Conclusions and thoughts about the causes of the restoration of capitalism

The operation to restore capitalism to the socialist countries began from within and from the top, without being preceded by any military imperialist intervention to restore capitalism or any popular uprising or internal clash. The history of the revolutionary labour movement has known defeats, but at different historical moments, when the outcome of the struggle had not been already determined. Under such circumstances, the clash developed in a straightforward way between the decisive action of the revolutionary popular masses on the one hand, and the forces of the local and international bourgeois class on the other.

The conditions, methods and means used to restore capitalism make it compulsory to study the problem with the subjective factor as starting point, i.e. the party and the state socialist system, as well as the total of primarily internal contradictions reported in the realm of social and economic relations. At that particular point in time when capitalism was restored, the other group of contradictions, concerning the relations between socialism and capitalism, while exerting a considerable influence on the sequence and interdependence of the internal events that led to the counter-revolution, was not however decisive.

26. The vanguard, leading role of the party as a ruling party and the nucleus of the political system, was gradually lost. It became lax and the party's principles and operating rules and policy for promoting   cadres had become blunted.

The fact alone that the threat of counter-revolution was not  suspected demonstrates the alteration in the identity and character of the communist parties in the socialist countries.

There were also specific events, and especially in Europe, which should have been recognised as "warning signs" (Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, the problems of Yugoslavia, Romania and Albania, as well as the revisionist attack using Eurocommunism as the spearhead to strike the communist movement in capitalist Europe).

Phenomena of splits in communist parties in capitalist Europe also constituted a strong warning of the ideological pressure exerted by capitalism and its ideology on the ranks of the workers' and communist movements in the capitalist countries.

The communist parties, as shown more clearly by recent developments, regarded their leading, vanguard role in the society as being given and incontestable. The successes in building socialism and in the international field cultivated a spirit of smugness and complacency. Unity with the people and democratic relations with the working people and with social organisations -all that was most precious and necessary for socialism- ceased to be of interest and to be kept up and renewed continuously.

From one point on, they became detached from reality, they lost their ability to grasp the people's mood, problems, needs and concerns. The party organs and organisations were transformed into bureaucratic-type services which resulted in weakening the creativity and initiative of the popular masses and their active participation in building socialism.

Control over the party, its organisations and cadres by the broad popular masses weakened gradually until it finally disappeared.

The leading bodies of the communist parties were responsible for undermining the process of criticism and self-criticism from above and below, resulting in the formal and schematic implementation of decisions, in a tendency to conceal and embellish true situations, in the lack of concern for the quality of work and results, and in a spirit where everybody covered for everybody else. A climate of tolerance was cultivated toward distortions of policy, violations of state discipline, and the quality of production.

Inner-party democracy was violated, the way was cleared for careerism among cadres, for the exploitation of party and government positions, for subjectivism in the selection of cadres. The principle of equality among communists was violated, and during recent years phenomena of contempt for party comradeship appeared and became stronger.

As a result of such developments, the doors were left wide open to cadres who had selfish motives, who suffered from a lack of political ability and farsightedness, or who were unable to understand and search out the suggestions and remarks of the working people, or to distinguish dissenting viewpoints from anti-socialist propaganda. The ability of the communist parties to base their decisions on scientific data was reduced, with results of more general significance to the building of socialism and dealing with complex and intricate phenomena.

These phenomena, incompatible with the nature of the communist party, opened the way to undermining the party's prestige among the people.

27. Theoretical viewpoints were cultivated or options preferred which constituted deviations from our theory, violations of building principles. The front of struggle with imperialism and revisionism was weakened. In some cases, erroneous theories were adopted, which either did not correspond to reality or simplified theoretical issues regarding the building of socialism, e.g. theories which put forward the rapid transition to developed socialism and communism, underestimating the complex and long-term character of the transitional period (see 20th congress), theories about the "all-people state", "all-people party" and "all-people democracy". (19)

The directions of the 20th congress toward "a variety of forms of transition of various countries to socialism, under certain conditions" was utilised by the leaderships of communist parties as a theoretical foundation for an offensive against the scientific theory of socialism. In the name of national specificities and particularities, the immutable laws of the socialist revolution were revised. Views were put forward that through structural reforms and "the policy of democracy" it would be possible for the capitalist system to be transformed into a socialist one, without a revolutionary leap.

