Eastern Initiative

Comrades and Friends,

When we look the decade of 1930-s, it is nearly impossible to understand any key decision of political leaders of that time without placing them in the context of the incoming war, World War II. In the speech delivered in 1931 to the industrial delegates Comrade Stalin said famously, that “We are 50 or 100 years behind the advanced countries. We much either make good this distance in 10 years. Either we do it or we shall be crushed”. Every decision of the Soviet government, which followed―forced collectivization of agriculture, rapid industrialization, ensuring internal security is possible to understand only in this context.

The common strategy of various opportunistic and reactionary forces who aim to discredit our movement is to separate the political lines and decision of political leaders from the concrete material conditions: necessities and objective of particular historical eras. They present them like they exist in a historical void, as ideal blueprints applicable all across time and space.

Various ultra-left currents also picked up on this and claimed that any successful socialist state need to reproduce the same decisions and solutions as these introduced by their favorite leader, let it even be Lenin or Stalin. Collectivization of agriculture for example, has been considered by many as a necessary condition for a formation to be socialist. But following this route leads us directly into the backroads of philosophical idealism.

In Polish People’s Republic the collectivization process was abandoned in late 1950s and the majority of land remained in private hands. This decision can be only understood in context of post-war power struggle, where securing support of the small and medium peasantry was a key to securing people’s power. There was no threat of imminent war or necessity to rapidly industrialize. The material conditions and the historical period was different than in Soviet Union of the 1930s.

Does it mean that Polish People’s Republic was not socialist or not socialist-enough? Of course not, the leaders of Polish United Workers Party simply responded to the main objective of the post war historical period―securing mass support for the construction of the socialist economy. Was it a correct decision? Acquiring a popular support for the Marxist government in Poland was considered as one of the worst scenarios for interest of imperialism in the region, as stated by Allan Dulles, CIA director at the time.

We can see now that every historical period has its own separate characteristics and its own specific objectives. What was right in one historical period may not be necessarily right in the other. The same decisions and solution, which were correct and justified in one concrete historical context might be detrimental and harmful in the other.

So before we can discuss the tasks of anti-imperialists we need to give an answer to the fundamental question: what is the character of the contemporary era?

In our view, the historical period in which we live at the moment can be described as the pre-World War III era. Similarly to us perceiving the era of the 1930s, the people who will come after us will see this will see our period as the period of preparation to new global military confrontation. Our actions and decision will be viewed and judged in this context by future generations. Only this context allows us to understand actions and decisions of particular subjects.

Comrades and friends,

Once we established that each historical period creates different challenges and requires different approach and that our era is the era preceding World War III we need to elaborate on the character of the incoming (or already lasting) war.

There are two contradictory theories in the communist movement regarding this topic. So-called “KKE line” claims that it is an “inter-imperialist war” between two equally imperialist blocs, similarly to the World War I and that the workers should not get involved and support either side.

The second view of the World War III is that it is an anti-imperialist war, the war between imperialism, cumulated in a handful of developed imperialist states and the rest of the world, including Russia, China, and Iran. Imperialism is fighting for its global dominance, another millennium of colonialism and plunder. Peoples or the world, on the other side, are fighting for their own national and social liberation, for development of their own productive forces.

Which of these two approaches is a correct one?

Comrades, there has been much said on this topic already and we don’t want to repeat what was stated before. It is sufficient to say here that the so-called “KKE-line” deliberately ignores the fact of the existence of the socialist countries: Cuba, North Korea and China. All these countries are taking part in the political developments, not only picking a side, but playing an active role in forefront of anti-imperialist block. It has been always a responsibility of a communist and workers movement to support socialist countries and it is they―not some self-appointed Western Marxists, who have a right for a primacy in the movement.

Here we face a dilemma―either we accuse Cuba, North Korea and China for “collaboration with imperialism” (or even―being “imperialist”, which echoes ultra-leftist attacks on the Soviet Union and its allies during the Cold War by the Western Marxists, for whom they were not socialist enough)―or we have to accuse forces which try to impose the theory of two imperialisms (Trotskyite groups and KKE) for an attempt to weaken the support which communist and workers movement provide to countries which embarked on the pathway of constructing socialism.

