Only he is a Marxist who extends the recognition of the class struggle to the recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This is the touchstone on which the real understanding and recognition of Marxism is to be tested.   V. I. Lenin 

Economic & Philosophic Science Review 

No 1168  January 21 2002

Subscriptions (£25 p a.) & circulation:  078679 96074                                   www.epsr-marx-lenin.co.uk
[P&P Bulletin Publications PO B0X 50, London SW 17 9NL] [ Post Office Regd.]   25p

SW  seminar 2pm   Sat Feb 1. Rcpts

The Chomsky-Benn resistance to war is an important, escalating phenomenon but misleads people by directing its reason against the imperialist system. The global economy's "freemarket" (i.e. for profit) paralysis of "over-production" forces the monopoly imperialist bourgeoisie to either FIGHT for slump survival (against the coming 1930s conditions, multiplied a hundred times) or else go under. Telling the fabulously wealthy, influential, and powerful Bush-Republican mafia to "negotiate Iraq into disarmament"; or "don't sell them the weapons to start with"; or "don t t bomb or they might use them"; or "don't create even more terrorists"; etc, etc, might swell "no" rallies this time but is worse than useless as a 'solution' to an incurably bullying imperialist world (by prolonging capitalism's "democracy" myth, its smartest stunt ever). The US imperialist "world policeman" tyranny must clash with unstoppable, universal, armsrace panic somewhere, - and LOSE. Revolutionary anti-imperialist seriousness is how to reduce the mayhem.

The mass anti-war feeling, now rapidly growing, is good, but the detailed rationalisations for peace remain vulnerably muddled.

The 'lefts' should stop exonerating Iraq, or bitching about ignored 'democracy' at the United Nations or in Parliament; because this warmongering has nothing whatever to do with one country's weapons stock however fearful, or with the fraud of "voting nicely" (by which means the working class is routinely swindled by capitalism, no matter how "fair" the system is supposed to be).

This US imperialist warmongering hysteria has the BIGGEST cause in history, - - the worldwide collapse of the ruling class system.

Iraq war may yet get stopped by protests. But what about the war after that? And the war after that? Etc, etc, etc, - worse and worse all the time as capitalism's economic crisis deteriorates relentlessly into the worst slump/trade-war mayhem in all civilisation's records.

The 'lefts' who troop into the TV and radio studios to emote against the war will LOSE the argument at some stage (if they are not just shut up at some point anyway) because of being unwilling to go far enough to challenge the whole perceived basis of bourgeois rule in the Western domination of the modern world.

Benn makes a valid point when he is challenged on his anti-war stance (about "what if the UN actually passed a specific pro-war motion, or what if Parliament did the same?".)

Benn scoffs in denying that imperialism has the interests of democracy at the UN, UK, or anywhere else uppermost in mind when plotting its war manoeuvres, and it has systematically trampled on all "democracy" throughout the whole of the West's warmongering colonial history.

But what Benn hesitates to say is that not only should total opposition to the war continue regardless of any 'approval' swindled by money, power, and influence out of the United Nations bourgeois opportunist circus, or out of the House of Commons bourgeois opportunist circus, - but that these capitalist-imperialist institutions of misrule should be overthrown themselves, - alongside the bullying Western warmongering hysteria they have routinely given birth to throughout capitalism's whole colonialist and neo-colonialist modern developments.

But Benn cannot say it. And neither can any of the fake-'lefts' who get on the air, or who are likely to get on the platform on Feb 15.

And by not going to the very heart of the brilliant game played by the bourgeoisie for nearly 800 years of exploitation, conquest and domination, - namely its "democracy" racket, - the petty bourgeois posturing of Bennism and all other fake-'lefts' would leave the capitalist system (now hopelessly incompetent, degenerate, and violent for the modern world's needs) to rule on for another 800 years, war CRUCIAL to its power, not optional.

And it should be self-evident that the wealth and power gained by the monopoly imperialist bourgeoisie will NEVER be given up voluntarily, because of some parliamentary vote or other.

The counter-revolutionary overthrows of "democracy" by rightwing coups because the monopoly-imperialist bourgeoisie did not like the way some "elected parliament" or other was running things, - now number HUNDREDS in history since they began, and they will never stop, - Allende this week, Chavez the next.

Get some "trade union" 	involved in the rightwing conspiracy, - such as in Venezuela now, or the CIA-Vatican-Pilsudski-ite 'Solidarity' in Poland, or the monstrous propaganda stunts by the West against Mugabe now in Zimbabwe (because he has made a gesture of land-confiscation towards solving problems and poverty), - and most idiotic fake-'lefts' will go along with the imperialist subversion.

