July 31, 2021

Norobotsverification

Latest online bangla news | bd, world, Sports, photo, video live | Norobotsverification

Communist Party in China is still invincible

How hesitating, we need attack power

The Chinese Communist Party is completing a hundred years. Preparations for a grand celebration to be held on July 1 on this occasion in China are going on for a long time. It’s but natural. China has been ruled by this party since the revolution in 1949. Under this leadership, China is on the way to become the world’s largest economy today, transforming from an agricultural country into an industrialized nation. The biggest thing is that even after doing all this, the Chinese Communist Party does not seem tired. He doesn’t seem to be in danger from outside or inside. The point of danger is important because we have seen how the Soviet Union, considered the second super power of the world, and with it the entire Socialist bloc collapsed on their own in the last decade of the last century without any outside intervention. Worldwide it was rightly considered a blatant failure of the Left.

some basic questions

This question is in the mind of every thinking person that what is the matter that the ideology which proved to be the chain of the feet of most of the countries of the world including Soviet Union, is going on to gallop China on the path of progress? Therefore, it becomes even more necessary to consider some of the fundamental questions related to the Left in the light of these hundred years of the Communist Party of China, and in the light of the basic criteria of the Left, the big claims that the Communist parties make in the world communist movement. doing in front of.

There is no doubt that the 1949 led by the Communist Party in China was not just a change of power, it was a revolution. That is, in that event, the ruling class was overthrown and the other class seized power. But it was not a proletarian revolution. Power was not captured by the working class by that revolution. Mao himself called it the Neo-Democratic Revolution. This means that until that time what was called a democratic revolution, it was something different from it, there was something new in it. What was that novelty? The new thing in it was that Mao had said that four classes were involved in that revolution. Apart from the workers and peasants, it also included a section of the bourgeoisie, which Mao defined as the national bourgeoisie.

The major land reform measures that were taken after the revolution also confirm that the democratic revolution was fulfilling its task. But the basic question is that when the bourgeoisie came to power instead of the working class in 1949, then when was the second revolution after that in which the working class ousted the bourgeoisie and seized power? After the democratic revolution in Russia in March 1917, the proletarian revolution was considered to have taken place in November. When did this happen in China? Some try to find the answer in the Cultural Revolution. But no matter how small or big it was, however much it was unsuccessful or successful, it was the Cultural Revolution. So can the cultural revolution fulfill the task of political revolution? If yes, then what was the need for political revolution? The communist movement around the world would have worked only through the Cultural Revolution. But if not, then it has to be accepted that that workload in China remained incomplete. All the upheavals and major policy changes we see there were a reflection of the conflict between different forms of capital, whether it was between agricultural capital and industrial capital, or between industrial capital and finance capital.

This is the reason that no matter what the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party have been claiming about their ideology and commitment, all countries, companies and institutions that follow the logic of capital are not inconvenienced by the presence of China as much as they do. Once upon a time, just hearing the name of the Soviet Union used to happen. China also entered the World Trade Organization in 2001 and has remained in it for the last two decades without much difficulty. Its confrontation with all countries, including America, is not a conflict between the basic arguments of capital and labor, but a general conflict according to the logic of capital.

difference between words and deeds

For once it may seem that how can a country maintain such a difference of words and deeds for so long. But this has been a common disease of the Left movement and is probably the biggest reason for its downfall. Lenin’s greatest example of telling the truth and accepting the truth at a sting can be considered as the biggest example in the current contexts. About the New Economic Policy that was brought in Russia within four years of the proletarian revolution of November 1917, Lenin himself clearly said that it should not be considered as a step towards socialism. This is a compromise with capitalism, which we have been doing for a while…. After that it doesn’t look like this. Whether it was to ignore the question of the representation of the world’s workers during the Second World War or to accept the principle of ‘peaceful co-existence’ during the Khushchev era, every decision was seen as a step forward in the direction of socialism. Most importantly, the world communist movement almost unanimously accepted it. Otherwise the collapse of the Soviet Union would not have been such a severe emotional blow to the communists around the world.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are those of the author.