The Polemic On The General Line Of The International Communist Movement

A major review of all of the many strands of Gramsci interpretation from the earliest writings of his contemporaries through to the academic debates of the 2010s.

The ease with which Cuba slipped into its relationship with Communism revived in the United States its recurring nightmare in which other Latin American countries, particularly Mexico, become satellites of Russia or Red China. But such an occurrence is most unlikely in Mexico, according to Karl Schmitt, former intelligence research analyst with the United States Department of State. Communism in Mexico traces efforts during the early twentieth century to create a Soviet-style society in one of the largest and most strategically situated of the Latin American countries. Schmitt writes authoritatively of the Mexican Communist movement, tracing its development from an early and potentially powerful political-economic base to the increasingly fragmented and weakened collection of parties and front groups of the 1960s. He follows the various schisms and factional divisions to the mid-1950s, when the process of disintegration became most noticeable, and explores and analyzes in detail Communist attempts since then to establish unity among the many quarreling and frustrated groups of the now-splintered movement. Three Communist parties in Mexico, a score of front groups, and numerous infiltration cells in non-Communist organizations such as student and labor groups, all recognize in a broad way a common and ultimate goal: the creation of a Soviet-style society. But their attempts at unity have consistently led only to further bickering and frustration. This period is subjected to a thorough study and analysis in an effort to understand and explain the Communists' lack of success. Schmitt presciently concludes that Communism's future in Mexico will be as cloudy as its past, and that the accelerating economy and improving social conditions there will serve to weaken the movement still further.

The current conflict which threatens the very existence of the inter national communist movement as a single coherent entity must be looked for in the roots of Marxian philosophy. The central concept of pre-Leninist communism is contained in the notion of "proletarian internationalism. " Yet the emergence of the communist party-states has been squarely predicated on the requirements of single national states, as viewed through the training and experience of the various communist leaders. Thus the Soviet version has been shaped by the nationalism of Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev. The only aberrant case, the internationalism of Trotsky, was doomed to failure. The Chinese version of "communism" has as its root concepts the spirit of "prolonged" struggle against a superior enemy, whose ultimate defeat is ensured through the dialectics of political growth. The non communist societies are by definition "decadent. " The movement came to power by exploiting the nationalism engendered within China by the Japanese invasion. Its mass support was based on the peasantry, although the transparent fiction of "proletarian leadership" was strictly maintained. Further, "communism" is a term which has lost its original encompassing definition. Peking now narrowly defines it as policies consonant with "the thought of Mao Tse-tung. " Thus both the Soviet and the Chinese interpretation of "commun ism" are based on a concept which was anathema to the intellectual founders of the movement.

The Sino-Soviet split in the 1960s was one of the most significant events of the Cold War. Why did the Sino-Soviet alliance, hailed by its creators as "unbreakable", "eternal", and as representing "brotherly solidarity", break up? Why did their relations eventually evolve into open hostility and military confrontation? With the publication of several works on the subject in the past decade, we are now in a better position to understand and explain the origins of the Sino-Soviet split. But at the same time new questions and puzzles have also emerged. The scholarly debate on this issue is still fierce. This book, the result of extensive research on declassified documents at the Chinese Foreign Ministry, and on numerous other new Chinese materials, sheds new light on the problem and makes a significant contribution to the debate. More than simply an empirical case study, by theorising the concept of the ideological dilemma, Mingjiang Li’s book attempts to address the relationship between ideology and foreign policy and discusses such pressing questions as why it is that an ideology can sometimes effectively dictate foreign policy, whilst at other times exercises almost no significant influence at all. This book will be of essential reading to anyone interested in Chinese-Soviet history, Cold War history, International Relations and the theory of ideology.

"By unleashing the international productive forces, the reorganization of international production has ushered in the Götterdämmerung of international finance capital. At the beginning of its crusade around the globe, international finance capital still reveled in fantasies of omnipotence and dreams of eternity. Today, their mood is one of general hangover: the crisis-proneness of the social system proves irreversible. But the turn of a new era already looms on the horizon; the dawning of the international socialist revolution becomes visible. And yet, the old masters will not make way voluntarily, even if they drag the whole of humanity with them into capitalist barbarism. The decision for the international revolution must be made by the workers and the masses themselves. To help them make this decision and together with them sweep every obstacle out of the way so that they can fulfill their historical mission - that, in a nutshell, sums up the tasks of the Marxist-Leninists in the whole world today."