4. For the Unity of the Communist World Movement on the Basis of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tsetung Thought

The Betrayal by the Teng/Hua-Clique and Hoxha's Slanderous Attacks on Mao Tsetung and Mao Tsetung Thought Have Promoted Worldwide Liquidationism

The clique of modern revisionists under the leadership of Hua Kuo-feng and Teng Hsiao-ping – petty-bourgeois degenerate bureaucrats who came into power after Mao's death – have restored capitalism and have turned into a bourgeoisie of a new type. In order to maintain their rule over the workers and peasants, they needed allies from other classes and strata: former capitalists, petty bourgeois and higher-ranking intellectuals. They were given back leading positions in economic, state and academic sectors. What is expected from the old capitalists under the command of the new bourgeoisie is plainly expressed by a revealing report about a banquet of 2,500 representatives of the national bourgeoisie:

"Vice-Chairman Deng expressed the hope that all the democratic parties and all the All-China Federation of Industrialists and Businessmen will play their role as masters of the country, make criticism and suggestions regarding the government's major policies and work in various fields, be the Party's sincere friends who will give their forthright views and comments, and work together with the Communist Party to run the state well"(112; emphasis by the ed.)

One can well imagine their enthusiasm. Numerous intellectuals and businessmen who had been dismissed from their high positions during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution were rehabilitated. In order to decorate these anti-socialist measures with a socialist appearance, the Chinese revisionists think up new theories:

"When the means of production are no longer in the hands of a class and when one group of people can no longer appropriate the labour of another, this class, of course, also ceases to exist."(113)

That stands in fundamental contradiction to Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tsetung Thought. Lenin explained clearly and plainly:

"And classes still remain and will remain in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The dictatorship will become unnecessary when classes disappear. Without the dictatorship of the proletariat they will not disappear.
Classes have remained, but in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat
every class has undergone a change, and the relations between the classes have also changed. The class struggle does not disappear under the dictatorship of the proletariat; it merely assumes different forms."(114)

Accordingly, Mao Tsetung points out, "in the historical period of socialism, there are still classes, class contradictions and class struggle".
Reality shows how the concept of "fundamental change in China's class situation" works and how the former exploiters have been "remoulded" into working people who "live by the work of their own hands". In January 1979 the following decision of the Central Committee of the CP of China was published:

"According to this decision, their [the old capitalists' - the ed.] bank deposits and other property confiscated with the approval of Lin Biao and the 'gang of four' during the Great Cultural Revolution will be returned to them, and the money deducted from their original wages over the years will be refunded. From now on they will receive the same high salary as they used to get before the Cultural Revolution."(115)

This appalling fact is camouflaged as the "reinstatement of Chairman Mao's policy towards the national bourgeoisie". This is blunt demagogy! The CP's policy towards the national bourgeoisie which had taken part in the revolution – a policy which was a necessary part of people's democratic revolution after liberation in 1949 – is applied to the period after the socialist revolution in 1956 and raised to a principle. This is a frontal attack on the Cultural Revolution.

The CP of China had pursued a policy of buying up the means of production owned by the national bourgeoisie which had supported the new-democratic revolution. In 1956 the small and middle private business became mixed state-private property. For a transitional period these capitalists were compensated with 5 per cent interest for their capital, the old bosses were often allowed to remain in leading positions in their former factories and often received higher salaries. But that was under state control. This agreement was only applied until September 1966, when all factories were transformed into the property of the people in the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. In a fierce class struggle the still existing influence of the national bourgeoisie was broken. The revolutionary masses confiscated the accumulated interest, saving accounts, public loans, gold and silver, private mansions etc. The high salaries of the businessmen were adapted to those of the common workers. Most of them were fired from their high positions and were sent to the workshops and stores for manual labour.

These revolutionary measures of the dictatorship of the proletariat are now being slandered as an expression of a "fascist dictatorship". The capitalists are getting back their money and interests and are re-instated in their former positions. Now the question comes up: Where does the money come from to pay back the interest, to pay back the fortunes? Where does their original capital come from? It comes from the surplus value pressed out of the workers!

Furthermore, the Marxist-Leninist line towards the intellectuals was revised.
These are the reasons:

"Shortly after countrywide liberation in 1949, the Chinese Communist Party brought out the policy of uniting, educating and remoulding intellectuals as most of them were bourgeois and petty-bourgeois intellectuals from the old society. More than two decades have passed and many fundamental changes have taken place in the ranks of the intellectuals. Today, the policy is no longer applicable in regard to the overwhelming majority of intellectuals. They are no longer the object of uniting, educating and remoulding, but are now a part of the working class engaged in mental labour and a force the Party relies on."(116; emphasis by the ed.)

