The Purpose of the Communist Party

Adrian (left) & Peter Wyles (right)

The purpose of the Communist Party is not to look back with nostalgia about the Soviet Union, or to defend its reputation, but rather to pursue policies that are most likely to benefit and free the working class, according to local conditions. The conditions of 1917 Russia are not the conditions of 1945 France, 1949 China, 1954 Vietnam or 2018 UK. Each set of circumstances are unique from the historical-materialist perspective, and each Communist Party must work tirelessly to fully understand the ever changing and existential conditions the workers in their part of the world inhabit. The USSR was not a bourgeois Nation State and did not pursue capitalist policies of imperialist expansion and empire building. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a collection of local working-class groupings that had freed themselves through (in one way or another) the guidance of the Communist Part of Russia (Bolshevik), taking advantage of the weakening of the Feudal State and the confusion and disarray of the bourgeoisie. These new Republics (controlled by the workers) naturally worked together out of solidarity and for security against the bourgeois Nation States and their highly efficient military-industrial complexes. VI Lenin was not a tyrant or totalitarian leader, and had no intention, inclination or ability to use the Red Army as Churchill or Truman used their respective militaries. The Red Army was a collective of the people armed and trained inaccordance with Socialist and humanitarian principles, designed to simultaneously ‘defend’ the Revolution (and the working-class) from attack, and in so doing confront and defeat the reactionary forces of capitalism and fascism. The Red Army was not an offensive force and existed only as a barrier of defence. The men and women who made-up its soldiers were politically (psychologically) educated through Marxist-Leninist ideology, whilst being physically trained to fight. Their morality was of the highest calibre and despite being a part of a war-machine, they understood that it was quite often the case that enemy workers needed ‘freeing’ from exploitation and were being forced to unnaturally confront Socialism.

The Communist Party, whilst dealing clearly with prevailing circumstances, does not need to defend the reputation of the USSR simply because it does not accept the false narratives generated by the bourgiesie as being correct. The Communist Party already knows the actual or true history of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and has no need to contend with the bourgeois system it is seeking to overthrow through non-inverted and effective dialectics, and timely action. Making a point about one particular aspect of bourgeois corruption would only serve to slow this over-all process down and legitimise the motivating ignorance of those employed by the capitalist system to hide its own crimes, whilst attempting to shift the blame for mass slaughter onto the only toiling force in history qualified to confront, prevent and stop such greed-led and racialised massacres. Communist Party scholars understand exactly what has happened, why it has happened, and the likely outcome of this process in the future.

The various Communist Parties were never subservient to Moscow (as claimed by the bourgeoisie) and have only ever been responsible for bringing the working-class to power in the part of the world each ‘Branch’ inhabits. The demise of the USSR in 1991 was simply a new set of dialectical circumstances that although ushering an era of rapid reorientation, did not and has not changed the function of the Communist Party(s). Of course, as a private matter, individual members of the Communist Party, (operating as individual citizens) may take it upon themselves to offer ‘corrective’ narratives as a means of combatting the often-unquestioned excesses of anti-Soviet disinformation, but this is not an official policy, and does not need to be such. In general, a good Communist will always share their knowledge with the masses in constructive ways that do not contradict Communist Party policy or direction. When operating within the confines of bourgeois, liberal democracies, and having to tout for votes, it is often prudent to remain ‘silent’ on some issues, whilst becoming vocal about others (and vice versa). As electioneering is a fluid process, any political party operates through expedient measures that remain true to political ethos, whilst maximising the chances of obtaining votes (and minimising losing votes). This does not change history or the reality of Scientific Socialism and historical (dialectical) materialism. Yes, the Communist Party can be brought to power through the bourgeois voting system (in theory), but this does not deny the fact that given the right circumstance, the workers could still bring themselves to power (guided by the Communist Party) and overthrow the bourgeois system entirely. As more and more people come to understand Communism (and work for its realisation) around the world, such concepts as the British Road to Socialism become possible, although such a realisation might be very difficult to actualise. However, ‘difficulty’ is no excuse to stop trying and striving to take-on the excesses of capitalism and make a better world for humanity. This is the function of the Communist Party.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s