Such views underestimate and underrate the fact that the exploiting classes, supported by militarism and the reactionary bureaucratic machinery, offer resistance, that any form of transition is subject to general laws, and is the result of a comprehensive parliamentary and non-parliamentary struggle.

During the period that followed, influenced by the experience from Chile and Portugal and by imperialism's change of tactics, some of the viewpoints and ideas of the 20th congress were set aside. Any changes in orientation relative to the 20th congress took place silently in the sense that they were not accompanied by a more general theoretical, open, collective discussion in the countries and within the ranks of the communist movement.

The strategy of ideological subversion -as can be seen in retrospect today in the light of experience- did not encounter the corresponding aggressive and united response from the communist movement, from the parties and government leaderships in the socialist countries. Although in the parties' documents, especially those of the CPSU, reference is made to the dangerous nature of imperialism's new tactics, in practice insufficient efforts were made to sound the alarm and put the communist movement on the alert in order to confront the new situation aggressively and convincingly.

The bourgeois class, with the rich historic experience it already had from the first moment the independent labour movement appeared, skilfully shifted the focus of the ideological struggle from outside to inside the communist movement and the socialist system. In its strategy and tactics, it utilised the rich historic experience in adapting and readapting which was acquired from its confrontation and cooperation with various classes, strata and political forces (absolute monarchy, constitutional monarchy, parliamentary republic, fascist dictatorship, military coups). It utilised the mistakes, weaknesses and ambitions of leading cadres, and took advantage of the social and political climate that cultivated deviations and discontent.

We also believe, on the basis of retrospective experience, that in documents of the communist parties of the socialist countries, the indisputable victories of socialism were overestimated, as well as the spectacular changes which took place in the world after World War II, in such a way as to underestimate the complex new problems which arose during the course of developments.

In certain cases, the phenomena of the crisis of capitalism were presented as being absolute, and a simplistic viewpoint was cultivated with respect to the disintegration of the capitalist system. The ability of capitalism to apply new scientific and technological advances to production was underestimated, despite their contradictions and adverse effects on the life and rights of the working people.

Deviation was not generated automatically, in a vacuum. There were new problems which did not find solutions, mistakes which were not revealed in good time or whose main cause was not identified, subjective and superficial assessments that evolved and slipped into deviation.

Certain erroneous or Utopian views about the problems in international life and the confrontation between the two social systems expressed a tendency to back down under the ideological pressure of the bourgeois ideology, despite the fact that the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries did not hesitate to confront imperialism at critical moments, in order to defend socialism and the countries who were waging national liberation wars.

Whether directly or indirectly, opportunism opened the way for the weakening of the communist parties. It constituted the ideological basis for imperialism's efforts to undermine and weaken socialism to succeed.

The problem cannot be solved by a formal exorcism of revisionist, opportunistic and liquidationist views and by denouncing their holders. The principles of the materialist-dialectical interpretation of history led to the search for objective facts in social, economic and cultural life on the basis of which the conditions may be created for the appearance of opportunistic theories and practices within the labour movement. This does not mean that the prevalence of opportunism is inevitable. When there is awareness of the objective factors which favour the phenomenon, then it is possible for the communist movement to deal with problems, side effects and even temporary defeats.

28. Creative ideological and political work was weakened, as was multi-faceted educational activity aimed at developing socialist consciousness and at ensuring the constant growth and improvement of the new type of person required to build the socialist society.

Socialist thought could and should have constituted the steering gear to the development of this new society, which had to chart new paths under conditions of intense confrontation with bourgeois and petty bourgeois ideology, with opportunism and revisionism. The building of socialism requires a relatively high educational and political-ideological level among the broad popular masses, as well as a certain level of knowledge and consciousness, so that they may be able to respond to the complex creative and initiative-oriented political and organisational process.

Under conditions of sharp ideological confrontation with capitalism, and of particular growth in the role of ideological activity within the socialist societies, this significant front of activity was neglected, and not adapted to changing conditions because it was taken for granted that the working people were convinced supporters of the system. The complexity of the process of cultivating socialist consciousness through direct, active participation in solving the problems of building socialism and managing social and political affairs was underestimated.

