.7 million of hectares of agricultural and forest lands were sold off and 80% of agricultural workers lost their jobs.

In 1990 the GDR economy plunged into bankruptcy when the hasty “currency union” was imposed by the West. The results were that the GDR export products rose in price by 450% overnight and were no longer competitive and thus the West gained more markets at the expense of GDR and the working people who became unemployed on a massive scale.

In the GDR everyone had a home, a guaranteed job, health care and all benefits that the socialist GDR gave to the people. After the unification close to 3,000,000 claims by non-GDR citizens were made on the GDR citizens’ homes! Most of the GDR citizens lost their homes to West Germans that were abetted by the West. Scores of GDR citizens committed suicide when they were evicted from their homes that they and their children grew up in.

That’s the price of the forced reunification and the sell off by traitors like Gorbachev and others!

Happy 130th Birthday Comrade Stalin!

Free Media Productions Staff — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:32:06 +0000

December 21, 2009 marks the occasion of the 130th anniversary of the birth of Ioseb Besarionis dze Jugashvili.

Free Media Productions would like to take this opportunity to wish a very Happy 130th Birthday to the late General Secretary, Josef Stalin!

Let us commemorate this day as a tribute to him! Long Live the Great Leader and Teacher of the Socialist Motherland!

Blame Abrahamic Religion

Metal Gear — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 03:44:53 +0000

Philosophies like Judaism, Christianity and Islam to the extent they are against the materialistic conclusions of both racialism and Marxism. While racialists and Marxists have elements of their thought process grounded in materialism, nationalism recognizes the nature of reality and uses it to strive for ideals.

There is a difference between Torah “Zionism” and supporting Jewish self-determination under the philosophy of secular nationalism. A Torah Zionist can be an ally to the extent they reconcile their views, but secularists are more likely to ally. Perhaps Jews and Arabs (many of which are racially Caucasoid, but that’s not the point) could even work together in the name of a Third Positionist ideology that focused less on religion.

Socialist Jurisprudence

Free Media Productions Staff — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:31:05 +0000

In his monumental legal work on the science of jurisprudence in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), entitled The Law of the Soviet State (1948), Comrade Andrei Vyshinsky (Procurator-General of the Soviet Union, Deputy People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs and later Minister of Foreign Affairs), reaffirmed the Marxist-Leninist concept of the law:

Law is the totality (a) of the rules of conduct, expressing the will of the dominant class and established in legal order, and (b) of customs and rules of community life sanctioned by state authority – their application being guaranteed by the compulsive force of the state in order to guard, secure, and develop social relationships and social orders advantageous and agreeable to the dominant class.

This simple thesis and observation was not new to Vyshinsky, but an objective characteristic of all legal systems, dating back to even the most primitive and ancient forms of historical jurisprudence.

But the difference between bourgeois jurisprudence and socialist legality is not only the necessary transition of state authority from one dominant class to the other (from bourgeoisie to proletariat), but is distinctively marked by the unity of theory and praxis. Unlike bourgeois “Constitutionalism,” as seen in Western liberal capitalist democratic states, the legal system of the Soviet Union was exemplified by this normative and descriptive cohesion. The most demonstrative evidence exists in the lack of so-called “Constitutional protections” that reflect vague or abstract principles whose validity exists beyond the realm of the material world, but a real-life reflection of the existing conditions prevalent in Soviet social relations.

Proceedings in 1945 trial of Polish nationalist-military conspirators

The above characteristic serves as the fundamental basis for the social, economic and political transformation of jurisprudence from capitalism to socialism; further evidence to socialist jurisprudence as the most progressive, scientific and fundamentally correct application of the law to have ever existed in history.

100 Jahre Enver Hoxha!

Free Media Productions Staff — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:19:14 +0000

Wage, Labor and Profit

Free Media Productions Staff — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:19:58 +0000

It’s common knowledge that within the system of private ownership of the means of production, profit is derived from the exploitation of the working class. Those who own the instruments of production pay their workers less than their value of labor, thus, the surplus extracted is what’s known as “profit.”

But coinciding with this basic characteristic of parasitic capitalism, is the active efforts by the bourgeoisie to increase the amount of profit extracted from workers – by lowering wages – even $1 per hour.

The following example was recently published in the November 2009 edition of the North Star Compass:

If a capitalist pays his workers just $1 less per hour – let’s say $10 instead of $11 – which doesn’t seem to be such a great difference – but, based on one year amounting to 2,000 hours, the employer takes $2,000 from the pocket of each employee and puts it into his own pocket.

If he employs 100 workers, his profit amounts to $200,000. If his company employs 1,000 workers, his handsome profit amounts to $2,000,000. per year – and so forth and so on.

Using all sorts of tax deductions allowed by the Government, he would pay less than $300,000 in taxes, which will leave him with a handsome profit of over $4,800,000.

It is very simple to understand! The ONLY way the rich get richer is by the poor getting poorer!

On the term “Stalinism”

Free Media Productions Staff — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:59:33 +0000

We’ve received a few questions from readers inquiring about the use of the term “Stalinism.”

J.V. Stalin

As a matter of historical fact, this term was never used by Josef Stalin himself, as he considered himself an ardent student of Marx, Engels and Lenin – in effect, a “Marxist-Leninist.”

The term itself was coined by one of Stalin’s closest and most loyal associates and comrades-in-arms, Lazar Kaganovich. Comrade Kaganovich communicated that “Stalinism” constituted a higher theoretical level in the application of Marxist-Leninist principles as evidenced in the unprecedented achievements of the Soviet Union.

While never in “official” use within the Soviet Union, the term did enjoy an impressive amount of publicity within the Soviet press – including its employment in editorials, news reports and other media.

That being said, the term was hijacked by anti-Soviet parties, most notably the followers of the renegade Leon Trotsky, as a pejorative, with the propagandistic intention of portraying Stalin’s application of Marxism-Leninism as somehow distinct (read heretical) from “orthodox” Marxism-Leninism.

These groundless accusations notwithstanding, there’s absolutely no principled contradistinction between “Stalinism” and “Marxism-Leninism,” as both employ the basic foundations of the dialectical materialist method in accordance with objective of establishing scientific socialism.

That’s also not to say that Stalin didn’t incorporate serious theoretical contributions to Marxist-Leninist thought, including his insights into Marxism and the National Question, the aggravation of class-struggle within socialism and a very important dialectical assessment of Marxism and linguistics.

Eastern Europe crippled under worldwide capitalist crisis

Free Media Productions Staff — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:26:34 +0000

The latest crisis to befall worldwide capitalism has left its mark all over the globe; however, the most notable examples of outright resistance to the capitalist wage-labor system, and all its innate failures, has been most prominent among the agitated working classes of Eastern Europe.

Following the 1989 counter-revolution by the revisionist General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Mikhail Gorbachev, which brought about the political dissolution of the Soviet Union and later the reversion of socialism to capitalism throughout Eastern Europe, systematic privatization of the means of production almost immediately resulted in the chaotic social transformation that have yet to be resolved, even 20 years thereafter.

Though some degree of stability was achieved in a few select states, the socio-economic consequences of the worldwide capitalist crisis that began in 2007 have revitalized Eastern Europe’s revolutionary proletariat – the most advanced social class in history – into taking direct, collective action against the ruling classes marked with a characteristic increase in sentiments favorable towards the re-socialization of the means of productions.

The most “hailed” private economies of the former Soviet and socialist bloc, including Poland, Latvia and the Ukraine, have now become plagued with economic instability and that have made them profoundly unattractive to foreign capital. Latvia, for instance, is on the brink of seeing a 20 per cent reduction in its gross national product. The former Ukrainian SSR, which was once hailed as a bastion of Western capital investment, has now seen its economic growth curbed back to pre-2003 levels. And Poland, whose regime is the most virulently reactionary of all the former socialist states, is now considered a major risk for defaulting on national debts.

The revolutionary transformation of the oppressed working peoples of Eastern Europe has not gone unnoticed by the ruling class regime, where in many cases unfathomable laws banning the public display of symbols associated with the labor and communist movement (such as the sickle and hammer, or the five-pointed red star). Such policies demonstrate the ruling classes’ growing anxiety over the rising threat of open insurrection against the self-destructive policies of the capitalist wage-labor system and all its insufferable calamities.

Support Islamism and Pan-Arabism!

John Paul Cupp — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 23:53:15 +0000

The only thing that deeply scares the Zionist Occupied Government enemy regime more than the proletarian shouts of “White Power!” as bullets fly through the streets is the monotheistic affirmation by a heroic and Jihadic Mujahid of “Allahu Akbar!” Hence any conscious European-American, including the Christians, must uphold and understand the need for critical unity against the common hated enemy of humanity – the Jews – and against the extermination of either of our peoples.

I speak here of White Power, not so much as a chauvinistic, divisive, and predatory project aligned with imperialism, but an all-encompassing civilizational project belonging to the popular classes of European-Americans stemming from their deep brokenness and desire for self-determination, one constituting the path and national constants by which any of our revolutionary patriots must travel if seeking to place our people on the solid footings of the resistance option.

The Arab brother or sister in his or her psychology does not recognize the existence of race, genetics, and bloodline in the formation of national identity today, but what they must understand is that our people’s racialism in their nationalism, like that of Garveyism amongst the Africans, is a progressive racialism that simply demonstrates the incompatibility of linear universal definitions of a nation.

Michel Aflaq, even during his Christian years, demonstrated persuasively the centrality of Islam in the make up of Arabism and the formation and expansion of the Arab nation, and hence developing a three-dimensional view of the Arab nation and bonds of the Ummah stemming from the progressive formation of the Caliphate, including its positive effects on Christians and other non-Muslims. This too is a serious error according to dogmatic Western Marxists and cosmopolitan leftists. Hence, we need to speak of the need for the self-determination of peoples, rather than pretending such peoples formed along five common points, and build real true fighting solidarity with one another.

While the Arab and Muslim will launch the immediate complaint about “racism,” and I do not dispute that our people are full of reactionary and chauvinistic social roles, I plead for them to understand that our people are consistently fed by the Jews and cosmopolitan leftists illusions that they are the only nationality in world history to have developed an advanced civilization that lacks a right to self-determination and must suffer and die needlessly. This brainwashing comes as a total assault on the dignity of our people and a direct provocation to push our people towards the camp of conservative and reactionary forces. The problem is intensified by the lack any real significant revolutionary anti-imperialist project capable of correcting our people’s reactionary social roles and ideas, and also capable of demonstrating a love for a our people, a truly proletariat platform, and the demonstrated ability to seize power.

You Arabs have your qualms with the Iranian Safawid for having overstepped their borders and for having decided to play an opportunist role against the Jihad of beloved Iraq and fellow Islamic brother Afghanistan (and who is frankly for us our Aryan cousin!), but you never put into question that there is an Iranian people or contend that Iranian people should be exterminated rather than simply have their hegemony fought and self-determination exercised solely in their natural borders. Indeed, most peoples have had problems with their neighbors over the years. This is true also of the Turks, and indeed only filth of the Zionist entity is treated to the scorn of unconditional non-recognition, and this for the very survival and unification of your nation and the liberation of al-Quds.

For us the problem is greater. First, there is the very real attempt by the Jews and their lackeys on the Western “left” to foment hatred by the world’s people for the White race and the European-American in particular. They claim such attempts at forming anti-White hatred and White self-hatred are not an deliberate platform of promoting globalism, but supposedly because of an eternal grudge because of the policies of colonialism and imperialism. The super-majority of our popular class had absolutely no control over these polices. Indeed, many occurred so many centuries before the birth of anyone living today that it would be idiotic to assign blame to anyone.

The European-Americans, like many peoples today, and indeed much of the White race, at least throughout much of Western Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand plays a largely reactionary and unbearable social role, but this does not deny a very real and ancient Jewish conspiracy to either subjugate or destroy us alongside many other brotherly national, racial, and spiritual groups.

The Zionist assaults center on 1948 Palestine and on affirming the Arab character, but on a global and historical level it does NOT end there, and it didn’t begin there either.
Just to read the Old Testament, the Jews have been committing genocide since their very inception, and according to the Babylonian Talmud they want to exterminate Christians, believe Jesus of is boiling in semen, and wish to rule over the goyim. One may note correctly that today’s Jews are the descendants of the Khazar Kingdom and not the people of the Old Testament, but what is significant is that such people subjectively identify by this vulgarity and base their “spirituality” and supposed “national” mythos around it.

Today the Jews who for centuries persecuted Christians and were justly crushed and regularly defeated and exiled have turned the Western Church in a brothel of cannibalism, that is to say a Synagogue of Christ-killers and national nihilist speculators in the name of the Jesus they martyred. Martin Luther’s wise instructions calling on Christians to exile Jews, burn down their synagogues, business and homes, and even kill them if necessary have been ignored and covered up with disastrous consequences for the popular masses of the world.

Now Islam stands beside nationalism in a war of attrition against a globalist enemy led by Jews and Zionist America.

While I espouse socialism and even communism, I cannot in good conscience and without feeling like a traitor to my people and the revolution, but denounce the Western “Left” and most “socialists and communists” for their cosmopolitanism and opportunism.

The right-wing anti-Zionists and White Nationalist camp have HUGE flaws at times. Some are so stupid they think the real enemy are African-Americans who seek self-determination or that we should support Z.O.G. soldiers killing freedom fighter who are resisting a common enemy.
This, however, is not the case for all White Nationalists and “patriotic” forces who if not White Nationalist in name are in content. Some groups cheered the September 11th attacks. Some groups reject the Zionist entity’s right to exist. Some even support attacks on US troops and know that this whole thing is going to come down to needing the maximum amount of unity possible to bring down the Jews and American regime and that we need each other.

My colleague Kevin Walsh and I who started the European-American Socialist Front (EASPF) have such lines and openly support national liberation struggles, the socialist bloc, and advocate self-determination for the Black and White nations alike in the present day United States. When we interact with the European-American streets and White nationalism as a whole, we are finding little pockets here or there that may not get published or openly noticed, but who understand that the paleo-conservativism of the old school White Nationalism isn’t going to cut it, and are beginning to see the need for patriots of all over the world to have international solidarity with each other against a common enemy.

Likewise one can think of a million Arabs, Muslims, and groups and people from traditionally Islamic countries who are traitors, opportunists, or if genuine are retarded, sectarian, or foolish. That doesn’t mean we should dump the whole of Arabia and the Ummah down the drain. It means that ALL people have to undergo ideological struggle to build and maintain the resistance option. My people have a lot to learn, but we also have a lot to offer.

We have so many elements who worship the system and are slaves to the Jews, but like the Islamic psychology we value martyrdom amongst our “fringe” elements. Look at the number of domestic bombings and internal military attacks (i.e. Timothy McVeigh and “The Order”) against the system as well as the amount of presidential and other political assassinations my people have achieved. Just this week a young European-American appears to have wanted to assassinate Barack Obama, and contrary to the liberal politically correct Zionist distortions that this is just racism, the brother supposedly joked or taunted about getting Bush the little or how someone should get him.
It’s just simply that we are in the center of imperialism. People who deep down hope Iraq kicks Z.O.G. America’s ass aren’t going to often say so. Furthermore, lots and lots of my people alongside African-Americans and others would be willing to take on an enemy if they believed in the probability of victory.

It’s OUR job build the path of hope, to build the united front.

Now is not the time for splitting hairs. We don’t have to all agree. A racialist pagan and a racial nihilist Salafi jihadi may not share much in common on a day to day level, but if they both hate the Jews and the American government, if they both understand the need for collective action to ensure the destiny and greatness of one’s own nationality and the stability and prosperity of the world, then WE HAVE THE MAKINGS FOR A UNITED FRONT AGAINST THE JEWS AND THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.

Let us march in solidarity, in the spirit of love we each feel for our heritage and people, and in such spirit let us unite to destroy the common hated enemies of us all!

The European-American National Liberation Struggle

John Paul Cupp — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 06:07:23 +0000

If you ask me if I am a patriot, as a Communist and son of the nation, my obligation and honor would be to affirm a resounding “Yes!” However, telling our people the truth, when they roll around in their own feces and then rejoice of salvation and pride, is my supreme duty both as a patriot and a proletarian internationalist.

The Zionist-controlled American government is the most evil and reactionary government the modern world has ever seen. In collusion with globalist stooges and petty imperialists, the Jews have demonstrated an evil conspiracy of death and destruction. Contrary to conventional wisdom, our own people aren’t so far down the totem pole from the Palestinians in this sinister plot for the subjugation of all nations.

