\

‘Nory of the inevitability. of war fits in with the
s of imperialism. Peking’s hostile policy to-
s Vietnam must be sharply condemned.
Some of the more far seeing elements among
q imperialists who recognize ‘the strength of

socialist community, headed by the Soviet
ion, see no profit in confrontation. These
ces favor a policy of detente, disarmament
-\l trade as the sane alternative to the dangers
a nuclear war. Expressing the growing con-

nit and alarm of ‘the working people with an
less arms race with its consequent disasters,
\ Socialist International Conference held re-
=\tly in the city of Vancouver, in our country,
“\ne out in support of a policy of disarmament
\i detente. This should help widen the struggle
peace. Despite the complexity of the situa-
»n, the forces of peace, if united, can safeguard

Vp imperialism sees the necessity of coordinat-
S its efforts though to hold up détente and
press the national and social liberation
\ vements — doesn’t it stand to reason that the
> ialist countries and Communist and Workers

\rdinate their efforts so as to advance the
ess of detente and strengthen the anti-
‘yerialist front? This coordination of effort is,
¢\re vital than ever today in face of the danger-
@- military strategy of imperialism, and in
\ier to assure continuous success in the strug-
for national and social liberation. ©
come comrades mix up the possibility of pre-
".\aténg world war with the false notion that
lice is already guaranteed. Such a conclusion
» \ 11d lead to dangerous passivity precisely at a
“Ye when the reactionary forces of imperialism
\ trying to turn things around. It could also
MA 4 to wrong tactical and strategic conclusions.
i arade Brezhnev correctly emphasized not so
ry longago that world peace is not yet guaran-
\\d. The conclusion from this is also obvious,
‘st of coordinating the work of all Communist
id Workers Parties together with the socialist
\:ntries, the anti-imperialist and peace forces
, the world. es
 \Our Party sees the fight for peace as a priority
WA. It'has striven to widen the peace front, to
n the organized labor movement, the New
l\\ mocratic Party, all peace-loving Canadians
s"\- active involvement in that struggle. We rec-
tS ize that the prevention of nuclear war and
e'\: preservation of peace is vital for the very
istence of civilization. We recognize that
\ .rld socialism and, above all, the Soviet Union
ys the decisive role in the world-wide strug-
\. for the prevention of nuclear war. The pre-
‘at and future of mankind depends upon the
ility, the strength of socialism to fulfill its his-
ic responsibility. In these circumstances to
\nigrate socialism, to play the game of im-

y

‘ S position on the question of the two super-
\wers, by its collusion with NATO, plays the

\hance Canada’s security. They undermine it
hile saddling the Canadian people with in-
\tionary tax burdens which cut into living
‘andards.

= ate: reactionary forces of imperialism
Of ve been striving might and main to divide and
\parate the international Communist move-
lent and prevent it from utilizing its full poten-

ths} in the struggle for peace and social progress. -

OMB reak with Leninism, with Marxism, with in-
Irnationalism, separate yourselves from the
bviet Union’’, they say. ‘““Demonstrate your
dependence by criticizing and even condemn-
le the Soviet Union’’. In effect, what these
ces of imperialism want is to move Com-
milunist and Workers Parties toward the adop-
RSbn of social-reformist positions. These siren
miyngs of imperialism are obviously not directed

ies throughout the world should likewise:

\rialism is, to put it mildly, the height of irres- _
\nsibility. The Peking leadership by its class-

-ace. PPOgGress

undermine internationalism and socialism itself.

This has a bearing on various views which
have been aired in the recent period on such
questions as the path to socialism, on the ques-
tion of working-class power, proletarian inter-
nationalism, democratic centralism. These
touch the very heart of Marxism-Leninism and
have led to a lively debate in our Party as well as
in other parties. We have stated our position on
these questions.

“In actual fact there are three questions of
principle we must cope with when dealing with
some of these differences. :

e The first is that of the path to socialism. The
path can be peaceful or non-peaceful, par-
liamentary or non-parliamentary, multi-party or
one party. But what is similar for all these di-
verse forms is one central question: that of the
dictatorship of the proletariat, or as we call it in
our program, The Road to Socialism in Canada,
the political power of the working class. There
can be no equivocation on this. But there is a
second side to working class power, and that is
its ability to defend itself once achieved. Here,
too, there are some equivocations in some quar-
ters under the cover of the term “‘pluralism”’.
There can be no equivocation on this question
either. The working class and its allies must not
only be able to win power but be able to defend
it. The alternative is clear, as demonstrated in
Chile. So-the path to socialism is not an abstrac-
tion. Our program places the question quite
clearly.