The discussion of ideological and political problems did not mobilise the whole party, its bodies, members and non-party supporters, and indeed the entire society. In this way, an opportunity would have been provided for a broad expression of views and orientations, and erroneous views would have been confronted using ideological means and persuasive arguments. The evolution of ideas does not automatically keep pace with social evolution; progressive and revolutionary ideas give way in conditions under which the people's initiative and creative action is blunted, lax and reduced, allowing anachronistic remnants, individualism, subjectivism and localism to return and become stronger. Thus are conditions created which permit the conduits of infiltration and reproduction of bourgeois and petty bourgeois ideology, of compromise and lassitude in face of the complexity of problems, to operate effectively. These inadequacies appear more pronounced today, under conditions of general regression.

29. There was a delay in the creative evolution, development and enrichment of revolutionary theory by the experience of socialist construction and the action of revolutionary forces. Without any intention of invalidating the scientific research and theoretical researches in the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, developments indicate that the communist parties were responsible for the theoretical delay in the creative development of Marxist-Leninist theory in conditions of socialist construction and the contemporary world. Scientific studies being conducted by special research centres, some of which belonged to the party itself, were either underestimated or overlooked.

Likewise underestimated was the need for socialism to be built through the constant development of the theory, the renewal of knowledge, which in conjunction with active participation in management and administration, prepares the ground for the development of a new type of person.

The theoretical and scientific problems were not studied in advance, so that the difficulties could be confronted promptly, and so that new trends, contradictions and conflicts which needed to be resolved in a dialectical way could be identified. The success of the October Revolution and the rise of the revolutionary movement that followed, proved that one of the basic elements of its success was the fact that for some time previously, a series of crucial theoretical issues had been studied by the Classics. Giving experience an absolute character without having recourse to theory and scientific research can be detrimental. The party, as the vanguard section of the people, must perceive new problems promptly, must be able to anticipate, and not to lose track of the overall movement, the whole, in face of the immediate, the everyday, the partial.

30. The dialectical relationship between direct and representative democracy became weak and failed to function with the quality and as required by the times and by the complex tasks of socialist construction.

It has not been possible, throughout the course of socialist construction, to combine central planning with popular initiative, to cultivate the feeling among the people that they are managing socialist ownership. From the 1970s on, this phenomenon became more marked, and took on an acute form.

Problems appeared in the development of forms of socialist democracy and in their correct functioning, including excessive powers and such phenomena which could not all be justified by the objective nature of the problems and/or special conditions. The potentialities inherent in this particular system -- whose basic criterion is the conscious participation of the people, social control over governments and administrative bodies, and the dialectical relationship and unit: "party-Soviet-people" -- were either not discovered or not utilised.

The loss of experienced cadres and fighters during the civil war and World War II, and the need to utilise the strongest, most capable cadres on the front of socialist construction created gaps in the composition of the Soviets. Owing to objective circumstances, a new generation of cadres was promoted which did not have the experience required to solve problems in a democratic way and with the people's participation and support. They were elected within a climate of laxness and careerism.

These consequences, while noted, were not dealt with effectively by the communist parties and organs of state power, and thus the problems were reproduced in a more acute way.

The main problem which must be investigated further, so as to make use of the relevant experience, has to do with the role and use of the Soviets as a form of state power and the relations between local Soviets and workers' collectives.

Even though laws were passed which continuously gave new rights to the local Soviets, to the working people and to workers' groups, in fact the procedures for popular participation and control were becoming merely formal in nature.

An equally serious issue which requires deeper examination was the status and role of the trade unions and other mass organisations of the socialist society. Legally and institutionally, their role was consolidated through laws and decisions, and through participation in all social and political affairs. In practice, their role was not developed to the highest possible degree.

The loosening of the party's links with the people and the detachment of the central organs from the working people had an adverse effect on the utilisation of the mass-organisations which should have constituted poles of attraction for non-party forces, for the people, to engage in active participation and control of state and party organs.