Hence, while our people in the US don’t need to be excessively disparaged and demoralized as done by Western “leftists,” they do play a whole series of reactionary social roles and cling to a whole series of opportunistic self-defeating tenets deeply embedded in their psychology. Getting to the root of this destruction takes precedence above and beyond pragmatism and political expediency.

The lines of the “left” and right promoted to our people are treasonously criminal and will get us nowhere. Racial and national nihilism, anti-family degeneracy, and anti-moral lines fomented by the “left” on behalf of their Jewish and globalist masters break down the solidarity of our working class, and promote cosmopolitanism, Zionism and imperialism. Likewise, the rightist, “traditionalist,” and so-called “patriotic” crowd’s promotion of so-called “American Nationalism,” this satanic anti-Christian cult of Judeo- “Christianity,” and the spreading of illusions that paleo-conservativism is a viable alternative to neo-conservativism, are all criminal plots leading to the physical extermination of millions upon millions of people.

My organization, the European-American Socialist People’s Front (EASPF), has an extensive amount of material combating the anti-White, philo-Semitic, and cosmopolitan lines of the contemporary “left.” Hence, I wish to devote this article to combating reactionary ideas and behavior on the Right which stem from our people and are the very heart and soul of our people’s humiliating self-defeat today.

First, we shall take on the myth that this greedy and bloodthirsty banker’s prison house of nations, America, is any sort of real country and one to which our patriotism should attach itself. Second, we shall analyze the origins and consequences of Judeo-“Christianity,” and demonstrate conclusively that whatever one personally thinks of genuine Christianity, is not a form of Christianity at all, but rather violently contrary to it. Third, we shall analyze the origins and scope of conservativism within the United States, and the relationship between paleo-conservativism which openly promotes US imperialism and neo-conservatism invented by Jewish Trotskites which dominates the leading quarters of imperialism today, to show that while objectively anti-imperialist at times, paleo-conservativism ultimately fails as a program of liberation. We shall throughout this piece demonstrate the role of the Jewish enemy, and the particular conspiracy they hatched long ago to exterminate our people and subjugate all the peoples of the world while destroying their distinct ways of life. Lastly, we shall affirm the call for total war and resistance by our people towards both international solidarity and the formation of the liberated European-American Democratic People’s Republic, one ideally to carry forward with socialist construction.

America is the enemy of our people and the world

The now deceased White Separatist guerrilla fighter turned resistance detainee David Lane, whose “14 words” were to become the bedrock of a quasi-national democratic line among White Nationalists, whatever other major differences I have with him, made clear that America is our enemy.

“Determined to destroy the integrity of races, nations and cultures for the Zionist New World Order, The Red, White, and Blue traveling man’s murder machine has been an engine of holocaust, genocide, and death unmatched in human history.

But still the CRAP wraps logic five times around a crooked tree to proclaim themselves “American Patriots” who support “Our Boys” as they bomb helpless nations into the Stone Age and blow tens of thousands or millions of women and children into tiny fragments. Always looking for someone else to blame, the CRAP screams, it’s the Jews, it’s the Jews. Well I’d be the last to deny that the media is dominated by Jews who have an agenda of world domination and of extinction for White Aryans.” — Excerpt from “C.R.A.P. Christian Right-wing American Patriots.”

Indeed, while we must condemn and oppose the Jews and Zionists, Lane’s self-criticism of our people who come from such quarters is completely on the mark, and in this case he was referring to Christian Right-wing American Patriots as “CRAP”. One could go much further in condemning pro-Americanism from amongst our people, because even the more mediocre trends within our genuinely nationalist and anti-globalist quarters are a tiny fraction of the overall European-American populace. Most of our people have no problem whatever, not only with the mass-murder and subjugation of peoples, with the government and ruling classes who perform such crimes against our people and the world, or even with the Jews. Hence, fierce ideological struggle is the first order of the day.

The same GI mercenary goons occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, may death and suffering be upon them, are the very army that will be mass-murdering our people in the streets in the event a genuine revolutionary struggle stems from them. Supposedly “anti-government” rednecks and Southern Nationalists usually whine to no end about “terrorism” and “supporting the troops,” and yet were a Confederate Army or any other anti-government formation by our people to be created, this same government would be calling them “terrorists,” and it would be US troops and police who work to destroy them.

How can this possibly be White Power when the enemy multicultural hellhole bombs hapless Serbia, that is a White Aryan traditionally Christian people and the last truly great European-descended force of resistance, and destroys what was then the last revolutionary unitary project of White Europe, i.e. Yugoslavia? Tomislav Sunic and those like him who invent the existence of a “communist threat” to justify race treason and aiding imperialism in turning brother against brother must rejected.

Can we really believe the Cold War was a good thing? It was Zionism and Jewish finance capital that acted as the shock force for world imperialism in bringing down the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was no more Jewish and Zionist at that point than a Palestinian human bomb, having long since purged the eternal enemy from Soviet and Eastern European power. Can we really believe pointing missiles and nuclear bombs at our White brothers and sisters in Europe because they liberated themselves from finance capital is a form of solidarity between European-descended peoples of the world? Would our people have benefited from White European-descended peoples dropping nuclear weapons on one another? Can we really believe this was even about communism, and not rather a conspiracy of aggression against our continental mother’s womb, just as this same enemy targeted Germany for annihilation by fire twice and has done to our brothers and sisters throughout Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East? I mean just look today and we see Russia isn’t run by Communists, but yet ZOG America’s ruling classes are still bound and determined to provoke another Cold War, crying to no end against the heroic liberation of brotherly South Ossetia and Abkhazia from ZOG Georgia and placing military instillations all over Europe against Moscow.

“Supporting our troops” means asking the Jews and globalists to mass-murder and subjugate both the world and ourselves with their lackeys. Every enemy who falls today at the hands of the Mujahadeen in Iraq and Afghanistan is a common victory for the truly patriotic forces from among our people. Let us “support the troops” only when they refuse the orders of the imperialist ZOG regime, march away from Iraq westward towards Tel Aviv, when they switch sides and turn their guns the other way, and particularly when they atone for their crimes by blowing up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Otherwise, may death and demise be upon them!

Equally, anyone carrying a badge is an enemy and deserves to be killed when attacking our people or anyone. You tell me, all you idiots who cry and whine when Blacks taunt and praise the killing of “the pigs” in their songs, who brought down Ruby Ridge and Waco with arms? Who is the armed wing of the Zionist Occupation Government? Who is spying on us, beating and imprisoning demonstrators, and every step of the way works to infiltrate and sabotage any hopes for our national liberation? Snitching and cop-calling are NOT “patriotic;” the pigs are not our friends!

Of course, I support some Black, Red Indian or Puerto Rican radical that is blowing their brains out. The only question is: WHY AREN’T OUR PEOPLE WILLING TO DO THE EXACT SAME THING WHEN THESE LACKIES OF ZOG COME MARCHING INTO OUR HOMES AND COMMUNITIES HELLBENT ON SUBJUGATING US AND MASS-MURDERING OUR POPULAR CLASSES AND POLITICAL DISSIDENTS?!

An example that I always bring up is the case of my colleague Kevin Walsh, who was felonized after having an armed standoff with government agents attempting to unjustly detain him. People reacted to the case as if he were “nuts.” Yet, many would completely support the very same case if he were in some exotic-sounding “Third World” country far removed from their comfort zones. What, we aren’t suppose to defend ourselves with arms when the enemy is trying to destroy us? Is that really so “extreme” or are our sensibilities so self-defeating and extremely brainwashed that we wind up thinking surrender and humiliation are acceptable?

Yet, the paradigm goes much deeper than being against the government of America. America itself doesn’t have a legitimate right to exist, is again I repeat, A BANKER’S PRISONHOUSE OF NATIONS AND NOT A NATION IN AND OF ITSELF. It is a project directly aligned with the Zionist entity, one more repressive than any other in modern history that will eventually lead to our extermination. Our nation is NOT America. Our hearts and heritage, raped and ravaged by the Zionist multicultural enemy countless times, must for our survival lie with the continental European mother’s womb of our people. In short, we’re White European-descended Aryans who formed a nationality with a common bloodline, language and heritage who require territorial imperatives for our ethnic survival, but we are NOT Americans. To be more exact, call us European-Americans if so long as in so doing we are defining a Eurocentric people and civilization and not a cosmopolitan anti-national project defined by the Red, White and Jew. Delinking our identity from Europe is a Zionist plot to rob of us of our Aryan soul and identity, and rather promote the existence an illusionary “American race” where the Africans, Red Indians, and others perish beside us on an altar of money-worship.

America is itself a concept of immigration and therefore anti-national. From the idiocy of our ancestors fleeing the continental mother’s womb instead of working to make their homeland a better place, to bombing and attempting to break down the ethnic character of the peoples of the world who resist globalism, to spreading such destruction against the various peoples residing in the United States who over the course of centuries each developed unique cultures and heritages with the genocidal use of “open borders” today, America is a dance with death. Hence, to be a nationalist, to believe in nationalism, and even to be an internationalist in the correct context, is to be anti-American and is to delink ourselves from America. The only thing that will ever be White and truly Eurocentric about America are the nihilism and rotting corpses of our people.

American Nationalism is objectively anti-nationalist globalism, for the destruction of the national unit, the great black hole, clearly lacks an ethnic character and patriotic dimension. In practical terms, American Nationalism today is just simply rednecks becoming Jewish and a mass support base for military aggression, globalism and consumerism. Such “nationalism” is our enemy. It cannot logically be construed to mean the patriotic love of our people and working to preserve and enrich what makes us unique.

It’s not only those followers of Marcus Garvey or Puerto Rican freedom fighters for whom the task of delinking from America stands as a sacred patriotic objective. White Power, when correctly defined, ultimately wants both separation from and death to America. Indeed, “White Power, Death to America!”

While our people are very different from both the Arabs and the Koreans, and hence have their own particular road to national liberation, the best models existing today, and worthy of careful study, admiration, and solidarity by our people are those of north Korea and the Iraqi Branch of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party.

Both projects, while guided by scientific socialism, took a far more thorough-going analysis of nationalism than pretending it to be something harmful to the unity of the popular classes or international solidarity, both realizing that nations are more than something which arose as product of capitalist development which will or should “whither away” as socialist construction intensifies. Both projects also defend the principle that to be a good internationalist one should first be a good patriot and that the nation alone decides the course of its struggle as masters of one’s own destiny and revolution.

Equally relevant for us, both projects are guided by a mother party capable of unifying the people though ideological struggle and developing a monolithic and organic ideology in the course of rooting out opportunism and erroneous ideas and behaviors. Like the eventuality of our own struggle against the Jews and American regime, both celebrate the central role of armed struggle and used their unique heritages to build a modern people-first civilizational project. In this regard, one finds leader Kim Jong Il’s On Correctly Understanding Nationalism and On Preserving the Juche Character and National Character of the Revolution and Construction extremely relevant and creatively applicable to our own struggle once liberated from ethnic chauvinism and pro-imperialist illusions.For our people, we call for preserving our ethnic character and heritage without pretending that the platform of the dominant White nationalist paradigm or the old Confederate regime are somehow capable of liberating us. We call for European-American motherland defense equipped with class analysis and a proletarian internationalist outlook as the guiding lens in these Zionized and pro-American times of defeat and despair.

Our nationalism must be a progressive nationalism, which while working to defend our blood and ethnic character against cosmopolitanism, is ultimately part of the global front to preserve the existence of nations and social liberation of the world’s popular classes in general.

Judeo-“Christianity” is our enemy

The historical accuracy of the Bible and the question of the existence of Jesus is not relevant to our struggles today. In practical terms, Christianity is today a two millennia old religious and political force in the world with a large number of adherents. With all due respect to the Pagans and non-religious from among our people, Christianity is simply a reality. While I to detest many of its political uses today and also recognize its origins as something distinctly foreign and Semitic, Christianity is an organic White Eurocentric expression from our people today. It is important, even for those like myself who are atheists, to recognize that Christianity has become a part of our people, and that many true Christians are our comrades today.

Hence, we must always hold a place at the table for all of our Christian brothers and sisters who work for social justice and the advancement and upliftment of our people. In criticizing Judeo-“Christianity,” I do not attack these people or the religion of our ancestors, nor am I attempting to discourage our people from practicing true Christianity. Rather, I attack a political poison masking itself in the image our people, but one that is inherently contrary to their best interests and that cannot be construed as being genuinely “Bible-based” anyways.

One should not be surprised that the Christian Jew was ultimately to submit before the Jewish Jew in the power struggle over domination of finance capital. Talmudism, on both a secular and religious level, being far more handcrafted at the art of subversion and sabotage and the Jews themselves raised in such a manner and spirit, than their Christian counterparts turned lackeys, and logically meaning the domination of Jewish Judaism over “Christian” Judaism. Our Christian population will either find alternative paths ranging from Islam, Buddhism and paganism to simply becoming atheists and agnostics or else they will need to reclaim the revolutionary potential of their creed as many have already done. However, Judeo-“Christianity” is unredeemable and shall be annihilated.

Judeo-“Christianity” presents the false notion that Jewish values are also Christian values and that the Zionist entity is part of the will of God in fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. It is treason to true Christianity, because it perverts Christian values and promotes attacks on real Christians in Palestine and elsewhere in the Arab world. “Love your neighbor as yourself” becomes “defraud and exploit your neighbor and physically attack him if he resists or even objects too much.” The teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin are far closer to the teachings of Christ than any of this predatory Judaeo-“Christian” gutter religion.

Paleo-Conservativism: an infantile disorder

Paleo-conservativism is the general trends of conservativism prior to neo-conservativism. It’s espousers, to varying degrees essentially believe in what one would consider “traditional American values” prior to the particularly Jewish/Trotskite/fanatically interventionist-oriented takeover of both the Republican Party and American nationalist thought. Essentially, while at times objectively anti-imperialist, they’re just whining because White Judeo-“Christian” quarters fail to dominate the leading quarters of imperialist finance capital and policy decisions on domestic and foreign affairs and essentially have the same idiotic attachment to the “American

Dream” as do their neo-conservative rivals. However, they detest America’s globalist role today while glossing over the fact that a whole series of reactionary ideas and behaviors they oppose are the ideological basis for the forming of America and were always tactics and strategies used by the enemy government.

The United States didn’t become imperialistic and hell bent for world domination when it became essentially Jewish. Becoming Jewish just made the problem a whole lot worse. We can trace clear back to wars of aggression against the Red Indians, to support for the Jewish-led slave trade in both the North and South, to the war of aggression against Dixie, and to America’s subversive decision to become an imperialist power clear back to 1898 and the aggression against the Philippines, Cuba and Puerto Rico, while claiming to be their friend and brother against Spanish colonialism.

Miscegenation didn’t begin with Neo-conservatives. Not only were enslaving Africans and mass murdering Red Indians morally wrong and inexcusable, though the meaning, relevance and scope of such actions has become greatly distorted, but they led us to lose our unique European identity by blood and culture for a false and enemy American one, as much as it did to those it colonized. Chinese immigrants, like their Irish counterparts – our brothers today, were brought in on a large scale by those who adhered to the will of the “Founding Fathers” as a source of cheap and easily exploited labor. This can hardly be seen as wanting to preserve our ethnic character.

The fact is, our “Founding Fathers,” without exception, were all garbage, who hailed an anti-national project where people were advised to abandon their ethnic character and nationalist-class struggle for the merchant’s pipe dream of America. Any true White Nationalist is not a paleo-conservative and should hate America’s founding leaders and ideology as much as leftists and peoples oppressed by White World colonialism.

Paleo-conservatives often play an anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist social role at a time when our culture, like those of the entire world, is being rapidly eroded, but they do so from a distorted and defeatist worldview that lacks class analysis, honest historical basis or a path forward. Our duty as patriots must not be to make the impossible return to the origins of our demise before the onslaught of liberalism and globalism, but to build a revolutionary path forward.

Build the European-American National Democratic Front and People’s War!

The illusions must smashed. The American regime, dominated by International Zionism but criminal in its own right, is our arch-enemy and ethnic catastrophe. Here we affirm that as ZOG is standing in the way of our national liberation and behaving as a violent anti-nationalist and anti-popular classes menace around the world by force of arms, armed struggle is the primary mode and necessity for our people’s survival, territorial imperative and the formation of a liberated and independent European-American Democratic People’s Republic. Without undue bravado nor illusions, we call upon our best and brightest sons and daughters to build and enhance the European-American people’s mass struggle, prerequisite for our war of national liberation, with total commitment and selflessness.