However, it is a fact that under socialism, too, the intellectuals still vacillate. Many intellectuals enjoy a higher standard of living than the workers, cultivate a petty-bourgeois life-style and are more vulnerable for bourgeois ideology. That's why Mao Tsetung emphasizes the necessity of remoulding the intellectuals in socialism. The new Chinese leadership has changed the policy towards the intellectuals fundamentally. Formerly the students were sent to the countryside during their university years in order to become acquainted with the life of the simple peasants and to unite with them, today they are expected to concentrate exclusively on their academic studies. Also they are exempted from taking part in physical labour, which bourgeois intellectuals often consider an annoying duty. As early as in March, 1978, Teng declared at the National Science Conference:

"Scientists and technicians should concentrate their energy on scientific and technical work. When we say that at least five-sixths of their work time should be left free for their scientific and technical work, this is meant to be the minimum demand. It is still better if even more time is available for this purpose."(117)

For him, ideological-political education is of no importance:

"We cannot demand that scientists and technicians, or at any rate, the overwhelming majority of them, study a lot of political and theoretical books, participate in numerous social activities and attend many meetings not related to their work."(118)

The new Chinese bourgeoisie needs these intellectuals to maintain its rule. For this reason a growing number of intellectuals are given leading positions in economy, the academic field and the state, even in the revisionist CP.

In Beijing Review, No. 51, 1979, in a report 'Experts in Leading Positions', one could read:

"For instance, after the reorganization of the Party committee in the Shanghai Oil Refinery, seven of its eleven members now are engineers, two are technicians and one is a specialist in management."(119)

Just imagine – 10 intellectuals on a "reorganized" Party committee consisting of 11 people, obviously cleared of workers. The workers are to be taken out of the leadership and administration of the factories. This shows that a new proletarian revolution is necessary.

With its 'New Policy' the Chinese leadership sharpens the contradiction between manual and brain work and destroys the revolutionary alliance of working class and intellectuals. The intellectuals are intended to become faithful instruments in the hands of the new bourgeoisie under the new conditions of revisionist rule and to be detached from the working class. Teng and Hua need a mass basis among the people in order to strengthen their rule. They find this among the mass of petty-bourgeois intellectuals and bribe them with privileges and profitable positions. The dictatorship of the proletariat was abolished and the achievements of the proletarian revolution were destroyed.

Until recently this betrayal of Marxism-Leninism and socialism by the Teng/Hua-liquidationists has, for tactical reasons, not yet gone so far to criticize Mao Tsetung and Mao Tsetung Thought openly. Frequently capitalist measures are even covered up by using words of Mao, made to fill their purpose – just as the Soviet revisionists hide their revisionism behind a screen of Marxist-Leninist phrases. The revisionist betrayal of the Teng/Hua-clique has done as much damage to the international communist and labour movement as the world-wide revisionism introduced by Khrushchev at the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956 did.

Marxist-Leninists condemn the revisionism which has been practiced since Mao's death by the new leadership with Teng and Hua at the top. As a consequence of revisionism, capitalism has been restored and China has, in a social-imperialist manner, invaded Vietnam. The Chinese leadership's bellicose stand and its boot-licking of the superpower USA and the leading reactionaries in the capitalist countries have created a profound mistrust on the part of working masses throughout the world. A great split has divided the Marxist-Leninist movement world-wide, a split into followers and opponents of the new Chinese leadership. The dispute has led to liquidation or splitting up of many organizations. This world-wide liquidationism was reinforced by the fatal position taken by Enver Hoxha and the Party of Labour of Albania. On the one hand, they condemn the betrayal of the Teng/Hua-clique, which is fully justified, and were the first to reject the so-called 'three worlds theory', on the other hand they claim that Mao Tsetung is responsible for the whole negative development in China, denounce him as a revisionist and a Chinese Khrushchev, slander his thought as anti-Marxist-Leninist, and thereby create profound confusion in the communist and labour movement, encouraging world-wide liquidationism.

In the ideological struggle against modern revisionism of the Soviet and Chinese variety, Enver Hoxha is a shady figure – on the one hand he is against it, on the other hand he is on a revisionist path himself in attacking Mao Tsetung and Mao Tsetung Thought. This discredits him in the eyes of many Marxist-Leninists all over the world. In his blind effort to degrade Mao Tsetung in order to put himself in a more favourable light he has come very close to people like Robert Steigerwald, the leading theoretician of the revisionist German Communist Party (DKP).