The primary, paramount responsibility for the above phenomena lies in the role and activity of the communist party which, by its nature and role, should have had the first concern for correlating its activity with the initiative of the people and cultivating participation by the people constantly. It should have restricted and eliminated administrative methods and created the conditions required to increase the role of the direct and representative organs of the people in the economic and organizational functions of the socialist state.

31. The negative phenomena and problems that appeared do not disprove the theoretical position that in the socialist society there is a political transitional period during which the state is expressed by the political term revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat, implying a full and substantial difference between it and the dictatorship of the bourgeois class in the capitalist society.

The criticism which was leveled at the socialist political system by anti-socialist forces in the capitalist countries, reformists and revisionists, started out from a consciously-or unconsciously in some cases- mistaken hypothesis, i.e. equating the criteria of capitalism and socialism, and from a classless treatment of democracy and freedom.

One of the most characteristic views of this type is identifying democracy with the multi-party system, with the number of parties that exercise power and take part in government. Socialism does not preclude the existence and functioning of other parties, Their existence is mainly determined by objective criteria. The number, nature and role of the political parties under socialism, apart from the communist party, depends on specific national specificities and traditions, on the social stratification or on historical reasons (e.g. the Social Revolutionaries although they participated in the first Soviet government, crossed over to the counter-revolution during the civil war).

The course of socialist construction showed the need, at each phase, at each level of socialist development, to ensure the best possible combination of democracy and centralism in the economic field of society with the primary goal being to improve centralism and develop democracy.

Centralism must express the basic interests of the working people and democracy the continuing presence of the people in the exercise of power. The most harmonic possible combination of the two, their dialectical interaction, constitutes a factor showing the ability of the socialist system to defend itself from mistakes and subversive activities. The growth of centralism to the detriment of democracy caused serious side-effects in economic development and in satisfying collective interests, and became a factor which weakened the defence of the socialist system.

Achieving popular participation and social control over socialist ownership proved not to be an easy matter, as the socialist system is historically separated from communist self-government.

For the people to become the supreme and sole owners of the social wealth as a whole requires time and constant effort so as to secure, improve and widen the rights of control, and to ensure the all-round development of the human personality.

Although this was of intense concern at party congresses and specific relevant decisions and plans were formulated, it does not appear that this issue was dealt with effectively, on the basis of targets and needs.

Apart from the objective difficulties, the mistakes, violations and deviations which can be summarized in the quality of the relation between the working people and socialist ownership, the presence of the working people in exercising the functions of power in harmonic relation with the increased significance of a central administration (20), likewise influenced the problems that arose.

32.  In the course of building socialism, the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his work" was substantially violated. The system of economic and moral incentives required constant improvements. To the extent that this failed to occur and was violated, the ground was prepared for indifference to work and to increasing productivity. These factors led to the creation of incomes which did not correspond to the quantity and quality of the work done. Despite the periodic efforts at economic reform in the socialist countries, the role of the economic methods and incentives in the popular economy did not finally become stronger, central planning became rigid and centralised. Problems remained in the transport of goods and in the prompt supply of the market.

In this regard, discussions were held and critical remarks put forward by communist parties and Marxist economists, about the way in which the law of value, commodity-money relations was used in administering and operating enterprises and the way in which workers1 collectives were utilised.

Questions related in particular to commodity-money relations, the quality of consumer goods and services, economic and moral incentives, social control and participation in planning and administration require further, special discussion. There are grounds for critical remarks, but special examination and greater depth are required. Studies need to be made, in cooperation with communist parties and scientists, of the experience of certain countries in Central and Eastern Europe, such as Hungary and Poland, in which experiments and applications were conducted.

Some proved to be ineffective and are to be blamed for the appearance of capitalist ownership with side-effects in the ideological and political realms.

Problems which appeared, and which constituted deviations from theory, not only failed to refute, but even confirmed the general direction of Marxism-Leninism, i.e. that socialisation (in its two main forms, state and cooperative) could not go ahead during the period of socialism in the form of separate independent communities, but as state ownership, because of the need to develop the productive forces and to secure the collective interest during the transitional period.

