ON THE COMINFORM

5 Cominform and the question of people's democracy as a modern type of...

And to establish the democracy of the world proletariat, it must achieve victory in the world socialist revolution. To support and advance this is and can only be the purpose of the internationalist foreign policy of a Marxist-Leninist state. If the main danger came from the Anglo-American imperialists, the Cominform should have led the working class in the struggle for socialist revolution precisely in these countries. This would have been not only a great act of proletarian internationalism, but also a duty towards the world proletariat, and Shdanov should have supported this revolutionary struggle of the working class in the USA and England with all his strength, but he was silent about this. Instead, Shdanov propagated being content with the "realisation of democratic principles" in America and England, i.e., the main arsonists of the war, the anti-communist world centre (!!), instead of fighting for their overthrow under the victorious banner of communism (of course, not without exploiting the struggle for proletarian democracy - lest we be misunderstood here and placed in the sectarian dogmatic corner !).

People's democracy as a special form of the dictatorship of the proletariat ?

Is people's democracy really identical in essence with the dictatorship of the proletariat ? We do not share this opinion for the following reasons:

The Cominform is based on the principle of people's democracy and not on the dictatorship of the proletariat. The social-fascist degeneration of the people's democracies in Eastern Europe shows that the dictatorship of the proletariat can only be achieved by armed socialist revolution, as in Albania !

While Shdanov at the 1st Conference of the Cominform in his report on the international situation still correctly spoke of the People's Democracies "developing towards socialism", the revisionist Suslov at the 3rd Conference of the Cominform no longer speaks of socialism.

What is the revisionist conception of people's democracy?

The revisionist conception of people's democracies consists in defining them as a final goal, that is, in dropping their necessary further development as a transition to the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The criticism of the Comintern (SH) against the modern revisionists is therefore not limited to the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union, but necessarily includes the obstruction and eventual prevention of the construction of socialism in the countries of the People's Democracies. The modern revisionists already turned out to be traitors to Marxism-Leninism in the Cominform. The Cominform thesis of the "imperialist and democratic world camp" was nothing other than the restoration of the old Dimitroffian popular front thesis, only that this thesis was no longer used against German but henceforth against American imperialism.

All these political stands fighting for socialism in favour of class collaboration were included in the final Cominform resolution on "The defence of peace and the struggle against the warmongers". As the other resolution on "Working Class Unity and the Tasks of Communists and Workers' Parties", this was unanimously approved on the basis of Togliatti's report on the subject: similar revisionist and right-wing things that "peace, bread and" demand democratic liberties "! "The Communist Party of Yugoslavia in the power of murderers and spies".

Stalin:

"It would be foolish to suppose that international capital will leave us alone. No, comrades, it is not like that. Classes exist, international capital exists, and it cannot sit back and watch the development of the country that is building socialism. In the past, international capital believed that it could overthrow Soviet power through direct military intervention. The attempt failed. Today it is striving, and will continue to strive, to weaken our economic power by an invisible, not always noticeable, but quite lasting economic intervention, organising pest labour, preparing all kinds of "crises" in this or that branch of industry, and thereby facilitating the possibility of future military intervention. Here everything is tied into a knot, the knot of the class struggle of international capital against Soviet power, and there can be no question of any coincidences at all. One of the two:

Either we shall continue to pursue a revolutionary policy and rally the proletarians and oppressed of all countries around the working class of the Soviet Union - and then international capital will seek by all means to disturb us in our advance; or we shall renounce our revolutionary policy, make a series of concessions in principle to international capital - and then international capital will probably not be averse to "helping" us in the transformation of our socialist country into a "good" bourgeois republic. (Stalin, Vol. 11, pp. 48-49)

This lesson of Stalin's was later taken to heart and successfully implemented in the world socialist camp only by the Albanians.

Enver Hoxha criticised the so-called "democratic" road to socialism". The modern revisionists trampled on the Marxist-Leninist thesis of the necessity of violent revolution and denied the revolutionary class content of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In accordance with this "democratic road to socialism", there is also no propagation of armed socialist revolution, let alone world revolution, in the organ of the Kominform. The organ of the Cominform did not show the proletariat and the peoples of the world that the road to victory over imperialism and capitalism cannot be achieved by the "democratic" road, but by the violent revolution.