Which way forward for the communists following the election?

That was the question posed at a seminar in London this month. The 30th anniversary of the start of the dialogue between the NCP and the RCPB (ML) was appropriately marked by the opening of a discussion that both parties believe needs to be taken throughout the labour movement. NCP leader Andy Brooks, who chaired the meeting at the NCP Centre, welcomed everyone to the seminar at the Sid French library or by video link and the discussion was opened by Michael Chant, the RCPB (ML) leader. The theme was Tasks of the Communists in the Light of the July 2024 General Election, and this is Michael’s contribution to the discussion.

Solidarity:Andy Brooks and Michael Chant in 2014 

We are taking up these themes as fraternal parties who see the need for the unity of the communist movement. It seems important to remind ourselves of this to set the context of such joint initiatives as this seminar, which is the communist equivalent of modern scientists presenting seminar papers and opening the way to sorting out the problems in their field so as to accord with reality.
We took up this cause in 1994, and so have 30 years of discussion between NCP and RCPB(ML) under our belt, and our first point of contact was between myself and Comrade Andy and we have kept our relations vital since that time. When I spoke at the funeral of Eric Trevett, who was General Secretary of NCP from 1979 to 1995, and subsequently its President until his passing in 2014, I mentioned on behalf of RCPB(ML) that “this work to build anew the communist movement which had its common roots in the anti-revisionist movement of the 1970s was our common aspiration, and our two Parties have made strenuous efforts to make this aspiration a reality”. And in our message of condolence, we said “our two Parties continue to make headway in developing our unity, discussing all the questions of the strategy and tactics which a communist party must adopt in the 21st century, and beginning to pay attention together to the theoretical work without which the revolutionary movement cannot take full shape. To honour Eric’s memory, let us continue to overcome the obstacles which the bourgeoisie places in the path of building the unity of the communist and workers’ movement.”
Besides giving messages on important anniversaries, such as those of the founding of the NCP, and attending each other’s Congresses and conferences, we have continued the efforts to make our aspirations a reality. We have even issued joint statements, such as on the Anglo-US aggression against Afghanistan, on Kashmir, against war on Iraq and in support of the Palestinian people, and in 2003 giving the call for an anti-war government. Particularly we have worked together in Friends of Korea in building friendship with the DPR Korea. Among the events which have taken place are the joint seminars On the Agenda for the Working Class in 2014, and What it means to be a communist—new and revolutionary today in 2022.
In this last seminar, I opened by saying “taking the topic at face value, and giving an answer in a nutshell, one could say to be a communist means seeing the face of the New in the crisis of the Old, and working for the necessary change, for the transformation of the Old into the New, with revolutionary sweep.
“Further, one cannot conceive of being a communist without membership of a communist party, a modern type of party which mobilises and organises the people to defend their own interests, collective, individual and the general interests of society.
“And, as both propositions imply, the communist party takes up the problems of the day, whether national or international, with the spirit of proletarian internationalism, in order to provide solutions and to advance the progress of society”.
So this is all by way of introduction and setting the scene on the independent programme of the working class.
There are the overall tasks of the communists in this period of the past 30 years, and there is the experience of the communist and workers’ movement in the light of the general election, which is not so decisive in itself. But we can use it to say, this is a confirmation of what are the tasks of the communists. We can use it to ask, what is the call of history that the communists must take up. This, in a word, is to leave the Old behind, renovate our thinking and continue to inspire, organise and set the line of march for the working class as the detachment in Britain of the international communist movement.
When the tasks of the communist and workers’ movement was addressed in “Discussion”, in 1994, the document which began the discussions between our two parties, and which set the tone for this period of history, it was said:
On the role of communist parties: While the basic doctrine of communism remains the same, it is quite clear that the communist movement has a lot of work to do in terms of elaborating a theory and line based on the circumstances within which each party finds itself. It has to be understood that while the communist movement has historically been guided by the doctrine of communism of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in its general form, the working class has always had to work out the particularities based on the specifics of its own situation. The entire economic, political and philosophical basis for a new system has to be elaborated as an integral part of the workers’ movement. The modern proletariat needs its consciousness and the communist parties have to be in a position to provide it.

What kind of party is necessary at this time?