The problems, weaknesses and mistakes which appeared in the dialectical relationship between democracy and centralism in the field of planning, in the local Soviets and the workers' collectives and their role, cannot be used as an excuse for projecting, as a counterweight to socialism, the "market economy" and "free competition" and the policy of privatisations or the Utopian, in the best possible case, view of "self-administration" and "self-management" which would lead to splitting united, nationwide socialist ownership into ownership by groups of producers, to the detriment of the social whole and the collective interest. Social ownership and central planning have been subject to constant attacks and slanders by anti-socialist forces. In essence, it is the abolition of class exploitation and the political power of the working class and its allies that is being targeted.

33. The system of internal contradictions in socialism, which constitutes the core of the materialist dialectic, was overlooked. The need to secure dialectical unity and interaction between the productive relations and productive forces at every phase and level of development was underestimated.

This may prove to be a key issue in many of the questions which concern us here with respect to the ground on which mistakes, weaknesses, deficiencies and finally deviations flourished. The problem of the contradictions in socialism did not become an object of theoretical studies and mainly of practical solutions, resulting in adverse effects that were reflected in the economic, social and political fields. Some of Lenin's most basic thoughts were underestimated, according to which socialism is not free of contradictions and disagreements and that these, when they are overlooked, can take on the nature of a conflict.(21)

The process of unifying the socialist society was overestimated or made absolute. Mistaken views prevailed which argued that contradictions lose their significance in socialism; the result was that inconsistencies, disharmonies and problems were not identified and dealt with to the extent required by circumstances.

At times, particularly during the 1970s and more intensively after the Polish crisis, intense discussions were carried out about the dialectic of contradictions in socialism, but these discussions did not continue. While issues were brought to the fore, practical solutions to this crucial problem do not seem to have been provided beyond theoretical discussions and studies carried out by various scientific institutes.

At every phase in the development of the socialist society, under conditions where the scientific and technological revolution showed the organic link between social and technological progress, the communist parties and state organs should have been directing their attention continuously to the following problems: improving productive relations, developing the productive forces, achieving the optimum organisation of the whole mechanism of the economy, raising socialist consciousness and increasing the cultural development of the peoples in the socialist countries.

Under conditions of socialist construction -as distinct from capitalism- the characteristic feature was the rapid and in some cases heady increases in people's material and intellectual needs; therefore the need for the development of the productive forces was constantly growing.

To the extent that these contradictions were not faced, conflicts arose between social production and consumption, between individual and social interests. In this instance, the contradiction could not be removed by cultivating and idealising individual consumerism nor of course by ignoring the growing trend in personal and collective needs. The course of socialist construction shows that problems were created and discontent was cultivated to the extent that there was no "yardstick" of balance on the basis of objective possibilities.

34. The stratification of the socialist society was overlooked, a fact which prepared the way for contradictions between general, partial, special and local interests.

When the foundations of socialism were laid, class distinctions were abolished; distinctions and differences of roles between the working class and the other social strata of the population, peasantry and intellectuals, which were manifested in various forms (contradictions between town and country, physical and mental labour etc.) diminished but were not abolished.

Other distinctions were associated with the level of socialist development, with forms of socialist ownership, with historic, national and local specificities. Yet others, which appeared as differences of consciousness and orientation, stemmed from the survival of anachronistic viewpoints or from the pressure of the bourgeois ideology under conditions of ideological attack by imperialism.

Contradictions in the socialist society are linked with the Marxist position on the nature of this society, which is described as a transitional period in the revolutionary transformation of capitalist into communist society. It is a period during which full social equality cannot be achieved.(22)

Historical experience has vindicated the positions of the Marxist-Leninist Classics. It has provided a lot of new data for deeper study and for the development of concepts about the contradictions in socialism. It has confirmed that the socialist society retains remnants, traditions, and deep traces of the old society whose offspring it was.

The class struggle does not stop with the victory of the socialist revolution. It continues and intensifies at critical moments, particularly during the period in which efforts are being made to socialise the main means of production, and to lay the foundations for socialism. The exploiting classes do not give up easily, despite the fact that they constitute a minority and have lost some of their most basic economic and political supports.

The intensity, duration, sharpness and form in which the class struggle is manifested depends on the pace at which socialist relations are built, and on the international surroundings and balance of forces. During the entire period in which private capital and small commodity production exist, new elements of the bourgeois class are reproduced. The situation is also affected by the international balance of forces, and the strategy and tactics of imperialism which is constantly looking for an internal foothold to promote the overthrow of socialism from within, since external intervention is not an easy matter.