We must join hands with the “Axis of Resistance” constituting those groups and lands around the world combating imperialism and the Jews. Primarily this includes the Mujahadeen in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and Somalia, and the People’s Wars in the Philippines and Colombia. It also constitutes the friendly peoples of Korea, Cuba, Russia, Serbia, Venezuela, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, China, Pakistan and India, Belarus, Myanmar, Sudan, Zimbabwe and others. In so doing, being masters of our own destiny, such solidarity is not a manifestation of flunkies. Hence, such solidarity should not be without mutual autonomy or criticism, but as a genuinely organic expression of solidarity among patriots against a common enemy regardless of ethnic and ideological differences.

The current rejectionist tactics of more advanced White Nationalist groups, namely “lone wolf actions,” anti-regime armed standoffs and “terrorism” are not without extremely positive and effective attributes in light of the absolute necessity of military operations and the lack of a revolutionary mass line and political-military apparatus capable of currently defeating the American regime and the Jews. They are not an end in and of themselves however. Our people must launch a successful guerrilla war capable of galvanizing the political arena and mobilizing the masses of our European-American people or we may well perish.

Our revolutionary struggle for liberation is not a “Race War,” and the designs of International Zionism for such fratricide between ourselves and the Black nation, as espoused by certain myopic and sectarian forces only serves to undermine our struggle and resistance. We also call for the formation of solidarity between European-descended peoples of the United States and African-descended peoples and others based on mutual respect of ethnic identity, brotherhood and friendship, and resistance to a common threat. Any ethnic contradictions between ourselves and Black people and others must be secondary to a recognition of the need for class solidarity and the need for all peoples to correct a whole series of idiotic social roles and ideas, though rejecting of assimilation and racial nihilism. We must ultimately unite in a political-military showdown towards defeating Jewish power, promoting the resistance of peoples outside the US territorial boundaries on the frontlines against globalism, overthrowing the regime, and defending the self-determination and ethnic character of peoples.

Furthermore, we laud the heroic acts of resistance which occurred on September 11^th, 2001 and welcome international combat volunteers, who also recognize in the American regime and the Jews a common enemy of their people and who are currently more advanced politically, spiritually, and militarily to combat them. At a time of total globalist onslaught we cannot pretend that our national borders exist in any coherent and natural sense anyways. This being the case, we respect the calls made by various Jihad organizations for opening up the field of combat both in the United States and the Zionist entity, rather than considering these to be acts of aggression against our people as proponents of the “war on terror” erroneously do.

Many forces conducting solidarity activities, building the movement against war, anti-Zionists, advocates of self-determination and anti-government agitators caution against raising the alarm bells with support of violent resistance to the Jews and regime, promotion of “terrorism” and the call for destroying the United States. Such people would argue that the actual conditions for successfully conducting People’s War currently do not exist or even that “terrorism” is universally immoral and counterproductive. They point out that this is potentially useful for demonizing more “legitimate” organizations, mass-appeal aboveground political work and single issue causes. It’s also true when they argue that this carries with it immense security risks and that the super-majority of people are deeply turned off by such an approach.

Yet, we cannot possibly forsake the revolution for political breadcrumbs or pragmatism. The necessity of armed nationalist-class struggle ranks as the singular greatest imperative both for the survival and liberation of my European-American people and for the final defeat of imperialism and Zionism around the world, i.e. for the national liberation of all peoples as the victory of international proletarian nationalism over cosmopolitanism, Americanism and globalism.

First, as is the duty of all people, I am affirming here the call for the self-determination and liberation of my people as a sacred principle and inalienable right, regardless of calls for moderation. At a time White people are being slated for destruction and demise, with all due respect, moderation and restraint are off the table. Secondly, one has to seriously question if anti-globalist forces within the misnomered “Western World,” unlike their counterparts in the equally misnomered “Third World,” are actually achieving anything at all. This leads to honestly assessing the state of defeat and duress, and presents clearly the centrality of revolutionary dynamism and correct ideology if we are going to tip the balance of power in our favor. Third, again I berate the proponents of dogmatic humanism and moralism for their degenerate blanket condemnations of the truly liberating brutality of resistance terror. The reality is we are fighting an enemy who lacks principles, chivalry or dignity. The idea of rules of engagement becomes a Talmudic length saga, rather than merely stressing the need for focusing attacks on the enemy more so than on our own popular classes (with the exception of the Zionist entity). This has become chains around the arms of our people and objectively enables reactionary anti-human terror of aggression a billion fold more barbaric than collateral damage caused by resistance actions, for it is such resistance actions that help to partially blunt the enemy’s aggression. Lastly, everything I have said about America, that it does not have a right to exist and will ultimately destroy our own just as it has so many others, is completely true. Hence, my position rests on its own merits.

The European-American “left,” unlike their counterparts throughout Eastern Europe, Asia, Arabia, Africa, Turkey and Latin America, overwhelming lack any real national dimension, red meat-eating instinct, willingness and thirst for combat, anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism in their psychology, and even are generally not opposed to globalism and imperialism. They have become chattel slaves, effeminate pacifists and the most loathing and distracted of shabbos goyim and ethnic nihilists. We struggle so that one day the best and brightest of our sons and daughters on the left join the ranks of proletarian Aryan combatant fighters, wishing defeat for the poisons of the New Left and Old Left alike.

Now looking honestly, my brothers and sisters on the right and those still embedded with a sense of salvation and ethnic survival, are not without the many fatal flaws I have mentioned in this appeal. May it be that ideological struggle and the blood of our martyrs cleanses our people, strengthens them, aids their contributions to overall global cause, and finds our people surviving and flourishing. Our greatest threat is apathy, our greatest freedom painful self-criticism, myself included.

We are facing the eventuality of the complete breakdown of imperialist finance capital. The imperialist system of the regime, aside from spreading the ills of multiculturalism, produced a parasitic economy unable to stand. Arise and destroy it with arms!

Glory to the European-American proletarian nation, hail to the White race!

Long live the resistance option, death to our enemies!

On the Need for Nationalist and anti-Jewish Ideological Struggle amongst Communists and Western Leftists

John Paul Cupp — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:52:34 +0000

In today’s post-Soviet world, with the exception of those nations where Communists seized state power and developed patriotic models of building socialism, to call oneself a “Communist” today is to be a fifth column agent for Zionism, liberalism, social democracy, defeatism, cosmopolitanism, international Jewry, and imperialist globalization.

Those of us who love our Communist identity, who love the working class of our nation and want to preserve our ethnic character and believe in international solidarity with the popular masses of other countries fighting against Zionism and imperialism, have a profound obligation to tell the truth and struggle to rectify this embarrassing and humiliating situation. This is true no matter how many times we ourselves are accused of espousing “racism,” “xenophobia,” “national chauvinism,” “anti-Semitism,” “White Supremacism” or “Islamo-fascism,” and even “anti-Communism.” As a revolutionary principle, the popular classes struggle together as a national unit to build the revolution. This patriotic class struggle forms proletarian internationalism not based upon wanting to destroy nations and form a “Communist International,” but by the bonds of solidarity and cooperation between patriots of one land with another. The leading forces behind the United States and imperialism worldwide, which struggles to break down the ethnic character of people, are overwhelmingly Jewish.

21^st Century Communism is National Communism, not dogmatic “anti-revisionist Marxism-Leninism,” not liberal identity politics and definitely not national nihilism and Jew-loving self-hatred. European-American National Communism isn’t chauvinistic nor the metaphysics of Hitlerite National Socialism, but it will coordinate with our kindred in the White Power national democratic front and other peoples on its own terms. It also will not fall for the trap of “anti-racism” and “anti-fascism” or whatever Jewish and nihilist conspiracy is hatched to prevent us from closing ranks with our kindred, regardless of whether or not they are currently anti-communist.

While we admire Stalin’s leadership during the Soviet-led struggle against Operation Barbarossa, we cannot possibly deny that many good points existed early on in the German revolution of 1933, and that very real limitations existed in the Communist movement, namely Jew-loving illusions and national nihilism. Further, we argue that Adolf Hitler has become the greatest sacred cow of the entire world, a sacred cow that needs to be correctly deconstructed because it stands in the way of our liberation and of movements of national release against globalism throughout the world.

We also will not deny that the dominant White Nationalist movement, regardless of our internal disagreements and its limitations, is not without many positive features. We defend “Europe for the Europeans” and opposition to “open borders” when Arabs and others ask us to “tone it down a notch,” because White people have a right to self-determination as much as Palestinians and Iraqis. Within the United States, multiculturalism is nothing more than a codeword for Zionist-driven cosmopolitanism and nihilistic death for which all of us are ultimately victims. We refuse to differentiate between Jews and Zionists, because it cannot possibly be argued that this lie has any logical benefit for our struggle or the overall struggle against imperialism. We do not deny the existence of races or the centrality of ethno-nationalism as the only genuine form of nationalism today, but merely state that such questions are the internal matter of other peoples and oppose genuine ethnic chauvinism while equally lambasting calls of denunciation against true nationalism when it is slandered by the forces of “political correctness.” Lastly, like all White Nationalists in the US, we love White people, are proudly Eurocentric and openly quarrel with the dominant leftist paradigm that pretends European-Americans are not an oppressed nation today with a right to self-determination.

Our communism is not an attempted subversion of the people through chameleon tactics. We have no hidden agenda, because our goals are public knowledge. Our call for socialism, anti-imperialism and anti-Zionism and the liberation of White people through a coordinated national democratic front is an open and steady call. Our political alliances are honest alliances, regardless of real differences, based on an understanding of needing unified collective White European-American action and eventually coordination with other people to bring down the American regime and Jewish power worldwide. We are not rightists with the rightists and leftists with the leftists, though we do speak to each in ways to which they can relate. We are patriotic communists at all times.

Unlike other group identities formed around religion or based on national identity (without conceding that the Jews constitute a nation), the very act of being a Jew is hostile to the world and without redeeming value. We admire Lenin, but he was wrong on this. Almost no real “Jewish proletariat” exists to be differentiated from the Jewish bourgeoisie, because Jews are lazy predatory creatures who close ranks around a common goal of world domination and economic slavery. We do need to condemn White globalists and others who are power holders in imperialist finance capital and the conspiracy to destroy nation states and think in terms of class analysis, but it is very important to understand that the leading quarters of imperialism and the true power structure of the United States are all Jews and that the entire Jewish community closes ranks with this threat to liberty.

My organization, the European-American Socialist People’s Front, calls on honest elements of the White European-descended left to correct their mistakes on the national question and the Jewish problem and join ranks for a nation liberation struggle to come. We call on White European-descended rightists to understand that while the dominant Western leftist political movements are Judaic assaults on the dignity of the white race, that not all of us are without great love for and pride in our people, and we do want a unified front to preserve our identity and promote our liberation. We address our allies outside the realm of our kindred as friends and comrades, but we do not allow that they should possibly dictate the terms of our mass line. We argue that natural differences always will exist between the mass lines of completely different people, but that this should not stand in the way of amiable relations and collective solidarity against a common threat.

Imperialism, not White solidarity, is the real enemy of humanity!

Pyongyang Corée du Nord, point de vue

Lenin1917 — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:22:03 +0000

Pyongyang Corée du Nord, point de vue

This is a much higher audio and video quality version of this video (Pyongyang Views) than the November 29, 2009 version.

*Raw street sounds, no music added.

Upgraded video viewable : here

On Racial Communism

John Paul Cupp — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 07:53:49 +0000

Racial communism is the highest stage of communist theory and practice for our people. It is an emerging ideology which seeks to produce the epic works for guiding our future generations to come while defeating the anti-White genocidal conspiracy by raising our people to the level of combatant fighters and successfully engaging in protracted armed struggle. It is a terroristic specter which haunts the lying misanthropic leftists who laugh joyously at the embarrassing state of defeat in which our people wallow. Racial communism prophetically promises them that the “favor” will be returned by a thousand fold when we achieve state power and butcher them en masse through great purges if they fail to correct their treasonous behavior. It stands in diametric opposition to attachment to the enemy liberal Zionist project called “America,” Cold War nonsense and the individualism of the far right, libertarians and paleoconservatives. However, racial communism as a product of collective cells organic to our European-American body also understands that our movement for racial, national and social liberation, even our working class vanguard today, is confused and often among these very same people. Minus ardent conservatives and integrationists, at least some of these types of people still want to be White, which is more than we can say for most of the left. Hence, even during fierce ideological struggle we treat our brothers and sisters differently than we treat anti-White enemies.

Vladimir Lenin was completely correct to call “left-wing communism” the “infantile disorder” that it is in his famous work. On the other extreme, David Lane was correct to affirm that “Christian Right-wing American Patriots” are “C.R.A.P.” in his famous work. While I doubt these two gentlemen would have liked each other very much, they both made real contributions to the kind of synthesis we need today in building a revolutionary European-American nationalistic anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist front, one that is both anti-capitalist and racially aware. Both of these great men understood the centrality of armed revolution, and it is none other than armed revolution which will act as a sort of antiseptic, cleaning our people’s deep wounds and nurturing our collective body and its cells.

“Neither left nor right” makes a certain point in today’s Western context because the “left” is completely cosmopolitan and an avowed enemy of our people, while the right seems lost in nostalgia for archaic, conservative and opportunistic ideas and social roles. However, I think it would be more correct to put my organiztion, the European-American Socialist People’s Front (EASPF), in the camp of leftism. This of course presupposes that unlike the infantilism of “left-wing communism,” EASPF is the guiding lens of “right-wing communism,” a national-racial revolutionary working class calling. In this sense, we are genuinely leftists because we are for socialism and anti-imperialism, but to the right of the infantile enemies, because we are patriots waving the red flag rather than open enemies of our own people’s right to self-determination. We are communists standing for the truest form of anti-revisionist communism among our people: White Power as a communist ideology.

Because the bulk of nationalistic Whites in the Western world belong to the far right or libertarian camps, they lack a tangible path forward and fail to see the contradictions that are brewing within the left, dominated as it is by the cosmopolitan infantile ones. Dialectically, the New Left “picked up a rock and dropped it on its own feet” to paraphrase basic pre-Cultural Revolution Maoist concepts. In becoming so vain and arrogant in their hatred of anything White and even openly holding working class Whites in deep contempt, they have essentially handed us a rope with which to hang them. In this spirit we call on the young leftists as they are being beaten in the streets by ZOG’s police to reconsider their positions and approach while maintaining their zeal for struggle.

One finds more and more average working class and middle class rednecks starting to see through capitalism for what it is, without the illusions that existed during the Cold War. White college students who grew up with blue collar parents are beginning to secretly hold their own dogmatic leftist “comrades” in contempt for their racial sectarianism, for this retarded idea that a “White working class doesn’t exist” or that it is “a racist oppressor.” Indeed, race treason isn’t loyalty to humanity, it’s betrayal of one’s own people. You can’t build the people’s revolution without loving them or by betraying them. This is exactly why cosmopolitan and anti-White misleaders promote such lines. In fact, the Zionist media had a virtual blackout on the militaristic aggression the police had in handling anarchist-leaning youth condemning the G20 summit in Pittsburgh recently. Despite the silly anti-White lines these young kids have, most of our supposedly “reactionary” poor workers when discovering reliable news of such events would like to have seen the anarchists send the government’s agents to hell for daring to attack them or any other citizen standing up for basic rights. As another example worth citing, a young European-American fresh out of ZOG’s imperialist military aggression came home and shot two cops dead recently not far from where I live. What if we mixed the spirit of the ex-GI cop-killer on the right and the young anarchists on the left together while calling on all our people to adopt more effective strategies and ideology for total resistance?

Watching African-Americans mindlessly line up in droves behind Barack Obama, simply because he is Black, even though he’s fanatically imperialistic and destroying the economy for all races and nationalities, has caused many people to reassess if Whites are the only ones who have to correct many foolish notions and behaviors. The idea that ZOG America is “AmeriKKKa,” as the New Left claims, doesn’t seem fitting in an environment where the symbolic leader of imperialism isn’t White and where transnational finance capital isn’t dominated by European-America Southerners. Certainly, if the Ku Klux Klan or other radical White paleoconservatives were the ruling elite today, our country wouldn’t have the idiotic pro-immigration stance that it does.

Now the contradictions are brewing. What seems small is a crack destined to shatter the moribund New Left and send them into the dustbin of history should we play our cards correctly. In such a way we could form and enhance a real true revolutionary White working class movement and develop the anti-capitalist and nationalist-racialist revolution. It’s time for real answers and real action. We need more theoretical debate and discussion, but more than that we need mass work, party building and the stockpiling of weapons and ammunition.