What all 'left' and 'socialist' vagueness lacks, of course, is any scrap of DEEP understanding that the capitalist system really does move along ONLY from one crisis to the next, however long the interval.

To the odd casual 'Marxist', the fullscale revolutionary crisis is just an occasional and very 'unusual' event instead of seeing it properly as THE GREAT MOTIVE FORCE of all historical development, and as THE BIG EVENT in all history.

From this lack of conviction that the capitalist system really does collapse in total economic chaos from time to time, the fake-'left' chorus, posturing 'anti-war' on air, virtually NEVER insists that the real issue is economic catastrophe for Western imperialist rule and that the universal warmongering hysteria is bourgeois propaganda's chosen method for the big 'free- market' world leaders to get out of their humiliation, virtually unscathed and with most of their wealth intact while the rest of the world gets blitzed, destroyed, boycotted, betrayed, dumped-on, and eaten up with recriminations, false blame, guilt, shame, or suicidal misery, etc, etc.

This inability or unwillingness by the fake-'left' to see that it is imperialist crisis which needs to be permanently on the defensive in all arguments, means that it is the anti-war pleading which always comes across as somehow just "avoiding unpleasantness" with no "real gravitas" about where the world can seriously start heading next if not to war, - just all a bit do-gooding, heartfelt amateurishness with really little to say except condemn violence.

The fake-'lefts' confirm this point too by always being the first to condemn whatever "violence" or "terrorism" is done to imperialism from anywhere in the Third World of down-trodden billions, stifling under the burden of Western exploitation and now slump & war.

LALKAR has just wallowed in this self-pitying cringe by publishing a detailed exoneration of Iraq from charges of having serious weapons of mass destruction.

Past UN weapons inspectors are quoted to prove that before they got themselves properly kicked out of Iraq in 1998 for spying for US imperialism, virtually all the WMD had already been destroyed and no new ones have been built, or could have been built under sanctions restrictions.

Which is very nice, but totally misses the point.

What if Iraq HAS got hold of some new WMD???

What if they have got rid of them but Washington just refuses to believe Saddam on principle???

What if Washington KNOWS that Iraq has no WMD but just wants to blitzkrieg it anyway for other reasons???

Etc; etc; etc.

The point is that an imperialist warmongering holocaust on the planet in the pattern of World War I and its World War II spin-off is NOT remotely a matter of following the rules of evidence, or doing objective scientific tests, or establishing any sound logic or philosophy whatsoever. It never has been and it never will be. Imperialist warmongering crisis is a matter of brute force and tyranny applied utterly arbitrarily and scarcely rationally in the interests of class and national dictatorship.

Surely the question suffering-humanity needs answering under the outrage of escalating imperialist warmongering is HOW WILL IT STOP?? WHERE WILL IT END??

WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT??????

The Lalkar piece soothes as best it can, at the end, over the monstrous way in which Iraq is being stitched up; but the gloom, misery, and despair are all-pervasive. There is not the slightest hint that there is even any possibility some day of imperialism being compromised or embarrassed, let alone defeated in any way:

The above few examples, although a mere tip of the iceberg of lies and distortions practised by our 'freedom-loving' and 'truth-seeking' press on the innocent, unsuspecting and gullible public, are enough to show that there is nothing fortuitous about these distortions; that the multi-billionaires who own these media empires are part and parcel of the same monopoly-capitalist (imperialist) system which is waging war against the oppressed people abroad, attacking the working class at home, and limbering up for an inter-imperialist confrontation of unprecedented proportions.

It is the bounden duty of the proletariat to expose, and oppose, this filthy system, which has, for so long drenched humanity in blood; to expose the lies perpetrated by its press and electronic agencies. It is the duty of the proletariat to give the maximum of fraternal support to the oppressed peoples in their just struggle against imperialist war and brigandage.

But this 'realism' is all a hopeless wrong emphasis, not because of daft purposes of whistling in the dark, but because a) it is only the traumatic crisis-problems themselves which make US imperialist warmongering hysteria even faintly intelligible; and b) even more importantly, this greatest ever economic crisis in capitalist history will IMPOSE severely limited outcome conditions on EVERY class and EVERY nation worldwide, within which civilisation can grapple for its further fate, - with INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST REVOLUTION the most glittering prize, and the more obvious prize THAN EVER BEFORE IN HISTORY.

Now, no one is obliged to believe a word of this. But if it does make any sense at all, then the sooner this understanding of what is happening to the world gets punted out and fought for, the better the working class cause is going to be for it. This is propaganda too, but differs from how the fake-'left' tries to fight imperialism (through greater 'sincerity, honesty, kindness', etc, hoping against hope to win the propaganda battle when it is obvious that imperialism will do what it likes anyway, and ride roughshod over EVERY obstacle if needs be, including locking EVERYONE up for a time if necessary.)