Its sharpness and forms are not the same for all countries; the national specificities, the traditions of the workers' and communist movement, the quality of the bonds between the party and the people, the quality of the alliance between the working class and the other social strata who are fighting for socialist measures and transformations in that particular country, all have a part to play.

It is obvious that, as the socialist relations of production are consolidated, as socialist democracy develops, and as the self-driven, active popular participation in the building and administration of political and social matters increases, the opponents of socialism will be minimized.

35. The widespread use in socialism of the advances of the scientific and technological revolution was delayed.

Congresses of communist parties in the socialist countries repeatedly identified problems in the unsatisfactory implementation and utilisation of new technologies. The scientific and technological revolution was applied and utilised unequally and selectively: in the military economy, in space, in some sectors of heavy industry and in large-scale projects; less so in the consumer goods and services industries.

Apart from objective, historical factors, the reasons for the relatively low utilisation of science and technology and the equally low return on investments should be sought in the following factors: In the role of the economic administrative mechanism, in the forms and methods of administration and management, in the system of distribution according to the quantity and quality of the work, in the system of material and moral incentives, in the rational use of material, financial and manpower resources, and closely related to the participation of the people in the administration, management and control of planning and administration bodies.

These factors play a significant role in taking advantage of the potentialities of socialist ownership, which cannot be put into practice by themselves, without the human factor and the support of science and technology. The passage from extensive to intensive development is linked also with the forms and quality of socialist democracy, with the participation of the masses.

Another factor which should be studied with the help of the experience of communist parties and scientists is the problem of the possibilities of socialist accumulation -- in specific countries and under specific historic conditions - which acts as an objective factor, encouraging or restraining continued growth, and above all that of the comprehensive application of technological advances.

Perceiving the way in which technology has been used in socialism does not disprove the fact that the socialist relations of production provided a significant thrust to the growth of the productive forces and to the visible technological progress in countries which had started at the lowest point in comparison with the corresponding situation in the developed capitalist countries. A series of studies and statistics have proved that in the socialist countries, the productive forces developed and that a considerable effort was made to develop science and technology. Discoveries and scientific research still retain their value in many fields. The USSR in particular, periodically pulled ahead of the developed capitalist countries.

There are no grounds for the argument that is widely disseminated in the capitalist countries, namely that the delay in modernising the productive forces was the decisive cause of the overthrow of the systems in the socialist countries.

These views that see the development of the means of production, technology and science as being the exclusive criterion for progressiveness and democracy have proved to be one-sided. They overlook the problem of ownership in capitalism, as well as the position and role of the working people in the productive process.

The development of productive forces, despite their creative, revolutionary nature, is not the exclusive indicator of the creative aspect of human activity and the social status of the working people. Socialism, even with lower productivity, and especially when this is due to historic, objective reasons, is in a position to offer the working people more than capitalism because of the qualitative elements it brings to working and living conditions. Abolishing the exploitation of man by man creates a new system of human values which determines the quality of life and the ranking of criteria and needs.

Undoubtedly the development of the material and technical infrastructure on the basis of scientific and technological revolution, the level of development of the means of production, and sophisticated mechanisation and automation contribute to the development of productive relations.

36. The application of the principle of proletarian internationalism was weakened owing to the loosening of and the split in the international communist movement's unity of action in the struggle against imperialism and revisionism.

At critical periods, the united strategy and tactics of the world communist movement was not marshalled against the united strategy and tactics of imperialism. A particularly heavy blow against the unity of the international communist movement was the breach between the CPSU and the Communist Party of China, with repercussions in the international balance of forces and in the unity of action against imperialism. It had an adverse chain reaction on many communist parties all over the world. It was exploited to step up anti-communism and anti-socialism. The unity of the communist movement was then further tried by the wave of Eurocommunism, which signaled the infiltration of revisionist, defeatist, compromising attitudes within the ranks of the communist movement in capitalist Europe.