’ There is a third side to the question. The
inference is made that the parliamentary path is
a democratic path while the non-parliamentary
path is non-democratic. This, of course, is-so
much nonsense. The democratic character of
the revolution, whatever its forms, is decided by
the fact that the majority of the people are in-
volved in it and, above all, by its aims which are
to win power for the majority and uphold the
power of the majority.

e The second question of principle is that of
internationalism. In some quarters stress is
placed on the national peculiarities, the tradi-
tions and so on of this or that country, this or
that working class. No one can question this or
ignore it. But to place it in opposition to the

_ international, to the general, means to throw out

that which is constant and permanent and
thereby imperil the success of the struggle. Our
Party has always firmly adhered to a position of
patriotism and internationalism and will con-
tinue to do so.

‘There is another side to this question — the
tendency to denigrate internationalism or dis-
tort its meaning. Clearly in the real world we live
in, where imperialism still has a powerful clout,
where neo-colonialism still exists, where
monopoly and the multi-national corporations
are still powerful and decisive factors, to ignore,
play down or side-step international solidarity

TRIBUNE PHOTO — KERRY McCUAIG

Social services to the Canadian people have
been made the brunt of the government's cut-
back program while billions are poured into arms

could be extremely dangerous. Imperialism re-
mains an enemy of mankind, a threat to world
peace. It remains a potential aggressor, and it
remains the enemy of the working class and all
working people in each capitalist country. Since
imperialism has not changed, since it remains
the same as before, the role of proletarian inter-

’ nationalism too remains the same. Indeed, at the

present stage of the struggle when the position
of the working class must be reinforced and
widened on a world scale, the significance of
internationalism has increased, not decreased.
In this connection to denigrate the role of the
Soviet Union and of the socialist community
and ignore the fact that it is their dynamic
growth, their economic, moral, political and
military strength, their foreign policies which
act as decisive deterrents to imperialism, would
be to live in a dream world, not in the world of
reality. The world has changed but imperialism
has not and we must not forget it. ;
This, of course, means that we should always
be guided by a class and internationalist posi-
tion, and start and end from such a position.
e The third question of principle has to do
with the renunciation of the leading role of the
working class and its Party, including its basic
principle of organization, that of democratic cen-
tralism. The Party is a free association of like-
minded people organized to combat capitalist
ideology and defend and advance a definite
world outlook, that of Marxism. When it fails to
defend the class independence of the working
class, it opens the road to the liquidation of the
Party. To succumb to liberalism, to ‘do it your-
self’, to individualism, to factions, would not
only wreck the Party but hinder the working
class in its ceaseless struggle against exploita-—
tion and in the struggle for socialism.
Objectively Euro-communism performs that

kind of role. It blows up national peculiarities
-while downgrading internationalism. While op-

posing all models it nevertheless projects a
model which has not been tested and is cr ntrary
to all international experience.

No one can question and in fact no one does
question the right of each party to develop its:
own strategy and tactics. As has been stated
repeatedly it has the right and duty to choose the
road to socialism in its own country. This obvi-
ously calls for the creative development of
Marxism-Leninism to the conditions of its coun-
try. But there isa difference between the-crea-
tive development of Marxism-Leninism and
creating illusions about class relations. There is
a difference between the creative development
of Marxism-Leninism and opportunism. One is
a strategy of victory for the working class and its
allies; the other is a strategy that could lead to
setbacks and defeats.

There is a certain convergence between
Maoism and Euro-communism. Both attack
existing socialism. One states that there is no
socialist community, the other states there is in
fact no socialismin the Soviet Union. They both
give support to NATO, although from different
sides. They both either directly or indirectly
embellish imperialism. They both negate inter-
nationalism. Both need to be exposed and re-
jected. Neither one nor the other-can serve as
alternatives to Marxism-Leninism.

In examining socialism and world develop-
ment what is decisive is the strengthened role of
socialism. Socialism has created more favorable
conditions for the struggle for peace, national

‘liberation and socialism. Indeed, real socialism

is the main force in the world today in the strug-
gle against the threat of nuclear war. From this it
follows that the more the positions of socialism
are strengthened, the more favorable will condi-
tions become for the Communist and Workers’
parties. By the same token international solidar-
ity is an absolute necessity for making the strug-
gle’ for péace, democratic advance and for
socialism more effective. International solidar-
ity and the independence of parties are not

-mutually exclusive — each reinforces the other.

A common position on the international issues
of our times is of crucial importance today. For

_Communists this should not be difficult if they

have acommon ideology and common interests
based on a firm class and internationalist posi-
tion. © <

We are sure this theoretical conference and
the exchange of views will be extremely helpful
in this regard and in coping with an‘increasingly
complex situation. In a certain sense we are
setting our watches, coordinating our time so
that the full impact of our collective strength can
be brought to bear in influencing developments
in a positive way.

g') aid the parties but rather to undermine them, production.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JANUARY 19, 1979—Page 7