The one propaganda war which can alone finally be won against imperialism's blanket bourgeois dictatorship world is the one which precisely deals only with an attempted objective analysis of the class and national forces governing civilisation's outcome at this period of history. To be right about their rough outline and their further perspectives would provide a mass workers movement with priceless understanding and leadership.

Grasping how class and national forces will fight so that the more revolutionary effective interventions can be made at every explosive stage of social and economic crisis developments, is a different science entirely from the fake-'left' self-delusion of telling other bourgeois politicians what they OUGHT to do, etc, - avoiding war, etc, etc;  giving 'democracy' a chance; - continually re-embracing the whole tyranny of class-collaboration 'reformism'.

As the ultimate futility of trade-unionist politics is reached, as 'Western affluence' finally becomes invisible in the universal appalling suffering and turmoil and disruption that will mark the end of the most magnificent capitalist boom in history (but also its most socially lethal, eventually), so will issues like adventurism or  'a return to core values', etc, perplex the workers movement.

The capitalist social order is disintegrating. Its press says so:

FOR the four officers, it was a routine patrol. Their police car was cruising along one of the main roads in Rio de Janeiro's North Zone on Wednesday evening when it was ambushed.

Thirty men appeared, armed with shotguns, pistols, rifles, submachine-guns and grenades. Bullets rained on the car, killing two of the policemen and, by mistake, a 51-year-old woman in a passing bus. The ages of the gang members, one of the city's most feared drug factions, said police, were between 10 and 25.

As the Brazilian film City of God opens in the US this weekend, after earning the third highest opening weekend figures for a foreign film in UK history, the horrors of Rio's urban violence are reaching a mass international audience for the first time.

But the reality is worse. Since the late 1970s, when most of the film takes place, deaths in favelas have skyrocketed, drug gangs have become better organised and better armed, more children have become involved and at a younger age.

The situation is so bad that gunshot deaths in Rio have exceeded those in conflict zones, including Colombia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Uganda, according to the study Child Combatants in Organised Crime to be published next month.

Almost 3,000 people in Rio, a city of 5.8 million souls, are shot dead each year. Only Angola is more violent. An estimated 11,000 young men are now involved in armed drug gangs in Rio, with about 50 per cent under 18.

Luke Dowdney, author of the study, which is part-sponsored by Unesco and the Department for International Development, said: 'Rio has now reached a situation where children's involvement with guns is comparable to situations in major world conflicts.

'Even though only 1 per cent of the community is involved, the entire community is affected.'

For Sgt Paixão, who refused to give his first name, a colleague of the officers killed this week, police are hideously ill-equipped. 

'The drug gangs have every sort of gun now; they have weapons made for military combat, assault rifles, ground-to-air rocket-launchers. They play around with grenades as if they are toys. And many of them are eight, 10, 12 years old,' he said:

'They attack us because they want to demoralise the state, to show that they are powerful. A few months ago they killed a policeman who was on his own in a cabin - as if they were doing it just for fun.'

City of God is the translation of Cidade de Deus, a 1960s housing project on the outskirts of Rio. During the 1970s it turned into a slum shanty, or favela.

The film - based on a book by a former resident Paulo Lins - charts the emergence of armed drug gangs with the arrival of cocaine into the favelas in the late 1970s. Rio now has about 800 favelas, containing more than a million people, a fifth of the metropolitan population.

Alba Zaluar, an anthropologist who has studied favelas for 25 years and whose research formed the base for Lins's book, said the main change since the 1980s has been that drug gangs started to be interested in political power inside the favela, as a way of asserting military control over their territory.

Now, almost all favelas are controlled by one of three drug factions. 'In the 1980s, traffickers were called "owners of the selling-points". By the 1990s they were called "owners of the favela".'

Police usually do not enter favelas. When they do, it is in military-style 'invade and occupy' operations, which increases the war mentality.

The worst violence now happens between factions which makes Cidade de Deus, controlled by one faction, less dangerous than many other disputed favelas.

One of the film's most shocking aspects is the involvement of children. Even though young children may not have been involved 20 years ago - as the film suggests - they are now.

Dowdney said that boys as young as 17 are in control of entire favelas. He said this was because children can manipulate small-calibre guns and they are fast. At 25, you are likely to be either dead or in prison.

'When you are in a war situation and the troops are dying, there is room for children to fill the spaces,' said Dowdney. 'I interviewed policemen who said that, if they saw a child first, they would shoot because a child is much more likely to shoot back.'