The adverse effects and repercussions from the dissolution of the Communist International as a united centre offering a forum for the exchange of views with other communist parties need to be studied and understood. The new form of coordination that was established, with the help of international conferences, contributed up to a certain point in time to the common elaboration of strategy and tactics, to joint action. Along the way, this too was substantially abandoned due to ideological disagreements and breaches in the ranks of the communist movement. The bilateral and multilateral regional meetings mainly on international issues that replaced it were insufficient to deal with matters related to joint action or ideological and theoretical problems. The discussion and confrontation was of a more or less formal nature, a long way from lively, creative discussion about the essence of problems.

There were periods when the discussion which was focused on ideological differences took on the form of an open breach and severance of relations of all kinds, resulting in widening the gap and divisions. In other cases, in the name of independent responsibility and non-intervention in parties' internal affairs, all discussion and criticism ceased, with the result that relations took on a strictly formal character in the exchange of views and opinions. Both tactics ultimately led to the same result: to the loosening of unity or the facile alignment behind one or another view. The main thing was that the discussion of theoretical problems and the reasons for one or the other view or deviation was reduced or weakened.

There must be continuing efforts, through the exchange of views with other communist parties on the basis of long-term positive as well as negative experience, to deepen our understanding of the ways and means of conducting discussions about ideological matters and differences between the communist parties, and about the type of relations that developed between them on an international and regional level.

When the discussion of the different viewpoints is conducted on the basis of communist principles, not only is exploitation by the forces of imperialism precluded, but on the contrary, the result constitutes a serious factor in confronting these forces.

37. Mistakes were made in the strategy and tactics of socialism in its confrontation with imperialism.

On the part of imperialism, the confrontation between the two systems was not just an ideological struggle, but a form of subversive activity against socialism.

The line of peaceful co-existence as it was developed during the early post-war years, and to some extent at the 19th and mainly 20th Congress, permitted the cultivation of Utopian views, i.e. that it was possible for imperialism to abandon war and military means and to accept a new world order which would be based on the principles of mutual benefit and cooperation on an equal footing; and that it would be possible for imperialism to accept a peace-time economy and the utilisation of the resources saved through disarmament by countries with development problems.

The radical change in the balance of forces, the constant progress of the international revolutionary process, and united, world action by the anti-imperialist forces can effectively prevent aggressiveness and military interventions and raids by imperialism.

At that particular phase in history, it was not noticed that the USA with its European allies were reinforcing the weaker Sinks in capitalism, keeping them in the imperialist system with both overt and covert interventions in countries' internal affairs using political, economic and military means and with the main instrument being the constant threat of the use of atomic and then nuclear weapons.

It is one thing to fight to avert war, especially thermonuclear war, and an entirely different thing to put forward the view -under specific conditions- that it is possible to eliminate war in general.

38. A negative influence was likewise exerted by the assessment of the possibilities and role of social democracy during the post-war period.

A main element in the communist strategy was to seek joint action and alliance with social democracy in the cause of detente and peace, but also more generally in the anti-imperialist struggle. The social democracy of Western Europe, irrespective of its verbal proclamations and periodic superficial maneuvers, was in fact on the side of the imperialist forces in the anti-socialist, anti-communist "human rights" campaign. The European social democrats were responsible for breaking up the cooperation with the communist parties, following U.S. pressures (through the Marshall plan) which required the expulsion of communists from post-war governments.

At critical moments, when the anti-imperialist, anti-militarist movement should have been strengthened and broadened, the policy of imperialism was condoned by attributing equal blame to the USSR and the USA for the arms race. The defensive Warsaw Treaty was identified with the cold-war, aggressive NATO. And indeed, certain social democracy parties, such as the SPD led by Willy Brandt, played an active part in the so-called "bridge" policy (Ost-politik), clearly aiming at the annexation of the GDR, and the encouragement of anti-socialist activities from within. The rise of social democratic parties to government power offered many proofs of the nature of these parties, and of the services they offered in support of the capitalist system and the management of its crisis.

The capitalist system could not retain and mainly it could not reproduce its power without the support of the ideology and policy of social democracy, which apart from supporting capitalism, proved to be a major factor in undermining the power and unity of the labour movement.

Today it can be seen clearly that there was a need for a strong, convincing and militant ideological front against the theories of social democracy which, at that time cultivated illusions that there is a so-called third road to socialism.