This question must be answered by keeping as a constant that it will be a communist party, it will be revolutionary and it will be based on democratic centralism. The modern feature which will be added in a demonstrative way is that it will not come to power itself or as the representative of the working class. It will be the instrument of bringing the working class into power to lead the people to establish the broadest possible democracy.
The sharpest class struggle is taking place on the question of what kind of democracy and what kind of system should be established in various countries. Is there a party which can exploit this situation in favour of the working class and open the path to the progress of the society?
On the question of modern definitions on the basis of which solutions to having fidelity to the relations between humans and humans, and humans and nature, are to be found: Today the struggle has to be directed against all the theories of the liberal bourgeoisie, all of whom are essentially Tories. It has to be directed against those who want to divert the communist movement and working class movement away from its task. All parties have to, within their conditions, work extremely hard to extricate themselves from that narrow-mindedness, that myopia, which has been imposed as a way of life. They have to present themselves as having relevance to modern society. There is a space for communism.
At this time, unless minds like Marx, so to speak, exist who revolutionise social science within the present circumstances, who are travelling on the high road of civilisation, there will be no revolutionary movement. Such a role belongs at this time to political parties and not to individuals alone.
In Britain where the greatest crisis in political theory exists, the bourgeoisie will not want to see and will not respond to those who would want to establish a democratic society in modern terms. A communist party cannot remain aloof from waging the most vigorous struggle to isolate the bourgeoisie.
When I appeared at the Undercover Policing Inquiry, along with Kate Hudson and Lindsey German, I had to explain to the inquiry that a Marxist-Leninist party had its various fronts of work, that communism represents the modern high road of civilisation and enlightenment, and that it was not characterised by the violence and public disorder with which the capitalist state tries to blacken its name. It is characterised by the mass line, not the obsession with recruiting members. Following which the undercover officer who had tried to infiltrate our Party in the early 1980s was obliged to say that while undercover he had felt he was out of his depth and spoke as little as possible for fear he would blow his cover.
Now, the debasement of politics by the cartel parties puts the need to raise the level of political discourse on the agenda by workers, women and youth setting the example themselves. Ways and means must be facilitated so that the working class and people can speak in their own name, and, while emphasising that the warmongers and neo-liberals in this so-called “representative democracy” do not speak in their name, use this as the transformation to becoming empowered.
Communists have a duty to call on workers to not permit the debasement of politics and nor should they drop out in disgust. Rather, the ruling class must not be given free rein to commit crimes. This is what happens when they manage to disorient the working class and people on matters related to the economy, sovereignty, war and peace or divide them on a racist basis by blaming immigrants for all the social ills plaguing the capitalist society and making them targets of attack. Communists emphasise and organise for the importance of getting together with one's peers to discuss the challenges the country faces and speaking out in one's own name on all matters of concern. It has to be said that illusions about the Labour Party changing the situation in favour of the people have reduced drastically since the days of Tony Blair. For working people to get together and give solutions for changing the direction of the economy and society at all levels is the necessity at this stage of history.
All of the developments centring around the July general election show the untenable state of affairs in the Parliament and the urgent need for democratic renewal – that working people provide for themselves the occasions and the means to speak in their own name, make their views known, organise to see that their demands are met and by empowering themselves provide a pro-social alternative to cartel parties and the private and supranational interests they represent. In our view, the political situation has deteriorated so that these parties are appendages of the state, rather than mass parties where members set the policy and programme, and determine the conduct of their own affairs. This is the meaning of what we refer to as cartel parties, which are wedded to the arrangements in society whereby the people are marginalised from political life and institutions. This is the meaning of the battle of democracy, of fighting for democratic renewal.
It is true that the results of the July 2024 elections saw a move towards independent candidates and smaller parties. In this context, it is a moot point whether an official coalition of small parties or independent candidates would transform the Commons proceedings in favour of the people, or would confer an illusory legitimacy on the party system and not challenge the present party-centric approach to the conduct of political affairs. The issue is to encourage the electorate to find new forms in the battle of democracy and encourage them to participate in setting the political and other agendas, based on their own experience, transforming the conception of a political party into one which truly links the electorate with governance, not simply as voting machines which resolve nothing.
It is also true that the actions of the working class in fighting for their rights and interests make a significant difference, and that forces the cartel parties, notably the Labour Party, to take notice to attempt to get the workers’ movement onside. But it can also be looked at the other way, in that the Labour Party programme, historically of social democracy, but now of a cartel party arm of the state in its pro-war, pro-business, anti-social outlook and programme, feeds its way into the workers’ movement. Nevertheless that same workers’ movement is showing evidence of its independent working class stands, such as the TUC’s stand for Palestine, and the rejection of the neo-liberal austerity measures.
In our way of thinking, as I stressed earlier, communists at this time have to heed the call of history and show imagination in envisioning the line of march, and calling the working class and people to leave the Old behind. This means bringing the organising work on a par with the political work that we take up.
What brings about wars of destruction, of genocide? What brings about droughts, climate crises, famines, mass migrations of people escaping untenable conditions? Who controls the decision-making and who the decisions benefit are of course key. But this means that it is the power structures which are characteristic of these crises, not right or wrong policies as such. It is the human factor/social consciousness which is decisive, the working people speaking out on their own behalf, and the task of the communists is to organise to bring this into play, in terms of the class struggle which is being waged, the battle for democracy and democratic rights. As we conclude our document, There Is A Way Out of the Crisis, which is included in the first issue of Discussion, we strive to unite all people in a storm against “the cuts”, working together with all for the empowerment of the people and for the creation of a socialist society!
Our conclusion is that the cutting edge of our work is the fight for an Anti-War Government. This has only been confirmed with the election of Starmer who is for further integration into the US/NATO war machine and virulently pro-Israel and against the resistance which the government labels as terrorism. This is not to say that we do not include Labour MPs in campaigns we engage in, particularly in the anti-war and pro-social movements. But the crucial issue is who makes the decisions on war and peace. In this respect, the conception of an Anti-War Government is not simply that within the status quo you have a government which takes an anti-war stand. It prepares the way for bringing about a society and state arrangements that embody a modern democratic personality.We could sum up our strategic goal in this period as:

 For a Socialist Britain with an Anti-War Government!

Proud to be a Communist in the 21st Century

by John Maryon

A contribution to the joint NCP-RCPB-ML seminar held recently in London

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels cooperated to publish the Communist Manifesto in1848. It was at the time of the Industrial Revolution when industrial cities were being and millions flocked from the countryside to seek work in the new factories. It was also a time of harsh exploitation by the bourgeoisie who accumulated great wealth from the surplus value created by the workers. The Communist Manifesto examined the development of nature, society and productive forces and proved the necessity for a class struggle. A struggle that would not only lead to a redistribution of wealth through various forms of public ownership. It would also serve to change the aspirations of the proletariat and the social relations within society itself.
    Today the those dark satanic mills may have gone but sweat-shops, with low pay and appalling working conditions, still exist where capitalism flourishes. Often the owners are to be found living in luxury near their tax havens. Grim polluted factories, with a dangerous work environment and employing children, are no longer to be found in Britain but we do have low pay and zero hour contracts forcing workers to rely on food banks. In former times agricultural labourers were forced to carry out hard manual labour, almost from dawn to dusk, but today their equivalent may be NHS staff. Some qualified ambulance workers may still be working 15 hours into a shift. And although the workhouse may be a thing of the past homeless people today can be left to die cold, lonely and frightened in some mean dark street.
    Capitalism still exists to enslave many parts of the world and remains powerful and influential. It is however in terminal crisis facing irreconcilable contradictions, as predicted by Marxists, leading to booms and slumps Cycles of inflation, unemployment and business failures occur but the main burden will always be carried by the workers. Imperialist rivalry increases with great hostility to the socialist countries bringing with it the constant danger of war. Communists today have an essential and vital role to play, in educating and organising the working class, to fight for improved wages and working conditions while maintaining the struggle for world peace.
    We now live in the digital age, an era of quantum physics and instant communication, but the fundamental nature of capitalism has not changed. The class struggle must continue and it is the duty of communists to lead it. Tinkering with a failed system by Social Democrats will achieve nothing. Communists believe that a revolutionary change is essential with full commitment to the class struggle.
    It can take courage to be a Communist. A situation similar in some ways to young men refusing to enlist for the First World War. Incessant propaganda by the bourgeois media creates an image in people's minds of communists being dangerous red monsters with evil intent. Others with alternative views such as anarchists are also tarred with the same brush by being presented as only wanting to destroy. A good communist must be able to stand tall and proud, be fair and honest and work hard to gain the trust and respect of his fellow workers.
    Communists may stand side by side with others to fight for a common cause. Whilst they may not agree with all the other parties honest held views those opinions will be respected and discussed. Communists will join with allies to form a broad front when it is expedient to do so.
    We will never abandon our core values or commitment to the scientific philosophy of Marxism Leninism. Communists will strongly resist the negative influence of a number of trotskyist organisations and also expose the treachery of the pseudo-left. Throughout the Labour movement there are individuals who while pretending to be progressive follow a reactionary agenda of their own. They emerge at critical times to oppose the workers struggle, make false claims against the socialist countries and some apparently have no qualms about stabbing their leader in the back.
    Communists will endeavour to equip the working class with the knowledge and confidence necessary to establish state power and build a socialist society. For centuries the poor, oppressed and disadvantaged have fought for justice and equality. Now in the modern world, with the rise of organised labour and the development of scientific socialism, it is possible to not only dream of a better world but to build it.
    Marxists realise that in the real physical world there is constant change. It is important to learn lessons from history and adapt to new conditions as they arise in order to meet new challenges that may lie ahead. There is no point however in re-fighting the ideological battles between Stalin and Trotsky of over 100years ago. This is merely a last ditch attempt by some Trotskyists to gain some relevance in the modern world.
    Communists respect an individuals sexuality and oppose any attempt to discredit or hassle others. We regard ourselves as all citizens of the world and are totally opposed to racism, social segregation or any persecution of ethnic minorities. We seek to build a beautiful new world based upon equality with the establishment of real human rights; something that is impossible in a capitalist society.
    Communist party members are committed to democratic centralism. This ensures that factional disputes, which would weaken the movement, are avoided. Policies are discussed fully and openly following which a vote is taken. The policy then becomes binding on all comrades.
    The struggle of the working class is international. Communists are true internationalists realising the importance of working together to coordinate their struggles with multi-national cooperations. There is also the question of aid in the form of material or military assistance given by powerful states to weaker one's being bullied by imperialism. In Afghanistan it is reported that a number of people have been forced to sell their kidneys to buy food. The US has frozen the nation’s assets but China has stepped in to provide aid including medicines. This is the kind of action that makes me proud to be a communist in the modern world.