We must continue to encourage the leftist youth to rally under the red flag of socialism, and show them that our Confederate battle flag, a symbol of European-American ethno-nationalist resistance today more so than narrow regionalism or loyalty to an antiquated political system, is also a red-colored flag. We need a people’s war, and we also need a race war against Jewish Supremacy, regardless of whether Jews are a real race or not, since they are attacking us because our racial and national identity threatens their hegemonic goals. So then let us build a people’s war against the enemy regime and finance capital. Let us also build a war for ethnic survival, though not one needlessly attacking other oppressed nationalities, particularly innocent popular class African-Americans, as many of my brothers and sisters on the the far right foolishly espouse. We need racial and national liberation, but we also need class struggle. Both the best of the right and the best of the left make complete sense and are useful sources of inspiration. We also should discard what is unusable or reactionary from them, especially libertarian hangups both sadly seem to share.

Our numbers are small, but things are turning in our favor. People who tuned out only a few years ago are now tuning in to our message today. This is because deep down our masses know the economy isn’t coming back. They also painfully understand that we are dying spiritually, culturally and even in a physical sense as an organic ethnic being. Despite often “going through the motions” or not having a workable solution, our people painfully know that they are oppressed. We simply lack the infrastructure and mass media that the enemy holds, or even the amount of media dogmatic rightist and leftist groups have. For all that, we can build a revolution when the young rebel leftist kids fighting the system with infantile behavior and ideas correct many of those mistakes and the rest of our people, whom conservative “Judeo-Christians” and the military industrial complex work hard to subvert, correct many of theirs as well. Then we could theoretically join hands in a shooting war, a mature resistance struggle with an understanding that victory will not be won without the righteous blood of our people as martyrs.

Imagine the deep healing that will come over our people at such a point. With numbers, proper leadership, organizational structure, mass movements, and especially armed resistance, what was today our saddest and most depressing moment can be followed by the greatest moment in the history of our people. The chains that shackles would then be smashed and our creative potential would become seemingly endless. This is to say nothing of what a return to the concept of family and neighborhood would bring, something which can only come when we destroy capitalism and build socialism and communism according to our own national and racial realities.

Our people are deeply yearning for something today. One senses that in whatever quarters they should happen to venture. Unfortunately the feeling of just what they are yearning for and how to achieve it has yet to come over them. That only means our work as revolutionaries must intensify.

Hail victory!

Victory of Socialism is Inevitable

Free Media Productions Staff — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:06:09 +0000

Korean Central News Agency

Pyongyang, November 29 (KCNA) — It is inevitability of history and a law governing the development of history that humankind advances toward socialism, says Rodong Sinmun Sunday in a signed article.

The socialist society develops thanks to the inexhaustible creative power of the popular masses who are armed with high ideological consciousness and united as one, the article notes, and goes on:

The drive for remolding people and their thought so as to strengthen the driving force of the revolution and steadily boost their role was pushed forward ahead of other work under the wise leadership of the Workers’ Party of Korea. As a result, socialism in the DPRK has been fortified as an invincible fortress standing whatever storm and stress, demonstrating its might all over the world.

The Songun era is the era of great change in which the driving force of the revolution has unprecedentedly grown stronger and the cause of socialism developed onto a new higher stage.

The DPRK has put forward the People’s Army stronger than any other social group in terms of revolutionary character, the sense of organization and combat capacity as the core unit of the Juche revolutionary force. Herein lies the source of the invincibility and might of Korean-style socialism.

Socialist society is the most advantageous and advanced one embodying the popular masses’ intrinsic nature and desire for independence. It is also genuine society for the people as their political and economic life as well as ideological and cultural one are in full bloom as required by man’s intrinsic desire to live and develop independently.

The advantages and vitality of socialism have been clearly proved by the reality in the DPRK which has brought about in a short span of historical time great socio-economic changes. It is impossible for capitalism to do so even though they would have taken it hundreds of years.

Socialism in the DPRK is the most advantageous one centered on the popular masses.

The essential character and advantages of Korean-style socialism lie in that it successfully embodies the immortal Juche idea in order to ensure that the popular masses are put forward as the master of everything in the society and everything of the society serves the people and independence of the people is most firmly defended and realized.

The reality in which Korean-style socialism centred on the popular masses is firmly defended and wins victory after victory goes to prove the validity and the tremendous vitality of the Songun leadership, the Songun politics of the Workers’ Party of Korea.

The cause of socialism is sure to emerge victorious as there is the Songun politics, example of the independent politics, politics under socialism in the present times and the most powerful weapon.

Big Joe (a serial killer) on the real victims

Metal Gear — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:12:58 +0000

According to Joseph Duncan, an active serial killer at the time he wrote this, the founding fathers were sex offenders and criminals are victims. The resident Marxist-Leninists who contribute their angle to this blog should love this guy. After all, this is class conflict.
http://fifthnail.blogspot.com/2004/01/610-pm-i-just-updated-this-blog.php

I just updated this blog template to show the Fifthnail image. I’m working on a web site that I hope will be a voice for oppressed “criminals.” I’m not sticking up for their crimes; I’m sticking up for the human being inside, and trying to get people to see that punishing a scapegoat does only creates more vicitms, mostly innocent ones. I believe—I know—there are no bad people in this world, just people who do bad things. I was one once. I was ignorant. Now I know better, and the only reason I do is because I am not a bad person at heart. I care about people, and my only solace is in knowing that if I had understood how I was hurting my victim I would not have done it. Our society needs to understand this. You take any criminal, even the worst, and underneath all the crappy thinking is a battered and tortured heart that cares. I’ve lived and loved these people, murderers, rapists, child molesters, you name it. Every one of them is a human and a victim of their own messed up thinking. Every one of them is capable of remorse. Even if most hide from their remorse by denying it, or by burying it in the rage they feel toward society for denying their existence as a worthwhile human being. And now instead of confirming their existence society is denying it in the worst way yet. By requiring them to register, and directly implying that they are not valuable human beings, but instead they are monsters that must be watched closely and tolerated only because some long dead person wrote (for some long forgotten reason) that they have rights. How soon we forget that the Fathers of this country were criminals, even sex offenders by today’s standards. Study your history people; it’s all there waiting to be repeated.

On ideology

Metal Gear — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 22:19:19 +0000

Marx thought that ideology was a belief system that kept people from acting in their own economic self-interest. He considered religion to be a part of this.

I believe, however, that ideology is something which helps man to overcome nature. In that way, techno-fascism is the opposite of marxism. Religion is a perversion of ideology.

Lenin speaks!

Lenin1917 — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:40:42 +0000

Colorized film footage of great revolutionary leader and Bolshevik
ideologist Vladimir Lenin, with a rare recording of a speech he
made during the Russian Civil War 1918 – 1922.

The speech is as follows:

“Comrade (Red Army) soldiers! The capitalists of England, America and France are waging a war against Russia. They are taking revenge on the Soviet Peasants & Workers’ Republic for her [Republic's] overthrowing the power of landlords and capitalists and set the example for all the peoples of the world.

With money and munitions, the capitalists of England, France and America support Russian landlords, who are marshalling their armies from Siberia, Don River, and Northern Caususus against the Soviets, seeking to restore the power of the Tsar, of the landlords, of capitalists.
No, this will NEVER happen! The Red Army has unified itself, it has arisen and started chasing the landlords’ armies and the White Guards’ officers away from the Volga, took back Riga, took back virtually all of Ukraine; it approaches Odessa and Rostov.”

*Video and above text courtesy of wagnerian1979.

The Russian and Chinese revolutions – And Realism

Metal Gear — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:53:05 +0000

Mao and Lenin did not take power because “they had the support of the working class.” And the Iranian people do not need “the support of the working class.”

They got in power solely because of warfare. WWI got Lenin in power. The Tzar was too weak and unprepared.
WWII got Mao in power. Kai-Shek didn’t have the ability to fight another war after fighting Japan.

Non-Marxists got in power more because of the depression than the war. They worked within capitalism to fix its contradictions. The depression got Mussolini in power. Same for Hitler. Not Franco, however. Marxists took power more violently.

If Iranian Marxists or similar movements take power, it will be because of the pressure US put on Iran weakens it, not in spite of it. The more screwed up things get, the more the opportunity exists for change. That opportunity won’t exist without pressure from Zionism and America.

If Iran does become socialist, then US imperialism will be the reason. But fundamentally, not the way that Besoshvilli thinks. It will be because the Iranian people are sick of fighting and finally overthrow their own government which is already fatigued from USA. Not because the Iranian people rally behind their government. Not because Iran gets stronger and heroically fends off USA. Because Iran gets weaker. The only reason a Marxist should support the ruling order in Iran, is under the logic that it will self-destruct and socialism can defeat it. The idea of supporting the Theocratic capitalist regime as an end in itself baffles me and any clear thinker when done under the banner of Marxist-Leninism.

If the US disappeared tomorrow and Islam dominated the world, atheistic socialism would be finished. It is not the working class that allows for revolution. It is infighting between capitalists.

Video Footage of Enver Hoxha’s visit to the DPRK

Besoshvili — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:13:04 +0000

Purging religious people from Third Position Ranks

Metal Gear — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:30:26 +0000

One problem with the right wing is that pious hypocrites have always infiltrated the ranks. If there is one attractive reason to turn to Marxism, it is that (generally speaking) Marxists take a hardline against religion. This is really what separates fascism from traditionalism. Corporate fascists put the state above the church. Clerical fascists are fake fascists.

I stand and will always stand for a total purge of judeo-christian-islamic theology. The movement of right wing authoritarians will be an atheistic movement. Corporatism and state worship will obliterate religion, and I hope that religion people will be shamed as they try to shame others with their man made nonsense.

Marxists only understand one motive for human behavior

Metal Gear — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:55:17 +0000

The motives for serial murder are visionary (voices in head), mission-oriented (political cause), thrill (impulsive for fun), sexual (impulsive for sex or necrophilia), gain (for profit either monetary or other) and power/control (want to totally enslave someone for sadistic reasons and then kill them).

Marxists only understand the profit motive. Material motives are not one of many motives to Marxists, but the only motive.

Twelve sexual commandments of revolutionary proletariat

Besoshvili — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:47:23 +0000

Brochure “Revolution and youth”, published by Communist University of Ya. M. Sverdlov, 1924
By Aron Borisovich Zalkind

1) There should not be an unnecesarily early development of sexual activity in the proletarian environment

2) It is necessary to abstain from sexual activity before marriage; marriage is to be had only when social and biological maturity is reached (20-25 y.o.)

3) Sexual connection is only a final stage of deep multi-faceted sympathy and attachment to the object of sexual love

4) Sexual intercourse must only be a final link in the chain of deep and complicated issues which connect the lovers during the current moment

5) Sexual intercourse must not repeat often

6) Do not change the sexual object often. Less sexual diversity

7) Love must be monogamous, monandric (one wife, one husband)

8 ) With each sexual intercourse, it is necessary to always remember of possible birth of a child — basically remember about offspring

9) Sexual selection must be built on the line of social [class] revolutionary proletarian expediency. No flirting, courting, coquetry and other elements of sexual conquest must be a part of intersexual relationships

10) There must not be jealousy

11) There must not be sexual perversions

12) Society [class], in the interests of revolutionary expediency, has a right to intervene with the sexual life of its members: the sexual should always obey the social [class], never be a problem for the latter, serve it in all ways.

Glory to Stalin!

Iron Bolshevik — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:07:25 +0000

East Germans lost much in 1989

Hobbes — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:24:10 +0000

For many in the GDR, the fall of the Berlin Wall and unification meant the loss of jobs, homes, security and equality

Bruni de la Motte

Sunday, 8 November 2009

Guardian

On 9 November 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down I realised German unification would soon follow, which it did a year later. This meant the end of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the country in which I was born, grew up, gave birth to my two children, gained my doctorate and enjoyed a fulfilling job as a lecturer in English literature at Potsdam University. Of course, unification brought with it the freedom to travel the world and, for some, more material wealth, but it also brought social breakdown, widespread unemployment, blacklisting, a crass materialism and an “elbow society” as well as a demonisation of the country I lived in and helped shape. Despite the advantages, for many it was more a disaster than a celebratory event.

Just two examples. My best friend, a foreign languages teacher, lost her job and was blacklisted because, at the time the wall fell, she happened to be teaching at a government law college. She was not a member of the party or indeed political at all. After much effort she managed to find a job helping young people excluded from school, with no long-term contract and on a much lower salary. My brother, who has a PhD in the philosophy of science, lost his research job at the academy and ever since has only been able to find odd, low-paid temporary jobs.

Little is known here about what happened to the GDR economy when the wall fell. Once the border was open the government decided to set up a trusteeship to ensure that “publicly owned enterprises” (the majority of businesses) would be transferred to the citizens who’d created the wealth. However, a few months before unification, the then newly elected conservative government handed over the trusteeship to west German appointees, many representing big business interests. The idea of “publicly owned” assets being transferred to citizens was quietly dropped. Instead all assets were privatised at breakneck speed. More then 85% were bought by west Germans and many were closed soon after. In the countryside 1.7 million hectares of agricultural and forest land were sold off and 80% of agricultural workers lost their job.

In July 1990, when the GDR still existed, a hasty “currency union” was introduced with the result that the GDR economy was plunged into bankruptcy. Before unification the West German mark was worth 4.50 GDR marks; however, at currency union it was fixed at parity with an exchange rate of 1:1. The result was that GDR export products rose in price by 450% overnight and were no longer competitive; the export market (39% of the economy) inevitably imploded.

Large numbers of ordinary workers lost their jobs, but so too did thousands of research workers and academics. As a result of the purging of academia, research and scientific establishments in a process of political vetting, more than a million individuals with degrees lost their jobs. This constituted about 50% of that group, creating in east Germany the highest percentage of professional unemployment in the world; all university chancellors and directors of state enterprises as well as 75,000 teachers lost their jobs and many were blacklisted. This process was in stark contrast to what happened in west Germany after the war, when few ex-Nazis were treated in this manner.

In the GDR everyone had a legally guaranteed security of tenure and ownership to the properties where they lived. After unification, 2.2m claims by non-GDR citizens were made on their homes. Many lost houses they’d lived in for decades; a number committed suicide rather than give them up. Ironically, claims for restitution the other way around, by east Germans on properties in the west, were rejected as “out of time”.

Since the demise of the GDR, many have come to recognise and regret that the genuine “social achievements” they enjoyed were dismantled: social and gender equality, full employment and lack of existential fears, as well as subsidised rents, public transport, culture and sports facilities. Unfortunately, the collapse of the GDR and “state socialism” came shortly before the collapse of the “free market” system in the west.

Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism

Besoshvili — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:33:19 +0000

The Marxist Internet Archive (MIA) has recently launched a new section to its website, entitled “Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism.”

Though not comprehensive, it does provide a decent collection of works documenting the growth of the Anti-Revisionist movement, its history, as well as a few primary texts. Still a work in progress, but definitely a worthwhile resource.

You can visit the “Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism” by clicking on the link above. The site has also been linked in our “Marxist-Leninist Resources” section (left-hand column).

Soviet Propaganda Shorts

Free Media Productions Staff — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:00:20 +0000

Урок не впрок. A lesson not learned

WE’LL KEEP OUR EYES PEELED

Black & White

Stalin and the Chinese Revolution

Hobbes — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:41:17 +0000

From Lalkar, Monthly Publication of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist)

Two lines on the Chinese Revolution: the line of the Comintern and Stalin versus the line of the Trotskyist opposition

Presentation made by Harpal Brar to the Stalin Society on 18 October 2009 to mark the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and the forthcoming 130th anniversary of the birth of Stalin.

In the latter half of the 1920s the Trotskyist opposition (Trotsky, Zinoviev, Radek and Kamenev) accused the ‘Stalinist bureaucracy’ i.e. the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolshevik) [CPSU(B)] and the Comintern of selling the Chinese Revolution and the Chinese communists down the river – of betraying the Chinese Revolution.

This slander has since then been picked up, and repeated thousands of times, by the Trotskyite counter-revolutionaries, revisionist renegades, social democrats, and even by some dubious Marxist-Leninists. Every attempt is made by this gentry to invent sharp difference of opinion between Stalin and Mao Zedong, between the line of the Comintern, which was the same as that of Stalin and the CPSU(B), on the one hand, and that of Mao Zedong, on the other hand, on the question of the Chinese Revolution. Nothing could be further from the truth.