Almost 4,000 under-18s were killed in Rio between 1988 and 2002 - more than eight times the combined number of Israeli and Palestinian children killed in the same period.

For many youngsters in favelas, City of God did not shock them at all. In Mare, one of the most violent areas of the city, 17-year-old Vitor da Silva said he thought the film was quite soft.  'It just shows what it used to be like. Now it's much more violent. It's easier to get guns. Before, the fighting was just against police; now it's between factions. It's easier for kids to get killed.

'The other day the traffickers killed a [sexual abuser] by cutting out his eyes, and cutting off his nose, ears and legs and parading them through the favela. They were shouting "Who wants to eat meat soup?". You didn't see that in the film.'

His friend, Sinval dos Santos, 23, says he was involved with drug gangs between the ages of 15 and 20. 'I have already lost 16 friends. Once I was in a crossfire and a friend next to me was hit in the head and it exploded.'

On adventurism, the best mass-workers party theory is likely to continue to conclude that in Britain, the huge percentage of the population from the working-class plus the colossal influence of 'democratic' illusions and concessions which for so long have formed such a huge part of public political life in this particular country's very long running and almost formal class struggle, may mean a premature forming of e.g. an armed workers militia (to protect against anarchy and breakdown, or against fascist provocations, or against a police-military coup, etc,) would be unlikely to be the best first way of combating the remnants of 'democracy' illusions (i.e. class-collaboration 'solutions') in the workers movement.

Charging off to form self-defence squads or armed detachments before the inability of capitalist society to accede to the overwhelming wish of people for a revolutionary change in how life is organised, could leave unnecessary millions of workers behind, if seen as 'premature' within this centuries-long culture of class-compromise.

Without being naive or weak, it is best to let capitalism's own actions educate the working-class in revolutionary necessities, wherever possible.

The problem, for example, in Chile, however much tardiness there may have also been in getting workers organised into self-defence squads, - was 100% a ludicrous failure of POLITICAL UNDERSTANDING by the 'socialist' government leaders, Allende & Co told the world that Chile's generals were "of a different culture to the rest of Latin America". Supposedly, they were not "coup-minded".

With this unbelievably crass,  petty bourgeois, nationalist bollocks, - the Chilean workers were led like lambs to the CIA slaughter.

Approaching this problem insisting too bureaucratically on constructing Chinese Walls between the difficulties of arming the proletariat ideologically and arming it in other ways, is always likely to make the worst possible mess of things, - usually as a result of still not grasping the huge significance of arming a workers party with revolutionary theory.

With the exception of Castro's revolution possibly, - the only bourgeois-capitalist states ever to be overthrown were by profoundly theoretically-armed communists. And Castro, in turn, was far ahead ideologically of the Sandinistas, which partly explains why his anti-imperialist revolution survived and theirs didn't.

Arms were not the issue.

Arms were not the issue in the historical catastrophe of the Soviet workers state's self-liquidation. Revisionist petty-bourgeois conceit was the problem, - and it remains still the major problem, not arms, in what is left of the workers states and the international 'communist' movement.

Simultaneously with all its (political) main weaknesses, however, fake-'leftism' also makes necessary a very specific intervention from revolutionary understanding whenever the quantity of "really socialist" wishful thinking reaches serious organisational proportions.

It is very possible that the wish to restore Labour to its "true Clause IV roots" will yet again resurrect in Britain, sweeping a sudden huge mass movement with it to "finally carry out the expropriation of capitalism that our Labour/ TUC forefathers intended originally" etc, etc.

Blair's  total abandonment to degenerate warmongering hysteria in the interests of US imperialism's survival at the top of an insane and indefensible capitalist economic crisis, could make retracing of steps for Labour to any of its previous 'pretend socialist' positions in over 100 years of determined class-collaboration more than a little difficult.

Yet another 'New Labour' or a return to 'Real Labour', etc, is a possible scenario, but the same old structure just might get reclaimed, around Clause IV, etc.

Either way, if such a huge centrist movement does popularly take off, genuine revolutionary socialists might be duty-bound to join in to help explain, discuss, and investigate the gap between a paper Clause IV in the hands of a petty bourgeois parliamentary movement, and REAL steps on the ground to actually expropriate the Ruling Class.