What it means to be a communist in 2022

by Theo Russell

A contribution to the joint NCP-RCPB-ML seminar held recently in London

A thorough understanding of Marxist-Leninist theory and philosophy - dialectics, a materialist, scientific and multi faceted view of the world. Thorough knowledge of the contributions of Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il and other revolutionary thinkers.
    Applying correct Marxist-Leninist positions to real day to day problems, understanding the errors of right and left revisionism, and of anarchism, and their relationship with bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology.
    Understanding the different trends within bourgeois ideology, liberal and reactionary bourgeois ideology (e.g. in different periods the bourgeoisie moves from one to the other), and that in normal times, they are not the same as fascists (a common ultra-leftist error).
    Thus our fight with both Tories and right-wing Labour is against their upholding neo-liberal capitalism at home and imperialism abroad, but at the same time we still enjoy extensive democratic rights which have been won in battles from the English Revolution onwards. The same can be said of most advanced capitalist states. It’s important to remember that the Bolsheviks had to work secretly underground under the brutal Czarist dictatorship.
    Understanding that even under bourgeois rule, and when there is no possibility of revolutionary change, the working class can still be mobilised to make enormous gains, as in the period of the 1945 -51 post-war Labour government, that such reforms can strengthen the morale of the organised working class, but never losing sight of the need to educate the vanguard and to take up the fight to achieve socialism when the time comes.
    A thorough understanding of the bourgeois, capitalist state in the epoch of imperialism and monopoly finance capital, which rides roughshod over the rights of workers and the small bourgeoisie alike. Knowing our enemy well and understanding that bourgeois democracy is only genius democracy for the bourgeoisie. This explains why in the same breath as telling socialist countries to adopt multi-party “democracy” and the “rule of law”, the dominant capitalist states also back violent subversion and corrupt and undemocratic regimes.
    Understanding that the handful of rich capitalist states still enjoy overwhelming dominance over the world economy, allowing them to use sanctions and financial subversion as powerful weapons, but also that this domination – especially in the fields of science & technology – is on the wane.
    The ability to distinguish between truth and falsehood and to search out truth from all sources, especially communist and honest, progressive sources. This may seem obvious to communists, but it distinguishes us from those who pose as leftist or revolutionary, but who have not left behind bourgeois / petty-bourgeois thinking, and are still infected with the lies of the capitalist censored mass media.
    Understanding the need to always work in alliances, first and foremost with communists and socialists, including a non-sectarian approach and working with organisations on vitally important issues while disagreeing on other issues.
    Understanding that we can ideologically side with all sorts of strange bedfellows, such as during the Brexit referendum, and right now we would agree with both S Khan and P Patel that the Met Police have to clean out the racist and sexist pigs from their animal farm. This is something which U-Ls get into huge theoretical twists about, but which also shows the world that we share the basic norms of democracy and civilised life with the masses.
    Likewise, understanding that if and when socialism is achieved, there is no magic wand which turns the masses into revolutionaries, but that you have to work with and bring with you a very wide alliance of forces to continue the revolution.
    The ability to work in all working class and progressive organisations democratically and collectively, not imposing our ideas on others but putting forward correct positions and proposals and accepting the decision of the collective without question. Never claiming to be better than the collective or the leadership.
    Setting an example of hard work, dedication and upholding an organisation's principles, eg in a trade union working to recruit members, build branches, inform and educate members, support strike action, and never fail to join picket lines – the coal face of working class struggle; if working with the Labour Party, always turn out for canvassing and any other tasks the local branch sets.
    Never to expect too much, to be prepared to continue working for months, years and decades with possibly little or no result, but when the class is ready to move and take up the fight, to be in position where you are known and trusted by many who are not in our party, are not communists, but who know that we fight for the same goals as they do.
    There are no easy solutions to the difficult and complex problems which life throws up.