That Mao Zedong and the Chinese communists held Stalin in extremely high regard is shown by the following words of Mao Zedong on the occasion of Stalin’s 60th birthday:

“Stalin is the leader of world revolution. This is of paramount importance. It is a great event that mankind is blessed with Stalin. Since we have him, things can go well. As you all know, Marx is dead and so are Engels and Lenin. Had there been no Stalin, who would be there to give directions? But having him – this is really a blessing. Now there exist in the world a Soviet Union, a Communist Party and also a Stalin. Thus, the affairs of the world can go well. We must hail him, we must support him, and we must learn from him. … We must learn from him in two respects: his theory and his work” (Quoted by Chen Po-Ta in Stalin on the Chinese Revolution).

Comintern’s analysis of the Chinese Revolution as regards the prospects and character of the Chinese Revolution.

The Comintern held that the main character of the Chinese Revolution was anti-feudal, for feudalism and the survivals of feudalism were the most predominant factor in the Chinese countryside. China, at that time, had a population of roughly 400/450 million people, out of which 350 or 400 million people lived in the countryside. Roughly 90% of the people were peasants who were exploited to the hilt by feudalism and, therefore, the most predominant feature of the Chinese Revolution was the fight against feudalism.

Thus the Chinese Revolution was an agrarian revolution spearheaded against feudalism and the entire militarist-bureaucratic structure which rested on it. An agrarian revolution is the basis and content of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. In China, at that time, the bourgeois democratic revolution could not fail to be an anti-imperialist revolution, because imperialism supported the whole structure of feudalism, the whole fabric of feudalism.

It is imperialism which fosters, inspires, supports and preserves feudalism and struggles on the side of feudalism. In colonial or semi-colonial countries, people fighting against feudalism cannot but at the same time be involved in a revolutionary fight for the overthrow of imperialism, because the interests of imperialism are inextricably intertwined with the interests of the feudal ruling class, as is happening today, for instance, in the Middle East.

As early as 1913, Lenin had the occasion to point out that the obsolescent bourgeoisie of Europe, out of fear of the rising strength of the proletariat, was “supporting everything backward, moribund and medieval” and “combining with all obsolete and obsolescent forces” in an effort to preserve the tottering system of wage slavery. “And a more striking example of this decay of the entire European bourgeoisie”, he wrote, “can scarcely be cited than the support it is lending to reaction in Asia for the sake of the selfish aims of the financial manipulators and capitalist swindlers” (‘Backward Europe and Advanced Asia’)

Trotsky’s analysis of the Chinese Revolution

Trotsky under-estimated and gave no decisive importance to the strength of feudalism, maintaining that the Chinese Revolution was merely aimed at ending China’s state-customs dependence on the imperialist countries; that this revolution was anti-imperialist mainly because it was directed at the abolition of unequal treaties imposed on China by the various imperialist countries.

In May 1927, Trotsky submitted to the Central Committee of the CPSU(B) and to the Executive Committee of the Comintern (ECCI) the following thesis: “Fundamentally untenable is Bukharin’s attempt to justify his opportunist compromising line by references to the alleged predominating role of ‘feudal survivals’ in China’s economy. Even if Bukharin’s estimate of the Chinese economy were based upon an economic analysis, and not upon scholastic definitions, all the same, ‘feudal survival’ could not justify the policy which so manifestly facilitated the April Coup. The Chinese revolution bears a national bourgeois character for the basic reason that the development of the productive forces of Chinese capitalism is being blocked by China’s state-customs dependence on the imperialist countries” (Trotsky: The Chinese Revolution and Stalin’s Theses) (my emphasis – HB).

No wonder Stalin characterised Trotsky’s viewpoint as “that of a state counsellor of ‘his Highness’ Chang Tso-lin”; As Stalin put it: “If Trotsky’s viewpoint is correct, then it must be admitted that Chang Tso-lin and Chiang Kai-shek are right in not desiring either an agrarian or a workers’ revolution and in striving only for the abolition of the unequal treaties and the establishment of customs autonomy for China” (Stalin’s emphasis).

And further, by way of comparison and summing up the line of the Comintern and of Trotsky, continues Stalin:

“Thus we have two basic lines:

“(a) the line of the Comintern, which takes into account the existence of feudal survivals in China, as the predominant form of oppression, the decisive importance of the powerful agrarian movement, the connection of the feudal survivals with imperialism, and the bourgeois-democratic character of the Chinese revolution with its struggle spearheaded against imperialism;

“(b) the line of Trotsky, which denies the predominant importance of feudal-militarist oppression, fails to appreciate the decisive importance of the agrarian revolutionary movement in China, and attributes the anti-imperialist character of the Chinese revolution solely to the interests of Chinese capitalism, which is demanding customs independence for China.

“The basic error of Trotsky (and hence of the opposition) is that he underestimates the agrarian revolution in China, does not understand the bourgeois-democratic character of that revolution, denies the existence of the preconditions for an agrarian movement in China, embracing many millions, and underestimates the role of the peasantry in the Chinese revolution” (Stalin: Revolution in China and the Tasks of the Comintern, speech delivered at the 10th sitting of the 8th plenum of the ECCI, 24 May 1927).

Trotsky’s under-estimation of the role of the peasantry is hardly new. It follows from his theory of ‘Permanent Revolution’, which alone explains the degeneration of Trotskyism into a counter-revolutionary agency in the service of imperialism.

As Stalin said:

“It is this peculiarity of Trotsky’s scheme – the fact that he sees the bourgeoisie and sees the proletariat, but does not notice the peasantry and does not understand its role in the bourgeois-democratic revolution – it is precisely this peculiarity that constitutes the opposition’s principal error on the Chinese question.

“It is just this that constitutes the ‘semi-Menshevism’ of Trotsky and of the opposition in the question of the character of the Chinese revolution.

“From this principal error stem all the other errors of the opposition, all the confusion in its theses on the Chinese question” (Stalin: Revolution in China and the Tasks of the Comintern, speech delivered on 24th May 1927).

Other errors of Trotskyist opposition

Error 1:

Trotsky’s “logical incongruity” towards Wuhan.

In the period of the all-national united front (the Canton period), particularly the period between 1925 and 12th April 1927, for some time Trotsky and the rest of the opposition demanded that the communists should withdraw from the Kuomintang.

First, a few words about the Kuomintang (KMT) in this period: it was a bloc of several oppressed classes – it was a bloc of the national bourgeoisie, of the urban poor, of the peasantry, of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia, and of the proletariat. It was a bloc of basically four classes. Between 1925 and April 12th, 1927, the national bourgeoisie played a progressive role (of this more later on).

Trotsky demanded that the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) withdraw support from the KMT. Why? Because the bourgeoisie is always counter revolutionary. Trotsky makes the error of comparing the Chinese bourgeoisie (in an oppressed country) with the Russian bourgeoisie (in an imperialist country).

The bourgeoisie of an oppressed country can for a certain period of time, under specific conditions, play a progressive role and become an ally of the proletariat.

Such an alliance is legitimate, as long as the proletariat is not hindered in its work of organising independently among the broad masses of people under its own programme. The fact is that being part of the KMT facilitated the work of the CPC

On 12 April 1927 the right-wing of the KMT, led by Chiang Kai-shek, launched its coup and started massacring the communists. The national bourgeoisie set up its counter-revolutionary centre in Nanking, deserted the camp of revolution and sided with the counter-revolution and imperialism.

Why? It was a) the fear of the Agrarian Revolution; and b) the pressure put on Chiang Kai-shek by imperialism in Shanghai.

Following the desertion by the national bourgeoisie, the left-wing of the KMT set up its headquarters in Wuhan, which became the base for the maximum development of the agrarian revolution, which was led by the CPC.

How did the Trotskyist opposition characterise Wuhan?

Trotsky described it as a “fiction” – and yet did not advocate withdrawal from this “fiction”, of the CPC, which was at the time allied with the left-wing of the KMT in Wuhan.

Permit me to quote a passage from Stalin’s speech, which aptly describes Trotsky’s attitude – “this ‘logical’ incongruity” – towards Wuhan. Here is what Stalin said:

“Let us assume that Wuhan is a fiction. But if Wuhan is a fiction, why does Trotsky not insist on a determined struggle against Wuhan? Since when have communists been supporting fictions, participating in fictions, standing at the head of fictions, and so on? Is it not a fact that the communists are duty bound to fight against fictions? Is it not a fact that if communists refrained from fighting against fictions, it would mean deceiving the proletariat and the peasantry? Why, then, does Trotsky not propose that the communists should fight against this fiction, if only by immediate withdrawal from the Wuhan Kuomintang and the Wuhan Government? Why does Trotsky propose that they should remain within this fiction, and not withdraw from it? Where is the logic in this?

“Is not this ‘logical’ incongruity to be explained by the fact that Trotsky took up a swaggering attitude towards Wuhan and called it a fiction, and then got cold feet and shrank from drawing the appropriate conclusion from his theses?”

Such is the position of Trotsky on the question of Wuhan.

Zinoviev characterised the Wuhan government as a Kemalist government. A Kemalist revolution is a revolution of the upper stratum, of the merchant bourgeoisie against imperialism, which from its very beginning is directed against workers and peasants, a revolution that gets stuck at its very first stage, with the idea of passing into a socialist revolution being entirely out of the question.

Such a government does not fight against feudalism. Therefore, there is no place for communists in such a government. If Wuhan was indeed such a government, the overthrow of such a government was absolutely necessary. “But that is what ordinary people, with ordinary human logic, might think.” (Stalin)

Far from advocating its overthrow, Zinoviev concluded that the most energetic support be given to it!

Here is what Zinoviev said in his thesis, distributed at the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU in April 1927:

“It is necessary to render the most energetic and all round assistance to Hankow [Wuhan was a triple city of Wuchang-Hankow-Hanyang] and to organise resistance from there against the Cavaignacs. In the immediate future efforts should be concentrated precisely on facilitating organisation and consolidation in Hankow.”

Stalin’s comment on this peculiar stand of Zinoviev was: “Understand that if you can!”

Yes, comrades, understand that if you can!

This is how Stalin sums up the confusion of the opposition on the point under discussion:

“What does all this show? It shows that the opposition has got entangled in contradictions. It has lost the capacity to think logically, it has lost all sense of perspective.

“Confusion of mind and loss of all sense of perspective on the Wuhan question – such is the position of Trotsky and the opposition, if confusion can be described as a position at all”.

Error 2:

The opposition’s demand for the establishment of the Soviets while the communists participated in the Wuhan government.

At the very time that the opposition was demanding that the Wuhan government be “energetically” supported (see Zinoviev’s thesis above) it also demanded the immediate establishment of the Soviets of workers’ and peasants’ deputies. But Soviets are organisational centres of revolution – organs of uprising against the existing system. If not, they are bound to degenerate and become empty chat-shops, empty playthings and bound to lead to apathy, indifference and disillusionment among the masses, who quite naturally become fed up with the endless repetition of resolutions and protests.

Such a call in the spring of 1927, when the left-KMT government in Wuhan was revolutionary, would have been tantamount to ‘skipping’ the KMT phase of revolution, endangering the revolution, and rendering inestimable service to Chiang Kai-shek.

The incongruity of participating in Wuhan and yet calling for its overthrow was nothing short of sheer lunacy.

The Trotskyist opposition got entangled in this hopeless contradiction because:

(i) it confused bourgeois-democratic revolution in China with a proletarian revolution,

(ii) it confused the bourgeois-democratic revolution in China with the bourgeois-democratic revolution of February 1917 in Russia, which rendered it blind to the distinction between the bourgeoisie of an oppressed, semi-colonial country, which can, for a limited period of time, play, and did play, a progressive and anti-imperialist role, with the bourgeoisie of an imperialist country such as Russia which could not, and did not, play a progressive role.

Summing up:

the line of the Comintern and the line of the Trotskyist opposition

Here is Stalin’s apt summary of the two lines on the Chinese Revolution.

“And so, we have before us two entirely different lines on the Chinese question – the line of the Comintern and the line of Trotsky and Zinoviev.

“The line of the Comintern

“Feudal survivals, and the bureaucratic-militarist superstructure which rests upon them and which receives every support from the imperialists of all countries, are the basic fact of Chinese life today.

“China at the present moment is passing through an agrarian revolution directed both against the feudal survivals and against imperialism.

“The agrarian revolution constitutes the basis and content of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in China.

“The Kuomintang in Wuhan and the Wuhan government are the centre of the bourgeois-democratic revolutionary movement.

“Nanking and the Nanking government are the centre of national counter-revolution.

“The policy of supporting Wuhan is at the same time a policy of developing the bourgeois-democratic revolution, with all the consequences resulting from that. Hence the participation of the Communists in the Wuhan Kuomintang and in the Wuhan revolutionary government, a participation which does not exclude, but rather presupposes strenuous criticism by the Communists of the half-heartedness and vacillation of their allies in the Kuomintang.

“The Communists must utilise this participation to facilitate the proletariat’s role of hegemon in the Chinese bourgeois-democratic revolution, and to hasten the moment of transition to the proletarian revolution.

“When the moment of the complete victory of the bourgeois-democratic revolution approaches, and when, in the course of the bourgeois revolution, the paths of transition to the proletarian revolution become clear, the time will have arrived when it is necessary to set up Soviets of workers’, peasants’ and soldiers’ deputies, as elements of a dual power, as organs of struggle for a new power, as organs of a new power, Soviet power.

“When that time comes the Communists must replace the bloc within the Kuomintang by a bloc outside the Kuomintang, and the Communist Party must become the sole leader of the new revolution in China.

“To propose now, as Trotsky and Zinoviev do, the immediate formation of Soviets of workers’ and peasants’ deputies and the immediate establishment of dual power now, when the bourgeois- democratic revolution is still in the initial phase of its development, and when the Kuomintang represents the form of organisation of the national-democratic revolution best adapted and most closely corresponding to the specific features of China, would be to disorganise the revolutionary movement, weaken Wuhan, facilitate its downfall, and render assistance to Chang Tso-lin and Chiang Kai-shek.

“The line of Trotsky and Zinoviev

“Feudal survivals in China are a figment of Bukharin’s imagination. They either do not exist at all in China, or are so insignificant that they cannot have any serious importance.

“There does appear to be an agrarian revolution in China at this moment. But where it comes from, the devil only knows (laughter).

“But since there is this agrarian revolution, it must, of course, be supported somehow.

“The chief thing just now is not the agrarian revolution, but a revolution for the customs independence of China, an anti-customs revolution, so to speak.

“The Wuhan Kuomintang and the Wuhan government are either a ‘fiction’ (Trotsky) or Kemalism (Zinoviev).

“On the one hand, dual power must be established for overthrowing the Wuhan government through the immediate formation of Soviets (Trotsky). On the other hand, the Wuhan government must be strengthened, it must be given energetic and all round assistance, also, it appears, through the immediate formation of Soviets (Zinoviev).

“By rights, the Communists ought to withdraw immediately from this ‘fiction’, i.e. in the Wuhan government and the Wuhan Kuomintang. Why they should remain in Wuhan if Wuhan is a ‘fiction’? That, it seems, God alone knows. And whoever does not agree with this, is a betrayer and a traitor [my emphasis - HB]

“Such is the so-called line of Trotsky and Zinoviev.

“Anything more grotesque and confused than this so-called line it would be hard to imagine.

“One gets the impression that one is dealing not with Marxists but with some sort of bureaucrats who are completely divorced from real life – or, still more, with ‘revolutionary’ tourists, who have been busy touring about Sukhum and Kislovodsk and such-like places, overlooked the Seventh Enlarged Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Comintern, which defined the basic attitude towards the Chinese revolution and then, having learned from the newspapers that some sort of a revolution – whether agrarian or anti-customs, they were not quite clear – was really taking place in China, they decided that it was necessary to compile a whole heap of theses – one set in April, another in the early part of May, a third in the latter part of May – and having done so, they bombard the Executive Committee of the Comintern with them, apparently believing that a plethora of confused and contradictory theses is the best means of saving the Chinese revolution [my emphasis - HB].

“Such, comrades, are the lines on the question of the Chinese revolution.

“You will have to choose between them”.

Trotskyism chooses “inappropriate moments” to launch attacks on the communist movement

Comrade Stalin ended his speech with the following words:

“I must say, comrades, that Trotsky has chosen an inappropriate moment for his attacks on the Party and the Comintern. I have just received information that the British Conservative government has decided to break off relations with the USSR. There is no need to prove that this will be followed by a universal campaign against the Communists. This campaign has already begun. Some are threatening the CPSU(B) with war and intervention. Others threaten it with split. Something like a united front from Chamberlain to Trotsky is being formed” [my emphasis - HB].