Historically, communist and workers movement has been always on the side of the socialist countries and national liberation movements and there is no justification to abandon this principle in face of incoming WWIII. That would be a betrayal.

The answer is clear now―communist and workers movement should side with the peoples of the Earth fighting for their national and social liberation against imperialism and neo-colonialism in the incoming World War III. This is the uttermost important task of the anti-imperialist movement of our times.

But what does it mean in practice?

The conditions of any practical action are determined by historically formed concrete material conditions of particular nations and peoples. Every single nation has been formed by a different historical process and its material conditions differ from the others. What is right for one peoples may not be necessarily right for others, as their material conditions: politics, geography, history, balance of forces―are different. There is no a single, ready recipe for all.

The decisions have to be made in a sovereign manner on the national level. It is for example Hungarian people who know what is the best for Hungarians, or Polish people for Polish. Communists are not a messianic sect―but the culmination of the most advanced and enlightened aspirations of their peoples, of the concrete, historically constituted societies. They emerge from the people and they respond to the people.

It is important in this context to remind that the Marxist theory is not a ready set of answers to all questions, but a set of practical tools which allow to understand and transform concrete material reality. It is a material world and not an abstract theory which is the starting point and the ultimate reference for all analysis and action.

Comrades and friends,

The capitalism of the war period has a tendencies to turn into a fascism. We understand fascism here as the direct, terroristic rule by the finance capital with removal of democratic and civil rights. The decisions are made directly by the finance capital oligarchy.

Here we can observe an evolution, especially in the EU―in this direction―in Romania, Baltic States or in Germany. It is likely that the fascisation will intensify with the large scale military confrontation approaching.

In our country―Poland, we have a specific situation. Poland is the next in the row for its role as a cannon fodder for imperialism. This fact describes the most important task of our historical era for us as communists and our people―disrupting imperialist plans and preventing them from happening. All other tasks are of the secondary importance.

But how to achieve that?

In order to have a real impact in the Polish politics, leading to a real result, a mass movement is necessary because only masses can shape history.

In Poland there is a slow emergence of the mass movement against the war, but it has a specific character. It mostly consists of a Catholic and―some would say―“right wing” groups.

The main task of communists in Poland of our historical period is supporting and constructing the united people’s front against fascism, imperialism and war, according to Marxist-Leninist theory of popular fronts. This popular front does not necessarily has to share all our positions, it doesn’t even have to support any side in the war―it is enough it will be actively against drawing Poland into the war.

All ideological or world-view divisions are secondary now. Dilemmas such as capitalism or communism, left or right, planning or market, religion or atheism, revolution or reform have no main significance at the moment. The key question and the line of division is―with imperialism against peoples of the world or with the peoples of the world against imperialism.

Building and supporting the popular front against imperialism is our fundamental task at the moment. In order to do that we need to engage with progressive and anti-imperialist wings of national-democratic, catholic, conservative and social-democratic movements. All divisions are of the secondary importance. If such agreements already exists―they have to be supported, considering that the objective is to prevent Poland from getting drawn into the war or to disrupt this process.

Our country should be neutral or at least have a position similar to Hungary or Slovakia.

These forces, regardless of how they call themselves and under what banner they operate, which try to break the popular front of make its formation difficult, regardless of their justification of this actions have to be considered hostile and favorable to imperialism.

This include Trotskyists, euro-communists and the KKE (European Communist Action). For example, during 1st of May demonstration in some European capital KKE members were distributing leaflets calling for the struggle against social-democracy. But―there are many social-democracies―there is Scholtz and there is Fico. Irish social-democracy is pro-neutrality and against NATO membership. Even in Poland we can find progressive and anti-imperialist social-democrats.

The adoption of the KKE statement implies the breakage of the fragile agreement between progressive and anti-imperialist social-democracy and the communists. It is the action aligned with the objectives of imperialism, which aim at preventing socialist, anti-imperialist and sovereign countries from receiving support from the communist and workers movement now―as well as in the past―during the existence of the Soviet Union.