What it means to be a communist, new and revolutionary today

by Michael Chant

A keynote opening given by the leader of the RCPB-ML at a joint seminar with the NCP that was held recently in London.

Taking the topic at face value, and giving an answer in a nutshell, one could say to be a communist means seeing the face of the New in the crisis of the Old, and working for the necessary change, for the transformation of the Old into the New, with revolutionary sweep.
    Further, one cannot conceive of being a communist without membership of a communist party, a modern type of party which mobilises and organises the people to defend their own interests, collective, individual and the general interests of society.
    And, as both propositions imply, the communist party takes up the problems of the day, whether national or international, with the spirit of proletarian internationalism, in order to provide solutions and to advance the progress of society.
    But, as always, the nub of the definition centres around how the question poses itself. To be a communist is not necessarily synonymous with being new and revolutionary. It is great that in our two parties, if one wants to separate them, we share the name communist; and one has New in its name and the other Revolutionary. I think this emphasises a common aspiration. It is difficult to think of a communist party worthy of the name that is not a party of revolutionary action, and which fights for the New. It seems to us essential that this quality is present.
    Being new and revolutionary is an act of being. In contrast, when it is posed, what it means to be a communist, one is invited to think of ‘communist’ as a category, how many criteria one fulfils, what the communist positions are, and so on. It is interesting how much difference a little ‘a’ can make: from ‘to be a communist’ to ‘to be communist’. In other words, ‘to be communist’ is not a question of ideological beliefs. It is a question of action, of structures, of membership. At the same time, how can it not include being new and revolutionary, immersing oneself in the struggles of the working class and people for their rights and interests, struggles which are in defence of the rights of all, and recognising the urgency of change, having a burning flame that the New has to come into being, since the political, economic, cultural and every other kind of crisis of the Old world is causing havoc and suffering to the people wherever they are in the world. In this respect, being communist is to have an optimism, to see in the movements of the people, whether against war, whether against the anti-social offensive, that the outcome can be something positive, creative, the people mobilised and organised to speak and act in their own name and have fidelity to the ensemble of all human relationships and what they are revealing, most importantly the need for political power. This looks like it is closer to how the question poses itself, and what it means to be a communist, new and revolutionary, today.
    So, ‘today’. This is crucial, because the argument is sometimes put that a communist party can only be revolutionary when there is a ‘revolutionary’ situation. So, then, what it means to be new and revolutionary today. It is the revolutionary nature and character of the party that matters, the revolutionary culture and driving force within it. But it is true that the revolutionary actions of the communist party are not to be understood as storming Parliament or Windsor Castle with an armed people’s militia. Nor is it the answer to return to a catechism of Lenin’s words that a revolutionary situation consists of when working people do not want to live in the old way and the ruling class cannot rule in the old way. Or, one could look at it from the point of view that that situation characterises the present, with the destruction of the public authority!
    But one can characterise the issue as what does the communist party take up for solution in this period of our era. When in the 1980s the world was going through its turning point from flow to ebb of revolution, of which, for example, the coming to power of Gorbachev in the Soviet Union was an example, the conclusion could be drawn that no force could act in the old way. Tony Blair tried to convince the world that there is a Third Way, but his new type of way was not in fact new, but pro-war, anti-worker, pro-covenant thesis.
    What might be said is that what is taken up for solution today is the battle of democracy, of which the defence of the rights of all is part, and which is characterised by the people being the decision-makers versus ‘representatives’ of the people claiming to act in their name but serving a fictitious person of state. In our view, not to engage in this battle of democracy condemns you to extinction today, particularly the communists. So these are crucial fronts of struggle that affect the lives of everyone: for economic well-being, for a ban on the use of force in settling conflicts, for the protection of the environment. It is our view that people are expressing their deepest desires for something new with these demands, which can be characterised as engaging in the battle of democracy, of the necessity to establish an anti-war government.
    Just to quote from the article Era, which Hardial Bains wrote in April 1991: “The main content of the era remains the same, but the forms of struggle have to be changed so that the working people can grasp and fight for the realisation of those demands which could improve their situation, bring peace, and protect the environment. The new situation demands a new approach and solutions that working people want.” So the tasks of today present themselves with profound meaning as engaging in the battle of democracy, taking it through to the end. One could say that communists present one face to the world, not a revolutionary face and a reformist face. It is a matter of our being. The working class will emancipate the whole of humanity through revolution, through the act of emancipating itself.
    In our view, confusion arises when ‘revolution’ becomes an act of belief rather than a historical outcome of the working class and people participating in making history. In this sense, ‘revolution’ as a belief simply says that the bourgeois ruling is overthrown by force with an act of revolution, to be replaced by the proletariat ruling by force. But the state form must be changed profoundly, and it is not a question of force – it is a question of bringing into being those arrangements that empower the people to be the decision-makers. We stand with the slogan: “There Is An Alternative! One Humanity, One Struggle!”
    That is to say, people are the history makers. How can the communists mobilise and organise the working class and people to this end, with this consciousness? The communists are not in a competition to best describe the ills of capitalism and of US imperialism striving for domination in the world. Communists are striving to develop the proletarian front and to provide an alternative, so that the New can overcome the resistance of the Old and prevail.
    Not only is the history-making of the 1917 October Revolution still unfolding – but the battle of democracy from the time of the English Civil Wars has still to be brought to completion! It is not a matter of indifference whether this battle is joined or not!
    The working class must stand at the head of the struggles of the people to turn things around in their own favour, and modern definitions are needed, not catechisms. That means that organising work for the communists takes pride of place. This means advancing step by step, accomplishment by accomplishment, dealing with the state disinformation that puts a veil over the need for political power. The character of the veil is that the people are told there is no question of achieving that power for themselves, but only replacing one set of ‘representatives’ by another, left-wing versus right-wing. In this way, the conception that the people are being deprived of decision-making power gets thoroughly obscured or put off sine die [indefinitely]. We need a vantage point and a line of march to impart to the working class and people!
    So, very briefly, that is what I wanted to say on what it means to be a communist – new and revolutionary – today!