“It is possible that they want to frighten us. But it scarcely needs proof that Bolsheviks are not the sort to be frightened. The history of Bolshevism knows plenty of such ‘fronts’. The history of Bolshevism shows that such ‘fronts’ have invariably been smashed by the revolutionary determination and supreme courage of the Bolsheviks.

“You need have no doubt that we shall succeed in smashing this new ‘front’ too” (Applause).

Trotskyism had a long history of choosing inappropriate moments to launch attacks on Leninism – on Bolshevism. It did this regularly from 1905 onwards all the way through to the 1920s and 1930s.

Reasons for the opposition’s mistakes: Tactics

In addition to its bankrupt programme concerning the prospect of the Chinese Revolution, the Opposition proved equally bankrupt on matters of tactics.

The first tactical principle of Leninism: consider the nationally peculiar features of a given country

Confusing the Chinese Revolution with the Russian Revolution, the opposition came up with the slogan in April 1926: No alliance with the Chinese bourgeoisie, when in the Canton Period the Chinese bourgeoisie played a progressive role and the national army reached Yang Tse, thus extending the revolutionary area enormously.

As a result of these victories, the opposition retreated, renounced its old formula and adopted a ‘new’ one, that is, the CPC must not withdraw from the KMT – that was the first punishment that befell the opposition for failing to take into account the national peculiarities of the Chinese revolution.

A second example: The opposition did not understand that the Chinese revolution was anti-imperialist, precisely because imperialism inspired, preserved and supported the immediate (feudal) exploiters of the Chinese people. When tens of million of peasants became involved in the mass agrarian movement directed against feudalism and imperialism, the opposition was once again forced to admit that it had been wrong and retreat. This was the second punishment that befell the opposition.

A third example: In China the merchant bourgeoisie were buying land and leasing it to the Chinese peasantry. Since the merchant was not a feudal lord, the opposition came out with a ready-made formula that feudalism and feudal survivals were of no consequence, that the Chinese Revolution was not an agrarian revolution directed, first and foremost, against feudalism, but a revolution for customs autonomy. The opposition forgot that it was feudalism that exploited the Chinese people, that the entire military-bureaucratic structure in China rested on the domination of feudal survivals. Again, in consequence of mass participation if tens if millions of peasants in the anti-feudal and anti-imperialist struggle, the opposition had to retreat. That was the third punishment that befell the opposition.

As Stalin commented “Disharmony between formulas and reality – such is the lot of the oppositionist pseudo-leaders” (my emphasis – HB).

The second tactical principle of Leninism: the question of allies

The proletariat cannot do without allies. But these allies must be mass allies, who do not prevent the proletariat from organising itself independently, who do not prevent the communist party from organising the proletariat and the broad masses of peasants, and rousing them to revolution, who would not in any way restrict its propaganda.

Subject to these conditions, the proletariat must avail itself of every opportunity to gain for itself a mass ally, even if such a mass ally is a temporary, weak, vacillating, unstable and an unreliable ally. Such is the essence of the second tactical principle of Leninism. Did the Chinese proletariat have such allies? Yes, it did.

In the first stage of the revolution (the Canton Period – the period of an all-nation United Front), these allies were: (i) the national bourgeoisie; (ii) the urban poor; (iii) the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia, and (iv) the peasantry.

During this period, the KMT was a mass organisation and a revolutionary force. At that time Canton was the centre of revolutionary struggle against imperialism.

What were the achievements of this period? The achievements of this period were:

(1) The extension of the territory of the revolution: the revolutionary troops reached as far as the Yangtze;

(2) The Chinese proletariat got a chance of openly organising itself. The CPC gained the possibility of openly organising the proletariat in trade unions, strike-committees, etc;

(3) The Chinese communists were able to form themselves from different groups into a mass party of five or six thousand people;

(4) The Chinese proletariat was able to create the first nuclei of the peasants’ organisations, the peasants’ associations; and

(5) The CPC was able to penetrate into the Army.

For the CPC, which at the time was a relatively small force, these were enormous gains.

On 12 April 1927, the national bourgeoisie deserted the revolution and established a counter-revolutionary centre in Nanking. At this point in time the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia sided with the revolution, and a revolutionary centre was set up in Wuhan.

In this period the allies of the proletariat were: (i) the peasantry; (ii) the urban poor, and (iii) the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia. It would have been wrong during this period, when the left-wing of the KMT had not yet disgraced itself, to have withdrawn from the Wuhan KMT; Wuhan at this time was the centre of the revolution.

The gains of the Wuhan period were:

(1) The Communist Party, from being an insignificant party of 5,000 to 6,000 members became a party comprising 50,000 or 60,000 members

(2) Trade unions grew into a tremendous force and they came to include 3 million members;

(3) Peasants’ organisations expanded to include several tens of millions of peasants in them;

(4) The Communist Party gained the possibility of openly organising the revolution;

(5) The Communist Party and the proletariat began to change from just being an insignificant factor into the hegemon of the Chinese Revolution. It became the most important factor of the revolution, rallying around itself the masses of the Chinese people.

Such were the achievements of this period.

A correct policy cannot by itself guarantee victory

When the Wuhan Kuomintang, when the left Kuomintang, deserted the revolution, the Trotskyist opposition started saying that this was because the Communist International had followed a wrong policy. But a correct policy cannot by itself guarantee victory. What is required for success to be achieved is not only a correct policy, but also a favourable balance of class forces. If the forces of reaction are stronger, the revolution may be defeated even though it is guided by a correct policy. One thing, however, is certain: for success to be achieved, in addition to a favourable balance of class forces, a correct policy, a correct programme and tactics, are necessary.

This is what Stalin had to say on the question under consideration:

“The opposition ascribes the temporary defeat of the revolution [in China - HB] to the Comintern’s policy.” But “only people who have broken with Marxism can say that. Only people who have broken with Marxism can demand that a correct policy should always and necessarily lead to immediate victory over the enemy” (Stalin: Notes on Contemporary Themes – China, ‘Pravda’, July 28th 1927)

And further:

“A correct policy is by no means bound to lead always and without fail to direct victory over the enemy. Direct victory over the enemy is not determined by correct policy alone: it is determined first and foremost by the correlation of the class forces, by a marked preponderance of strength on the side of the revolution, by disintegration in the enemy’s camp, by a favourable international situation.

“Only given those conditions can a correct policy of the proletariat lead to direct victory.

“But there is one obligatory requirement which a correct policy must satisfy always and under all conditions. That requirement is that the party’s policy must enhance the fighting capacity of the proletariat, multiply its ties with the labouring masses, increase its prestige among these masses, and convert the proletariat into the hegemon of the revolution.

“Can it be affirmed that this past period has presented the maximum favourable conditions for the direct victory of the revolution in China? Clearly, it cannot.

“Can it be affirmed that Communist policy in China has not enhanced the fighting capacity of the proletariat, has not multiplied its ties with the broad masses, and has not increased its prestige among these masses? Clearly, it cannot.

“Only the blind could fail to see that the Chinese proletariat has succeeded in this period in severing the broad masses of the peasantry both from the national bourgeoisie and from the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia, so as to rally them around its own standard” (Stalin, ibid; my emphasis – HB).

Owing to the correct policy pursued by the CPC during this period, its ties with the broad masses and its prestige among them increased enormously. Even the Trotskyist opposition, during this period, declared that it was correct for the CPC to pursue the policy of a revolutionary bloc with the Wuhan KMT.

But as soon as Wuhan deserted the revolution, and because of this desertion, the opposition began to assert that the policy of a bloc with the Wuhan KMT was incorrect and sought to attribute the temporary defeat of the Chinese Revolution to the policy of the Comintern, thus showing its spinelessness, its break with Marxism and departure from the second tactical principle of Leninism – the need for the proletariat to secure for itself mass allies.

The third tactical principle: the question of educating the masses

This concerns the question of educating the masses; the question of how a slogan for the party can become a slogan for the masses. How must the communists lead the masses to revolutionary positions, so that they (the masses) become convinced by their own political experience of the correctness of the Party’s slogan? How must the Communist Party lead the masses in order to turn a formula, a perspective for the immediate future, into a formula as a slogan of the day? How must the communists really act? This is of particular importance.

Trotskyites will always tell you “we were the first to tell you that the national bourgeoisie will desert”. Comrades, it isn’t a question of playing a game, it is not a question at all of who was the first one to tell us that the national bourgeoisie will desert. That is absolutely stupid. The question is what policy you advocate at a given particular time – a policy which is suited to the situation, and which neither runs too far ahead of the masses, nor lags behind them. If you are issuing a slogan long before the masses will accept it then it isn’t good enough for you at a later date to say that you were the first one to issue that particular slogan.

The communist party must see further than the masses, but at the same time it must not run far ahead of them. If the communist party follows the tactics of perpetually overshooting or undershooting, such tactics cannot be called long-range tactics; these are haphazard tactics.

The conception of the United Front advocated

The opposition never tired of referring to a single telegram sent by the Comintern in October 1926, which said: “Until Shanghai is captured, the agrarian movement should not be intensified”.

This telegram was wrong and Stalin admitted that it was. And the Comintern cancelled it within five weeks of its despatch.

The facts need to be noted in regard to this telegram:

1. It was the Communist International and Stalin who were responsible for cancelling this telegram and not the opposition;

2. The first time the opposition ever raised this matter of the telegram, was nine months after this telegram had actually been cancelled.

This telegram was an isolated, episodic affair; completely uncharacteristic of the line impressed on the CPC by the Comintern.

The line of the Comintern is contained in a number of well known documents which are conveniently ignored by the Trotskyite and other falsifiers of history.

In these the Comintern calls upon the CPC to “consolidate its alliance with the peasantry”, to “put forward a radical agrarian programme” and to identify itself “with the agrarian revolution”.

Here is an excerpt from the resolution (a document which really defines the line of the Comintern) of the Seventh Plenum of the Comintern, in November 1926, that is a month after the above- mentioned telegram:

“The peculiar feature of the present situation is its transitional character, the fact that the proletariat must choose between the prospect of a bloc with considerable sections of the bourgeoisie and the prospect of further consolidating its alliance with the peasantry. If the proletariat fails to put forward a radical agrarian programme, it will be unable to draw the peasantry into revolutionary struggle and will forfeit its hegemony in the national liberation move-ment” (‘Resolution of the Seventh Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International’) (my emphasis – HB).

And further:

“The Canton People’s Government will not be able to retain power in the revolution, will not be able to achieve complete victory over foreign imperialism and native reaction until the cause of national liberation is identified with the agrarian revolution” (my emphasis – HB).

Allow me to quote some passages from the speech that Stalin made in November of the same year – 1926. Stalin’s speech was published under the heading The prospects of the revolution in China. It is this speech, and not the above telegram, which is characteristic of the line of Stalin and that of the Comintern on the Chinese Revolution.

Here is what Stalin said in his speech:

“I know that there are Kuomintangists and even Chinese communists who do not consider it possible to unleash revolution in the countryside, since they fear that if the peasantry were drawn into the revolution it would disrupt the united anti-imperialist front. That is a profound error, comrades. The more quickly and thoroughly the Chinese peasantry is drawn into the revolution, the stronger and more powerful the anti-imperialist front in China will be.”

And further:

“I know that among the Chinese communists there are comrades who do not approve of workers going on strike for an improvement of their material conditions and legal status, and who try to dissuade the workers from striking. (A voice: ‘That happened in Canton and Shanghai’) That is a great mistake, comrades. It is a very serious underestimation of the role and importance of the Chinese proletariat. This fact should be noted in the theses as something decidedly objectionable. It would be a great mistake if the Chinese communists failed to take advantage of the present favourable situation to assist the workers to improve their material conditions and legal status, even through strikes. Otherwise, what purpose does the revolution in China serve?” (Stalin: The Prospects of the Revolution in China).

Here is a third document of December 1926 which was sent to the CPC by the Communist International:

“A general policy of retreat in the towns and of curtailing the workers’ struggle to improve their conditions would be wrong. The struggle in the countryside must be extended, but at the same time advantage must be taken of the favourable situation to improve the material conditions and legal status of the workers, while striving in every way to lend the workers’ struggle an organised character, which precludes excesses or running too far ahead. Special efforts must be exerted to direct the struggle in the towns against the big bourgeoisie and, above all, against the imperialists, so as to keep the Chinese petty bourgeoisie and middle bourgeoisie as far as possible within the framework of the united front against the common enemy. We regard the system of conciliation boards, arbitration courts, etc., as expedient, provided a correct working-class policy is ensured in these institutions. At the same time we think it necessary to utter the warning that decrees directed against the right to strike, against workers’ freedom of assembly, etc., are absolutely impermissible”.

Here is a fourth document issued six seeks before Chiang Kai-shek’s coup:

“The work of the Kuomintang and the Communist units in the army must be intensified; they must be organised wherever they do not now exist and it is possible to organise them; where it is not possible to organise communist units, intensified work must be conducted with the help of concealed communists.

“It is necessary to adopt the course of arming the workers and peasants and converting the peasant committees in the localities into actual organs of governmental authority equipped with armed self-defence, etc.

“The Communist Party must everywhere come forward as such; a policy of voluntary semi-legality is impermissible; the Communist Party must not come forward as a brake on the mass movement; the Communist Party should not cover up the treacherous and reactionary policy of the Kuomintang Rights, and should mobilise the masses around the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party on the basis of exposing the Rights.

“The attention of all political workers who are loyal to the revolution must be drawn to the fact that at the present time, in connection with the regrouping of class forces and concentration of the imperialist armies, the Chinese revolution is passing through a critical period, and that it can achieve further victories only by resolutely adopting the course of developing the mass movement. Otherwise a tremendous danger threatens the revolution. The fulfilment of directives is therefore most necessary than ever before” (Stalin: About China, the International Situation and the Defence of the USSR, 1927, CW Vol X).

In fact, as early as April 1926, a year before the coup staged by the Kuomintang Rights and Chiang Kai-shek, the Comintern had warned the Chinese Communist Party, and pointed out that it was necessary to work for the “resignation or expulsion of the Rights from the Kuomintang”.

The above documents clearly reveal the Comintern tactics of a United Front against imperialism during the first stage – the Canton period – of the Chinese Revolution, when the revolution was striking its blows chiefly at foreign imperialism, and when the national bourgeoisie found itself in the revolutionary camp and supported the revolutionary movement.

All these documents were known to the opposition, but it carefully avoided mentioning them. As Stalin said: “Why does it [the opposition] say nothing about them [the above documents]? Because its aim is to raise a squabble, not to bring out the truth” (Speech to a Joint Plenum of the Central Committee of the Central Control Commission of the CPSU, 1 August 1927).

Stalin went on to refer to the February- March 1926 Sixth Plenum of the Comintern at which a unanimous resolution was passed, and which gave approximately the same estimate of the first stage of the Chinese Revolution (the Canton period) as given by the Comintern, which the opposition repudiated a year later. Zinoviev voted for this resolution, and not a single member of the CC of the Comintern, not even Trotsky, Kamenev or other leaders of the opposition, objected to it.

The second stage of the Chinese Revolution: the Wuhan period

The opposition was to assert that the Comintern had failed to warn the CPC of the possible desertion of the left Kuomintang to the side of counter-revolution. This assertion is refuted by two documents of May 1927, in which the Comintern impressed on the CPC the need to develop the agrarian revolution systematically; to organise eight or ten divisions of revolutionary peasants and workers with absolutely reliable officers; to organise and intensity disintegrating activities in the rear and in Chiang Kai-shek’s units; and to draw in new peasant and working-class leaders into the CC of the KMT, in order that their bold voices may stiffen the backs of the old leaders or effect their removal.

“Dependence upon unreliable generals must be eliminated. Mobilise about 20,000 communists, and about 50,000 revolutionary workers and peasants from Hunan and Hupeh, form several new army corps, use the students at the officers’ school as commanders and organise your own reliable army before it is too late. If this is not done there is no guarantee against failure. It is a difficult matter, but there is no alternative.

“Organise a Revolutionary Military Tribunal headed by prominent non-communist Kuomintangists. Punish officers who maintain contact with Chiang Kai-shek or who incite the soldiers against the people, the workers and peasants. Persuasion is not enough. It is time to act. Scoundrels must be punished. If the Kuomintangists do not learn to be revolutionary Jacobins they will perish so far as the people and the revolution are concerned” (see Stalin’s speech of 1st August 1927) (Stalin’s emphases).