What is Maoism?

 Review

 by Ben Soton

 

Maoism – A Global History by Julia Lovell, Bodley Head. 2019.

In September 1993 I caught an early coach to London to join a protest against the arrest of a Peruvian guerrilla leader.  In 1970 a seven-year-old boy in a Scottish prep-school asked the Chinese embassy for literature to enable him to start a Cultural Revolution at his school.. What links these events is the movement known as Maoism.  In her book Julia Lovell charts its history.

Maoism is broadly defined as a variant of Marxism that places greater emphasis on the peasantry.  Regular Marxist-Leninists see this class as equal to the industrial working-class; whilst Trotskyists tend to be dismissive of it and the author shows a degree of ignorance when she uses the term ‘lumpen-proletariat’ in reference to the rural poor.  It also places specific emphasis on anti-imperialism whilst its supporters in the west tend to focus on oppressed groups such as ethnic minorities and those outside the official labour movement. 

Meanwhile Maoism is accused of supporting cult-like veneration of the leader although the same accusation was made against Soviet Union under Stalin.  Lovell argues that the distinct features of Maoism originate in the violent suppression of the Chinese Communist Party and labour movement in 1927.The brutality of these events led to Chinese Communist Party’s emphasis on armed struggle over trade unionism.

Much of the book focuses on Maoism outside of China; covering the Korean War, the tragic events in Indonesia in 1966, the Vietnam war and the horrors of Pol Pot.  It should be pointed out that the Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh was not a Maoist and that Vietnam later overthrew the Pol Pot regime in Kampuchea.

 It also covers the conflict in Peru in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The guerrilla leader mentioned earlier was Abimael Guzman leader of the Shining Path. Guzman is now in a Peruvian jail. The seven-year-old boy was Andrew Marr who is now a mainstream journalist and television presenter.

A chapter on Maoism in the West explains how it influenced the anti-war and civil-rights protests of the 1960s and 70s.  British Maoism, or that section of the Communist movement opposed to Krushchevite revisionism originates from the Committee for the Defeat of Modern Revisionism and Communist Unity founded in 1963 by Michael McCreary.

But the book contains inaccuracies about British Maoism; for instance, it claims that the Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist) (CPE-ML) later became the Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (CPB–ML).  The two groups were, in fact,  separate organisations; the CPB-ML, was founded in 1968 by Reg Birch, a maverick member of the old mainstream communist party, while the CPE was established in 1972 to later become  the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) in 1979.

Lovell curiously argues that despite market reforms Maoism still influences Chinese policy citing a change to the Chinese constitution which lifts the limits the Chinese President to two terms in office, arguably making Xi Jinping president for life.  However, China never gave material assistance to most of the movements mentioned.  This was even the case with the Nepalese Maoists who overthrew the Nepalese monarchy in 2007.