Summation of the Errors of the Opposition

At this stage, it would be extremely useful to sum up the errors of the Trotskyist opposition on the question of the Chinese Revolution in the following words of Stalin:

“The chief mistakes of the opposition are:

“(1) The opposition does not understand the character and prospects of the Chinese Revolution;

“(2) The opposition sees no difference between the revolution in China and the revolution in Russia, between revolution in colonial countries and revolution in imperialist countries;

“(3) The opposition is departing from Leninist tactics, on the question of the attitude to the national bourgeoisie in colonial countries at the first stage of the revolution;

“(4) The opposition does not understand the question of the Communists’ participation in the Kuomintang;

“(5) The opposition is violating the principles of Leninist tactics on the question of the relations between the vanguard (the party) and the rearguard (the vast masses of the working people);

“(6) The opposition is departing from the resolutions of the Sixth and Seventh Plenums of the Executive Committee of the Communist International”.

Continues Stalin:

“The opposition noisily brags about its policy on the Chinese question and asserts that if that policy had been adopted the situation in China today [i.e. August 1st, 1927 - HB] would be better than it is. It scarcely needs proof that, considering the gross mistakes committed by the opposition, the Chinese Communist Party would have landed in a complete impasse had it adopted the anti-Leninist and adventurist policy of the opposition [my emphasis - HB].

“The fact that the Communist Party of China has in a short period grown from a small group of five or six thousand into a mass party of 60,000 members; the fact that the CPC has succeeded in organising nearly 3,000,000 proletarians in trade unions during the period; the fact that the CPC has succeeded in rousing the many millions of the peasantry from their torpor and in drawing tens of millions of peasants into the revolutionary peasant associations; the fact that the CPC has succeeded during this period in winning over whole regiments and divisions of national troops; the fact that the CPC has succeeded during this period in converting the idea of the hegemony of the proletariat from an aspiration into a reality – the fact that the CPC has succeeded in a short period in achieving all these gains is due, among other things, to its having followed the path outlined by Lenin, the path indicated by the Comintern.

“Needless to say, if the policy of the opposition, with its mistakes and anti-Leninist line on questions of colonial revolution, had been followed, these gains of the Chinese revolution would either not have been achieved at all, or would have been extremely insignificant.

“Only ‘ultra-left’ renegades and advent-urers can doubt this” (ibid) (my emphasis – HB).

Defeats of 1927 mainly due to opportunism of the Chen Tu-hsiu clique

The CPC’s successes and failures closely related to whether or not it adhered to the line of the Comintern and of Stalin.

Headed by the notorious Chen Tu-hsiu, the CPC at the time failed to deepen the agrarian revolution and thoroughly expose the KMT right.

Soon after the defeats of 1927, Chen Tu-hsiu was defeated, after which he made an unsuccessful attempt to launch a Trotskyist movement in China, and on 10 December 1929 made a statement that it was necessary to “work undeviatingly on the side of the international opposition led by Comrade Trotsky”.

As to the defeats of 1927, which were due to the failure of the CPC, under his leadership, to carry out the policy advocated by the Comintern and Stalin, he attempted to whitewash his own opportunist role and blame Stalin for it with this malicious slander:

“I [Chen Tu-hsiu], whose understanding was not sufficiently clear, whose opinion was not sufficiently resolute, deeply mired in the atmosphere of opportunism, sincerely supported the opportunist policy of the Third International. I unconsciously became an instrument of the narrow Stalin faction; I did not have an opportunity to develop; I could not save the party; I could not save the revolution…”.

The malicious lies in the above statement are refuted not only by the subsequent victorious path traversed by the Chinese Revolution under the brilliant leadership of Mao Zedong, but also the following statement which the Executive Committee of the CPC issued on 7 August 1927 by way of self-criticism.

“The Communist International has repeatedly instructed the CPC to fight for the improvement of the material conditions of the working masses. … At the same time, the Communist International points out that it is necessary to arm the workers speedily, boldly and resolutely, especially those elements which are most class-conscious and best organised. … But the leading organ of our Party has developed a different course. It has simply hindered and minimised the class struggle and the revolutionary actions of the workers. Instead of spreading and promoting strike movements, the Central Committee, together with the leaders of the Kuomintang, decided on an arbitrary method of mediation and ruled that the final authority belonged to the government. Under the government of a coalition of classes, led at this first stage by the bourgeoisie, this kind of policy actually served merely to protect the interests of the bourgeoisie and greatly obstructed the workers’ movement. …

“The agrarian revolution is the crux of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in China. The Communist International has repeatedly explained itself concerning this question.

“The relation between the Party and the Communist International was also not in accordance with accepted organisational procedure. There has never been a case in the history of the Communist International where the instructions and resolutions were actually rejected in such a critical situation. This was no longer merely a simple breach of discipline, but a criminal act against the Chinese and International Communist movement. … The Chinese Communist Party not only carried out an erroneous policy, a policy that brought the revolution to defeat, that voluntarily liquidated the revolution and capitulated to the enemy, but also would not admit its errors and obey the instructions of the Communist International…” (my emphasis – HB).

The truth contained in the above statement of the CPC is further corroborated by the following extract borrowed from the pamphlet, Stalin and the Chinese Revolution, by Chen Po-ta:

“The Chen Tu-hsiu opportunism of 1927 was precisely opposed to this dialectical analysis [of the character of the Chinese Revolution, according to which the Chinese Revolution was of an anti-feudal as well as an anti-imperialist nature - HB] by Stalin. The Chen Tu-hsiu opportunism later merged with counter-revolutionary Trotskyism. This is well known and will not be dwelt on further.”

The opportunists in the CPC went so far as to suppress Stalin’s writings on the Chinese Revolution. “Both in 1927 when Chen Tu-hsiu was in power and afterwards, the opportunists either intentionally or unintentionally obstructed the dissemination inside the Chinese Party of Stalin’s many works on the Chinese question” (Chen Po-ta, ibid).

“It should be pointed out in this connection that during the twenty-odd years since 1927, the errors of both Right and ‘Left’ opportunism which occurred within our party were usually, in the first place, violations of this dialectical analysis by Stalin regarding the nature of the revolution, by overlooking either the anti-imperialist or the anti-feudal aspect” (Chen Po-ta writing in 1949, ibid).

During the ten-year civil war period, the ‘left’ opportunists, forgetting the anti-imperialist character of the Chinese Revolution, opposed the policy of joining the anti-imperialist united front.

However, during the Resistance to Japanese aggression, these ‘left’ opportunists transformed themselves into right opportunists, coming to hold views akin to those held by Chen Tu-hsiu. They failed to realise the decisive significance of deepening the agrarian movement.

Stalin had precisely these people in mind when he said that:

“I know that there are … even Chinese communists who do not consider it possible to unleash revolution in the countryside, since they fear that if the peasantry were drawn into the revolution it would disrupt the united anti-imperialist front”.

They forgot the Leninist teaching of Stalin that “the anti-imperialist front in China will become stronger and more powerful, the sooner and more solidly the Chinese peasantry is drawn into the revolution”.

They advocated giving up the leadership of the proletariat. They “saw only the bourgeoisie” and failed to see a future victory of the people’s democratic revolution and that of socialism. They forgot the Leninist teaching of Stalin and of the Comintern on the Chinese Revolution that “the role of the initiator and leader of the Chinese Revolution, the role of the leader of the Chinese peasantry must inevitably fall to the Chinese proletariat and its party”.

Mao Zedong applied the Comintern line to China

It is indeed the great merit of Mao Zedong that he fought courageously against the ‘Left’ and Right opportunist deviations within the CPC; that he fought for the implementation of the Leninist policy advocated by the Comintern and by Stalin; that he delivered crushing blows at the dogmatists and the Rightists in the Chinese Party; and above all, that, he, in a most creative way applied the Comintern line to the situation in China and in so doing further developed it to a still higher stage. It was this skilful integration, by the CPC, under the brilliant leadership of Mao Zedong, of the line of the Comintern with the concrete practice of the Chinese Revolution which, among other things, led to the success of the Chinese Revolution.

Under the brilliant leadership of Comrade Mao Zedong, the CPC never for a moment ignored either the anti-imperialist or the anti-feudal aspect of the Chinese Revolution. While carrying out its task of leading the peasantry in the agrarian revolution, it never missed an opportunity of broadening the anti-imperialist front of the Chinese Revolution by forming a national united front, thereby also overcoming the isolation of the agrarian revolution. The formation in 1937 of the anti-imperialist front at the insistence of the CPC was a culmination of the brilliant tactics of the CPC under the wise leadership of Comrade Mao Zedong.

The fact that the Chiang Kai-shek bandits were forced to agree to a united front with the Communist Party in order to wage the War of Resistance of the Chinese people against Japanese aggression was a brilliant victory for the line of Mao Zedong, for the line of Stalin and that of the Comintern. It was at the same time a refutation of the counter-revolutionary nonsense of the Trotskyites.

It is also the great merit of Mao Zedong that under his leadership, the CPC avoided the mistakes of the 1927 period and firmly upheld the principle of the independence of the Communist Party within the Anti-Japanese United Front as well as the principle of rousing the peasantry to revolution. The CPC, under the leadership of Mao Zedong, fought against the dogmatists when they opposed the formation of the United Front and advocated “overthrowing everybody”. Comrade Mao Zedong addressed the dogmatists thus:

“You cannot overthrow those in power, so you want to overthrow those who are not in power. They are already out of power, yet, you still want to overthrow them.”

The CPC also fought against the dogmatists when, during the War of Resistance against Japan, the latter swung over to advocating “unity with everybody”.

So, it was by following the correct Marxist-Leninist line in regard to the nature of the Chinese Revolution and in the matter of tactics that the CPC, under the correct leadership of Comrade Mao Zedong, was able to lead the Chinese people successfully to achieve the People’s Democratic Revolution and then pass over to achieve socialism in China.

Had the counter-revolutionary jumble, advocated by the Trotskyite opposition, been followed by the CPC, it would certainly have meant either the victory of imperialism or the establishment of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in China. It could on no account result in the establishment of the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry under the leadership of the proletariat, leading in course of time to the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

To those who sow dissension between the lines of Mao Zedong and of Stalin

There are many Trotskyites, as well as those who are not Trotskyites, who assert that there were fundamental differences between Comrade Stalin and Comrade Mao Zedong; that Stalin did not render any assistance to the Chinese Revolution and that he tried his best to betray the cause of the liberation of the Chinese people. In view of these persistent slanders and misrepresentations, I find it necessary to conclude my speech this afternoon with a few remarks that Comrade Mao Zedong made in a speech delivered by him on December 20th, 1939, on the occasion of the 60th birthday of Stalin. This is what he said:

“However, there are friends of another kind, friends who have real sympathy with us and regard us as brothers. Who are they? They are the Soviet people and Stalin.

“No other country has renounced its privileges in China; the Soviet Union alone has done so.

“All the imperialists opposed us during our First Great Revolution; the Soviet Union alone helped us.

“No government of any imperialist country has given us real help since the outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japan; the Soviet Union alone has helped China with its aviation and supplies.

“Is not the point clear enough?

“Only the land of socialism, its leaders and people, and socialist thinkers, statesmen and workers can give real help to the cause of liberation of the Chinese nation and the Chinese people, and without their help our cause cannot win final victory.

“Stalin is the true friend of the cause of liberation of the Chinese people. No attempt to sow dissension, no lies and calumnies, can affect the Chinese people’s whole-hearted love and respect for Stalin and our genuine friendship for the Soviet Union”. (Mao Zedong: Selected Works).

No comment is necessary. These remarks of Comrade Mao Zedong, the leader of the victorious Chinese Revolution, are more than sufficient to refute the campaign of lies of the open, and hidden, Trotskyites, who have been doing their best to “sow dissension” and cause confusion, who have been trying their best to represent the revolutionary line of Mao Zedong as being different from the revolutionary line of Stalin; these remarks are more than sufficient to refute the slanderous propaganda, of ‘friends’ and enemies alike, against Stalin.

Cuba and Venezuela are Flirting with Death!

Lenin1917 — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:16:46 +0000

by John Paul Cupp … link

Both of the Castro brothers and Hugo Chavez have made considerable gains in the fight against capitalism and imperialism, but while both countries have historically been allies of the anti-imperialist struggle, neither is genuinely revolutionary today. This has caused many of their allies and all sorts of anti-American and anti-war agitators to gloss over the direction both are going. Sentimental connections with Che Guevara have lots of people not noticing the social democratic and Trotskyite scum who are rapidly seizing openings in both countries, scum Guevara would have ensured were executed. It isn’t an accident that Chavez praised Trotsky, nor that this Zionist-cosmopolitan bastardization of true Marxism is allowed into Cuba as if it were another revolutionary anti-imperialist tendency. Cuba nor Venezuela is moving in a genuinely socialist direction, though both are objectively anti-imperialist and have good bases of support among the workers.

It isn’t an accident that Barack Obama is cuddling up to Cuba and Venezuela. This isn’t because Obama is a “socialist” as the right-wing media proclaim or because either of the two countries has won some dynamic struggle against the US imperialists, and hence forced Obama to his knees. Rather, both have taken a direction similar to Iran in that they are willing to forgo revolutionary anti-imperialism for social democratic foreign policies and drop anti-Americanism in exchange for the US simply moving against more dynamically anti-imperialist forces, namely north Korea, Myanmar, Sudan, the People’s Wars in the Philippines and Colombia and the Jihads against occupation throughout the Arab world and Afghanistan. Both Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez were talking counterrevolutionary nonsense when they attacked the FARC-EP, and both have been around Latin American geopolitics long enough to know that they were committing treason against principles in order to get sanctions and conspiracies by the US imperialists removed. Both know full well that no room for “political struggle” short of armed resistance exists in Colombia, and all too well understand that this beachhead of imperialism in Latin American literally assassinates at will as the US pours in tens of billions of dollars more.
The revolutionary vanguard in Latin America today, not just in Colombia, is the FARC-EP. Material conditions force them to remain true to the principles of People’s War and wage a dynamic patriotic struggle for socialism, national liberation and Bolivarian unification that absolutely isn’t going to come about because of any project Chavez leads.

It’s good that Cuba promotes literacy and health care, but that isn’t remotely as relevant as national struggle and class warfare. Anti-imperialist principles come first. The illusions must be smashed!

We should not take the same dogmatic Maoist anti-Chavez and anti-Cuba lines that many revolutionaries have, but we shouldn’t deny a lot of the good points made in such arguments either. Solidarity and criticism are a synthesis that should be properly balanced. Recognizing that these regimes have a right to be masters of their own course and destiny is not the same thing at all as pretending that either country is developing genuine models of resistance as both claim to be doing. We should support both Venezuela and Cuba against imperialism and realize both are far more good than bad, but we also shouldn’t pretend reformist and social democratic traits are revolutionary.

Ultimately, both countries are oppressed people with a history of resisting imperialism. However, both regimes, especially Cuba being just ninety miles from the US with a well-funded pro-imperialist opposition, risk being totally destroyed if they attempt to build a Latin American version of Deng Xiaoping’s China. Taking a pragmatic approach to US imperialism, regardless of the current president’s skin color, is like asking to be shot in the head. Unless you have a Jewish-sounding last name, US imperialism isn’t your friend and never will be!

Communists Celebrate Anniversary of Bolshevik Revolution

Iron Bolshevik — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:39:19 +0000

92nd Anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution!

Free Media Productions Staff — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:36:22 +0000

Division Between Anti-Capitalists

Metal Gear — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:18:55 +0000

Third Positionists oppose liberal capitalism on grounds that it is bad for the nation (fascism) or libertarian interests (anarchism).

Marxists, however, oppose it on grounds that it will create a class war, which the lower class will win.

Of course history has disproven the inevitably of Marx’s predictions. Marxists should just admit that real life Communist leaders were all revisionists, even Stalin and Mao, because real Marxism doesn’t and never did work.

Margot Honecker – Victory to Socialism!

Hekkenschroeder — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:19:32 +0000

Video of Margot Honecker and Comrades celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of the founding of the German Democratic Republic (GDR).

Hoxha on the 1956 Hungarian Counter-Revolution

Hekkenschroeder — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:41:38 +0000

October 23 marked the 53rd anniversary of the 1956 counter-revolutionary riots in Hungary. On this occasion, proto-fascist puppet forces under the command of Titoite loyalists and the NATO-imperialist bloc attempted to quell the growth and development of socialism and people’s democracy in Hungary in a reactionary campaign to bring back to power the deposed fascists.