She believes that in the light of recent disputes between China and the West (largely provoked by the latter) that our ruling class need to take a new look at Maoism.  The question is should those of us opposed to imperialism also take a look at it?

Joint Letter on the Korean War

Comrade Kim Jong Il
General Secretary, Workers’ Party of Korea
Chairman of National Defence Commission, DPRK
Pyongyang
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea


25th July 2009 (Juche 98)

Dear Comrade Kim Jong Il,

Our organisations participating in this celebration to mark the 56th anniversary of the end of the Korean War and the historic victory of the Korean people send you the warmest congratulations and heartfelt best wishes.

The Korean War was an illegal war of aggression organised by the US imperialists under the flag of the United Nations. US imperialism is the most barbaric force that humanity has encountered, armed to the teeth with nuclear and other weapons and operating on the fascist dictum "might makes right". It seeks to blackmail any people who affirm their collective right to existence, just as the DPRK is leading the Korean people in doing.

Just as hundreds of millions of people opposed the US-led illegal war of aggression against the Korean people in 1950, so today the working class and people of Britain, as well as all the peace loving people of the world, must not permit Anglo-US imperialism to justify another Korean War.

We participating organisations, on behalf of all democratic forces in Britain, are indeed proud to be called Friends of Korea. We declare our great admiration for the historic victory of the Korean people, and the heroic advance in rebuilding their country, and in their fervent aspiration to once again reunify the Korean Peninsula under the precept of “By our nation itself”. We also celebrate on this occasion your tireless and peerless work, your leadership, and the collective spirit of the whole Korean people under your guidance in defending their socialist system and fighting for complete freedom and independence.

We expresses our utmost confidence that the Korean people through their own efforts will oust the US occupation troops from the south of their country, and reunify their country through their own efforts, peacefully and without outside interference.

We regard the Korean people’s victories as our victories, as we struggle for the same ideals and against the same enemies. As ever, we assure our comrades in the DPRK that we fight shoulder to shoulder with them in their struggles now and in the future also.

With warmest fraternal regards

Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
European Regional Society for the Study of the Juche Idea
UK Korean Friendship Association
New Communist Party of Britain
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
Socialist Labour Party

NCPB and RCPB(ML) joint statement on DPR Korea satellite launch

The Launch of an Experimental Communications Satellite by the DPRK Is its Sovereign Right

Joint Statement of the New Communist Party and the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist), April 21, 2009


On April 5th , the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) successfully launched an experimental communications satellite, the Kwangmyongsong-2, into orbit by means of carrier rocket Unha-2. The satellite is part of the DPRK's long-term plan for the development of outer space. Both carrier rocket and satellite were made and developed by the DPRK using only their own resources and technology, in keeping with the guiding philosophy of self-reliance.
The DPRK points out that the satellite is of decisive significance in promoting scientific research into the peaceful use of outer space and solving scientific and technological problems for the launch of practical satellites in the future. The successful satellite launch was conducted against the backdrop of a national drive aimed at bringing about a renewed revolutionary surge throughout the DPRK to "open the gate to a great prosperous and powerful nation without fail by 2012, the centenary of birth of President Kim Il Sung, under the far-reaching plan of General Secretary Kim Jong Il".
Despite the fact that it is the DPRK's sovereign right to engage in peaceful scientific experimentation and to create the conditions for its own prosperity, the US, Japan, South Korea and Western European powers, including Britain, demanded that the DPRK be condemned. They have persisted in spreading the misleading impression that the DPRK was testing an intercontinental ballistic missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The US puppet government of south Korea branded the launch "reckless". The US and Japan reacted to the news of the satellite by escalating the warmongering and disinformation campaign against the DPRK and demanding its further international isolation.
US President Barack Obama during his visit to Prague on April 5 used the occasion to condemn the DPRK with high-sounding rhetoric: “Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something.” If Obama’s call for nuclear disarmament meant something, why then was he in the Czech Republic to promote a US missile base? If his words meant something, why does the US not withdraw its arsenal of one thousand nuclear weapons from the south of Korea, together with its tens of thousands of troops, in order to promote peace and security on the Korean Peninsula, and end its threats of aggression against the DPRK? To anyone that cares to see through the rhetoric to the objective reality, the spectacle of this representative of the armed international might of the US calling upon the blockaded and sanctioned DPRK to be peaceful and follow the rules is ludicrous and shameful.
Bill Rammell of the British Foreign Office added his voice to the clamour in arrogantly condemning the launch, and blustering that the British government was “seeking at the Security Council the most united and robust international response”.
In line with these outlandish statements of the big powers, the UN Security Council on April 13 approved a “Presidential Statement” condemning the launch and linking it with the nuclear issue, as well as adjusting the sanctions imposed on the DPRK in October 2006. This is an abuse of the Security Council to violate the sovereign right of the DPRK.
In response, the DPRK Foreign Ministry issued a statement, pointing out that throughout its history the Security Council had never before taken issue with satellite launches. It rejected the unjust action of the Security Council as infringing upon the sovereignty of the DPRK and seriously hurting the dignity of the Korean people. It pointed out that since the six-party talks have now turned into a platform to force the DPRK to disarm and to bring down its social system, the DPRK would no longer participate in the talks nor be bound by any agreement there, including the disablement of its nuclear facilities, which it will now take measures to restore.
Our Parties vigorously condemn the warmongering and chauvinism of the US and Britain. We call on all democratic and peace-loving people, irrespective of their political viewpoints or other considerations, to reject the infantile hysteria and outright disinformation being generated against the DPRK over this issue, and to take a stand in defence of its sovereignty and independence. In our view, this is a duty of the working class and people in order to contribute to the peace and security not only of the Korean Peninsula but world-wide.