Here’s what Comrade Hoxha had to say on the subject in a speech delivered before 81 other Communist and Workers Parties in November 1960:

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/nov1960.htm

In our opinion, the counter-revolution in Hungary was mainly the work of the Titoites. In Tito and the Belgrade renegades, the U.S. imperialists had their best weapon to destroy the people’s democracy in Hungary.

After comrade Khrushchev’s visit to Belgrade in 1955, no more was said about Tito’s undermining activity. The counter-revolution in Hungary did not break out unexpectedly. It was prepared for, we might say, quite openly, and it would be futile for any one to try to convince us that this counter-revolution was prepared in great secrecy. This counter-revolution was prepared by the agents of the Tito gang in collusion with the traitor Imre Nagy, in collusion with the Hungarian fascists and all of them acted openly under the direction of the Americans.

The scheme of the Titoites, who were the leaders, was for Hungary to be detached from our socialist camp, to be turned into a second Yugoslavia, be linked in alliance with NATO through Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey, to receive aid from the U.S.A. and, together with Yugoslavia and under the direction of the imperialists, to continue the struggle against the socialist camp.

The counter-revolutionaries worked openly in Hungary. But how is it that their activities attracted no attention? We cannot understand how it is possible for Tito and Horthy’s bands to work so freely in a fraternal country of People’s Democracy like Hungary where the party was in power and the weapons of dictatorship were in its hands, where the Soviet army was present.

We think that the stand taken by comrade Khrushchev and the other Soviet comrades towards Hungary was not clear, because the greatly mistaken views which they held about the Belgrade gang did not allow them to see the situation correctly.

[...]

Whether to intervene or not to intervene with arms in Hungary is, we think, not within the competence of one person alone; seeing that we have set up the Warsaw Treaty, we should decide jointly, because otherwise it is of no use to speak of alliance, of the collective spirit and collaboration among the parties. The Hungarian counter-revolution cost to our camp blood, it cost Hungary and the Soviet Union blood.

Why was this bloodshed permitted and no steps taken to prevent it? We are of the opinion that no preliminary steps could be taken so long as Comrade Khrushchev and the Soviet comrades placed their trust in the organizer of the Hungarian counter-revolution, the traitor Tito, so long as they set so little value on the absolutely necessary regular meetings with their friends and allies, so long as they considered their unilateral decisions on matters that concern us all as the only correct ones, and so long as they attached no importance whatsoever to collective work and collective decisions.

[...]

Hungary was a great lesson for us, for what was done, and for the drama that was played on the stage and behind the scenes there. We believed that the Hungarian counter-revolution was more than enough to show the betrayal of Tito and his gang. We know that many documents are kept locked away and are not brought to light, documents that expose the barbarous activity of Tito’s group in the Hungarian events. Why this should happen we do not understand. What interests are hidden behind these documents which are not brought to light but are kept under lock and key? To condemn Stalin after his death, the most trifling items were searched out, while the documents that expose a vile traitor like Tito are locked away in a drawer.

But even after the Hungarian counter-revolution, the political and ideological fight against the Titoite gang, instead of becoming more intense, as Marxism-Leninism demands, was played down, leading to reconciliation, smiles, contacts, moderation and almost to kisses. In fact, thanks to this opportunist attitude, the Titoites got out of this predicament.

Party Platform of the American Party of Labor (APL)

Iron Bolshevik — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:14:46 +0000

The American Party of Labor, a revolutionary working class organization in the United States of America, has published its Party Platform, adopted at the Party’s General Congress on December 6, 2008.

The comprehensive Party Platform of the American Party of Labor represents one of the most fundamentally correct documents put forth by any contemporary progressive-left wing organization in the United States.

Party Platform of the American Party of Labor

Workers

1. We demand all means of production to be in the hands of the working class through the socialist state represented through worker councils or elected managers with production estimates provided by the state.
2. We support the right of all workers to organize.
3. We demand a 30-hour work week with at least six weeks of annual paid vacation.
4. We demand retirement pensions to be no less than 75% of a person’s pay at the time of retirement enacted after at least 15 years of work.
5. We demand the repealing of all laws designed to hurt and weaken the working class.
6. We demand the payment for the full value of labor for the working peoples of America.

Education and the Arts
1. We want libraries, museums and schools to be available as cultural centers for exhibiting the multicultural aspect of American culture.
2. We support art that reflects the struggles and achievements of the working people.
3. We strongly support free and quality education for all people which would include college, medical and graduate schools.
4. We believe in every child’s right to learn in a safe and clean environment.
5. We want fair and decent wages for teachers.
6. We are against private education and against corporate running of schools. We want education to be in the hands of the Community and the State.
7. We are against abstinence-only sex education and promote realistic sex education programs emphasizing protection.
8. We are adamantly against religion in schools which has manifested, but is not limited to religious schools, prayer in school, creationism, etc.

Health
1. We support a national healthcare system that will cover all Americans.
2. We support the emphasis of preventive care.
3. We support the nationalization of the pharmaceutical industry.
4. We support government research of presently incurable diseases and oppose discrimination against people with those diseases.
5. We are adamantly against drug use in the Party and against the legalization of hardcore drugs. We promote the combating of drug addiction through use of proven medical treatments and preventive education.
6. We support the legalization of marijuana.
7. We support patient rights including the right to die with dignity and if a patient is incapacitated the decision should rest with his/her spouse or person designated beforehand to make the decision for the patient.

Housing
1. We support the right of all people to have quality and affordable housing.
2. We support low-rent for all homes not exceeding three days worth of pay per month.
3. We support future state funded construction of public apartment complexes as a means to support the growing population and to house those without homes.
4. We support state-funded broad renovation and remodeling projects for old homes and neighborhoods.
5. We believe it is a human right for people to live in neighborhoods that are safe, supportive and free of crime. Therefore we support the creation of fully funded Neighborhood Safety Committees with members coming exclusively from the neighborhood.

Civil Rights
1. We demand an end to all anti-homosexual, bisexual, and transgender discrimination in spheres of employment, education and society and we condemn acts of violence against them.
2. We support the legalization of same-sex marriage. Religious groups may or may not allow the practice but the State shall recognize and issue secular marriage licenses for same-sex couples.
3. We demand an end to police brutality and racial profiling.
4. We support Native American rights and call for full enforcement of all treaty rights and respect their right to secede and have a path to statehood if their needs are not met.
5. We promote the dismantling of walls erected both physically and socially that hinder people with disabilities to fully participate in socialist society.
6. We demand an end to discrimination, full employment and benefits for people with disabilities as well as quality education and job training programs.
7. We fully support the reproductive rights of women including access to free abortion at any stage of pregnancy.
8. We are against the intimidation of women and abortion clinics by reactionary “Pro-Life” Groups.
9. We support the prevention of violence against women and children and call on the State to actively protect women and children from battery and offenders.
10. We are against prostitution and the unjust exploitation of women as sex slaves.
11. We call for a minimum of 12 months paid leave for new mothers with access to fully funded and quality childcare centers.
12. We support the right of women to enlist in the military to defend their country.
13. We support the right of women to enter in any occupation without pressure to do or not to do so.
14. We demand equal pay for men and women for equal work.
15. We recognize that large immigration from Mexico is the effect of uncontrollable capitalism that forces millions of people to flee their homelands by the need to survive.
16. We support the rights of all immigrants to education, health, civil and legal rights.
17. We support amnesty for undocumented workers so long as they have no violent criminal records.
18. We are against police discrimination and raids against Hispanic citizens and immigrant communities.
19. We support access to citizenship after five years of residency with no criminal records.

The World
1. We demand a cancellation of all Third World Debt.
2. We support the right of all U.S. territories and Commonwealths to self-determination with the right to form an independent nation or to join the U.S. as a state with full representation.
3. We demand the abolition of all aggressive and imperialist wars and oppose all wars except the Class War.
4. We want an immediate American withdrawal from and expulsion of the United Nations from American soil.
5. We want an end to U.S. involvement in NATO and other imperialist alliances and demand an end to bullying and intimidating nations.
6. We call for an immediate cease of military and financial aid to the governments of Israel, Colombia, and other outposts of imperialism and capitalist oppression.
7. We demand an end to the U.S. occupation of Guantanamo, Cuba.
8. We demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
9. We support friendly relationships with nations with differing govt. systems so long as they are anti or non-imperialists.
10. We support mending our relationship with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Libya, and Syria for the sake of peace and prosperity.

The Economy
1. We oppose NAFTA, CAFTA and the future creation of more free trade agreements. We want an immediate American withdrawal from these agreements.
2. We want an immediate end of the exporting of American jobs overseas and demand full employment for the American people.
3. We demand that all financial institutions be commonly owned and directed by an American National Bank.
4. We want a maximum cap on wages with a ratio of 2:1.
5. We are opposed to payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes and other regressive taxes.
6. We oppose all inheritance, and other things which are not earned through work.
7. We demand retraining programs, compensation and relocation for workers displaced by technological advances.
8. We want an end to American involvement in the IMF, World Bank and WTO.

Agriculture
1. We demand the end to all corporate farms.
2. We support the establishment and encouragement of agricultural cooperatives and collectives.
3. We support state low-cost grants, loans and machinery assistance to farmers.
4. We support soil conserving farming techniques such as contour plowing, terracing, and no-till farming.
5. We support helping and encouraging farmers to produce staple foods rather than non-essentials.
6. We support the abolition of the current ‘factory farm’ style of production and the establishment of collective livestock farming.
7. We demand an end to current debts placed on farmers.
8. We support the cultivation of hemp for food, fuel, fiber and industrial uses.

Energy, Transportation, the Environment and Communications
1. We support the creation of a publicly-funded high-speed national rail system with low rates and access to all major U.S. cities.
2. We call for the nationalization and worker control of the automobile production industry.
3. We call for a reduction of private automobile production until a viable and clean alternative fuel is introduced on a massive scale.
4. We support the creation of light-rails and or subways funded by the state in every major city.
5. We demand common ownership of the airline and tourist industry.
6. We support the development of alternative forms of energy including solar, geothermal, nuclear power and hydropower.
7. We demand public ownership of all American natural resources and their conservation.
8. We support active recycling programs of paper, metal and plastic and their use in various construction projects.
9. We support low utility rates for working people with a total cost not exceeding 3 days worth of pay per month.
10. We are opposed to private ownership of newspapers, radio, magazines, television and the internet and oppose their hindrance of allowing the common people to show their opinions and viewpoints.
11. We are opposed to copyright laws.
12. We support public ownership of all internet bandwidth and support the providing of free internet access to the public at large and computers to school-aged children.
13. We demand that all communications that utilize public infrastructure and public maintenance such as the internet, phone service and cable television shall be provided free to the public and maintained by the State. The peoples’ right to communication should not be interfered with.
14. All communities that have supportive density and a population of 30,000 or more should have a public transit system, or be served by a nearby public transit system. Fares and service should be adequate, and riders should be involved in all matters of service.

Resources and Information on the American Party of Labor:

Website

The Red Phoenix, Organ of the APL

Wikipedia Article

ducation and the Arts
1. We want libraries, museums and schools to be available as cultural centers for exhibiting the multicultural aspect of American culture.
2. We support art that reflects the struggles and achievements of the working people.
3. We strongly support free and quality education for all people which would include college, medical and graduate schools.
4. We believe in every child’s right to learn in a safe and clean environment.
5. We want fair and decent wages for teachers.
6. We are against private education and against corporate running of schools. We want education to be in the hands of the Community and the State.
7. We are against abstinence-only sex education and promote realistic sex education programs emphasizing protection.
8. We are adamantly against religion in schools which has manifested, but is not limited to religious schools, prayer in school, creationism, etc.

Why Scientific Socialism isn’t Necessary

Metal Gear — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 03:44:51 +0000

The theory of scientific socialism, as opposed to Utopian socialism, is that wherever there is capitalism, there will be oppression. Therefore wherever there is capitalism, there is a means to resist capitalism by rallying the class antagonisms of the proletariat against the bourgeois. The goal is to make society class conscious so that socialist revolution becomes “natural.”

This is unnecessary because all you need to get into power is guns. You can vertically force socialism – or any other system of law- on a population. In fact, in my opinion, that brute force mentality was Stalin’s mentality rather than the more egalitarian pro-proletarian Marxist-Leninist approach.

Workers’ Songs!

Hekkenschroeder — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:31:51 +0000

Below is a list of well-known songs by, and for, the revolutionary working-class. The original list was compiled by Chapaev and posted in the forum, but are worth posting here on the Editorials as well.

If you know of more, please post them in the comments section!

You can download these songs by right-clicking on the title and select, “Save As.”

Russian:
Internationale
Varshavianka
Workers of All Countries, Unite!
We’re Renouncing the Old World (“Workers’ Marseillaise)
Ahead, Fearless Comrades
Oh, roads
Forward, Red Marines
Rage Tyrants
Red Banner
Through Hills and Over Valleys
Hymn of the World Democratic Youth
Song of the Motherland
Grenada
The Sacred War
Song About Shchors
Katiusha
Young Eagle
Cuba, My Love
The Sacred War
Dubinushka
Toward the Future

German:
March of the Komintern
Social Democratic Party Congress
Leftist March
Song of Struggle Against Fascism
Kampflied der Internationalen Arbeiterhilfe
Song of Solidarity
Song of the United Front
Peat Bog Soldiers
Song of International Brigade
The Secret Deployment
ThÃ¤lmann Kolone
Hans Beimler
Subbotnik
Zeit Marsch
Thank You, Soviet Soldiers
Ballad of the XI Brigade
Kaserne Winkt

Czech:
Ahead, not a step back
Prague’s direction
Hey, there is a sunrise
Earth belongs to us

The Historical Reality of Stalin’s Oppression of Islam

Metal Gear — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 02:14:19 +0000

The Link
It really seems Stalin was primarily a bureaucrat who purged state enemies rather than class enemies, meaning that his main goal was to eliminate threats rather than promote class unity across religious lines. In that respect, Trotsky was theoretically “right” (but didn’t know how to run a country). Of course if your ideology is right winged like me, then that is good instead of bad. For people who are convinced that Stalin was the most logical follower of Lenin and Marx, and that the true Marxist line closely mirrors the true Islamic line, this post is bad news.

The only real defense people on the other side of the debate can make is to either deny history, disagree with this aspect of Stalin’s legacy or argue that material conditions justified Stalin’s actions but do not currently justify opposition to Islam due to the position of American imperialism and the non-existence of the Soviet State (lesser evils).

If they chose the last approach, they would have to concede that if Communism had the strength it did before 1989, then opposition to Islam would be logical.

When Joseph Stalin consolidated power in the second half of 1920s, his religion policy changed. Mosques were closed or turned into warehouses throughout Central Asia (comment by metal gear : this is technocracy). Religious leaders were persecuted, religious schools were closed down and Waqf’s were outlawed.[3] The Soviet government took the Paranji veil that the women wore (as part of the Islamic Hijab interpretation of Modesty) as evidence that the Muslim women were oppressed, and began the Hujum to try and forcefully remove it.[2][4] This backfired, and the veil became more popular than ever among the workers, whereas prior to this was mostly used by the middle, wealthier classes.[5] Stalin’s Cult of personality, left virtually no place for any religious sentiment.[4][2]

Stalin also forcibly moved Chechens and several other small nationalities residing primarily in southwestern Russia (Crimean Tatars, Balkars, Karachais, Meshketian Turks, Kalmyks and others) from their homelands during World War II, lest they rise up against him in favour of Nazi Germany (comment by Metal Gear : everyone knows that).[6]

During Stalin’s reign, Crimean Tatar Muslims were victims of mass deportation. The deportation had begun on 17 May 1944 in all Crimean inhabited localities. More than 32,000 NKVD troops participated in this action. 193,865 Crimean Tatars were deported, 151,136 of them to Uzbek SSR, 8,597 to Mari ASSR, 4,286 to Kazakh SSR, the rest 29,846 to the various oblasts of RSFSR.

From May to November 10,105 Crimean Tatars died of starvation in Uzbekistan (7% of deported to Uzbek SSR). Nearly 30,000 (20%) died in exile during the year and a half by the NKVD data and nearly 46% by the data of the Crimean Tatar activists. According to Soviet dissident information, many Crimean Tatars were made to work in the large-scale projects conducted by the Soviet GULAG system.[7]