New Communist Party of Britain
PO Box 73, London SW11 2PQ.

Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
170 Wandsworth Road, London SW8 2LA

The British Government Must End All Interference in Zimbabwe

Statement of the New Communist Party of Britain and the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist), July 26, 2008

We vigorously condemn the government’s continued interference in the internal affairs of Zimbabwe, the most recent example of which resulted in a decision by the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council on July 22 to impose new sanctions on those associated with the government of Zimbabwe.

The government has been at the forefront of external attempts to interfere in the electoral process in Zimbabwe and to attempt to determine that country’s economic and political future. It has openly given its support to the candidate of the opposition party, imposed sanctions and destabilised Zimbabwe’s economy, and is striving to bring maximum pressure to bear on the mediation efforts of those from neighbouring countries and from the African Union. At the same time, a great propaganda campaign has been launched in the monopoly-controlled media, to spread as much disinformation as possible on Zimbabwe and its history. Nothing is said about Britain’s colonial domination of that country and the fact that no reparation has been made; or of the fact that the Labour government has reneged on agreements made in the past to provide financial support for land redistribution in Zimbabwe. The same media never mention that Britain has openly interfered in Zimbabwe’s internal politics through the so-called Westminster Foundation for Democracy and other sinister organisations.

The government currently seeks to justify its interference on the grounds that violence has prevented the second round of the presidential election in Zimbabwe from being viable and has called for further EU and UN intervention. At the same time, it has declared itself content with the first round of the election held in March, since although that vote was inconclusive it favoured the candidate who is acceptable to Anglo-American imperialism and the other big powers in the EU. It is now demanding that Robert Mugabe, the president of Zimbabwe, should stand aside and that a “transitional government” favourable to the big powers should be established. Then, it is promised, sanctions will be lifted and “aid” will be provided so that the rebuilding of Zimbabwe’s economy can begin.

We totally condemn such interference and what amounts to outright blackmail. Zimbabwe is no longer a British colony and the British government has no right to declare itself the arbiter of which political party or individual is a “legitimate representative of the will of the people of Zimbabwe”.
What must also be condemned are the economic measures taken in the past by Anglo-American imperialism and the international financial institutions in which it holds sway, which have created many of the economic problems facing Zimbabwe and its people. Indeed, it is the big British and other monopolies such as Anglo American, Rio Tinto, and Standard Chartered which still dominate Zimbabwe’s economy, 30 years after formal independence. They now stand poised to strengthen their grip and continue to dictate the actions of the British government.

It is also clear that Britain and the other big powers have created all the conditions for violence to take place and have not ruled out its use and “whatever it takes” in order to effect “regime change”. But while apparently deploring violence during the elections in Zimbabwe, the Labour government condones and perpetrates it during the elections illegally held in occupied Iraq and Afghanistan.

The British government presents itself as the guardian of so-called “universal values”, which are nothing more than the values of neo-liberal globalisation. It attempts to impose such values all over the world, just as the imperialists of the 19th century declared that they had a “civilising mission” to impose the alleged benefits of colonial rule. It demands that all should bow down and accept its definitions of “democracy” and “good governance”, and declares it is ready to “export democracy” on the basis that “might is right” to those who refuse.

We call on the working class and all democratic people to resolutely oppose this old colonial mentality. In regard to Zimbabwe, the important principle that must be upheld is the right of the people of that country to choose their own path of development and government free from the meddling of Britain and the other big powers. The attempts of the government to impose its “universal values” in any other country must be resolutely opposed and it must end all its interference in Zimbabwe.