But the greatest overall problem facing the UK working class still remains the gap between would-be 'revolutionary' understanding, - and actually kickstarting NOW the OPEN discussion THROUGHOUT the workers movement PERMANENTLY of one matter only, - a full non-stop debate about how the REVOLUTION (and nothing else) has at last been placed as the ONLY SERIOUS ITEM on the future agenda of Britain. All the clever excuses about "Iraq is innocent"; all of the convoluted 'oil plots'; all of the fantastic conspiracies about "the CIA carried out Sept 11"; all of the jibes that the imperialists "are running scared of Parliament and the people"; all of the hand-wringing deference about "of course we condemn terrorist murders"; all of the smart-alec jeers at anarchists for "playing into the hands of the Genoa police provocateurs"; etc; etc; etc; etc; - - all have one, crucial, central, identical motivation (along with many other varied ones), - which is that a 'left' posture can be adopted, but that REVOLUTION still doesn't have to be talked about 'yet', etc.

As imperialism's insoluble, final, warmongering crisis deepens, - so it will be among the fake-'lefts' themselves initially that some serious revolutionary understanding at last begins to be fought for, - against appallingly determined backwardness and conservatism.

The oddness of this hysterical imperialist warmongering crisis, plus the strange universal foreboding about disastrous economic developments ahead, is producing widespread debate about what sort of historical period capitalism is in, and much comparing with past crises.

The best likeness may be with the pre-1914 period of booming imperialist confidence, - but with massive, all-important differences in 2003.

Western arrogance after a long period of  'free market' economic expansion, technological domination, and total 'cultural' triumph, - is identical; and the automatic response of ruthless imperialist warmongering aggression at "things going wrong" is identical too.

The catalyst role played by terrorist acts from some of the smaller players, giving the big imperialist powers the "excuse" to mobilise, is identical too. And the cause of war is comparable in 'overproduction' crisis, the great imperialist powers finding fewer and fewer profitable expansion opportunities, or even meeting gigantic corporate losses and huge setbacks to state prestige, because of an 'over-crowded market'.

The apparent difference that pre-1914, the competition was for direct colonial exploitation markets and territories,  whereas today it is for neo-colonial financing and franchising influence or joint venture developments, - does not alter the deadly politics of inter-imperialist conflict.

Because of globalised financial marketing and the far huger scale of dealing, now as opposed to then, it might be that trading setbacks and the loss of influence today could be even more catastrophic for a losing imperialist power in 2003 than the failure to grab a colony was, pre-1914.

And certain crucial circumstances now are just like pre-1914 only much more so.

The fringes of the imperialist-world economy today are ten times vaster, - and ten times more volatile, - than they were in the period which gave the planet World War I, - and ended with the Bolshevik Revolution in very backward Russia.

The conditions in Brazil admitted by the capitalist press itself above, are saying more than just that life is hard and corrupt in Rio. They are, saying that the present world carve-up of wealth-disparities is now utterly intolerable for modern mankind.

And if this was the message in 1917 which produced the phenomenal Bolshevik Revolution and its even more phenomenal Socialist Camp aftermath, centred on the great Chinese Revolution, and Vietnam, etc, - then the worldwide revolutionary AVALANCHE that will follow this new 'over-production', crisis-paralysis, warmongering nonsense from the imperialist system, will be better than the wildest communist dreams.

Scientific Marxist revolutionary understanding is currently at a low ebb in total global quantity, but while that remains the VITAL, NECESSARY development, - above all else, - it is also one, which could be completed at a phenomenal speed, and arming the international workers ideologically to a phenomenally higher level than ever before in history.

It just needs OPEN parties of Marxist Revolutionary Science to be built everywhere, based on OPEN polemical struggle.

One big difference, of course, is the scale of monopoly-domination now reached under the US imperialist superpower, and a speculative book could be written on possible self-destructive dialectical effects this total monopolisation might have had on the economic fall-out from an "overproduction'' crisis in such circumstances; - and possibly another one on the dramatic cultural, political, and military effects.

But for the moment, it leaves a puzzle of seeing exactly what wars are going to take place, - there no longer being any equally powerful or comparably powerful Germanies, Japans, and Italies to take on the bullying dominant colonial (and neo-colonial) powers of Britain, France, and the USA, - nor any obvious smaller powers but with crucial land areas such as Russia and Turkey to play a combative role as was done pre-1914.

Proper inter-imperialist war again still seems hard to envisage, but then no brain on Earth remotely foresaw what WWI would bring in its scarcely describable shock and horror. And World War II even less so. All that is obvious is that the arms-race has never stopped proceeding at break-neck speed under imperialism, and that now the world capitalist economy is facing virtual collapse from insoluble contradictions: A revolutionary outcome is inevitable. Build Leninism.  EPSR supporters

World Revolutionary Socialist Review

(edited extracts from a variety of anti-imperialist struggles).

OPPOSE BUSH'S "ANTI-TERRORIST" CRUSADE AGAINST THE WORLD'S PEOPLE! 

On September 11, thousands of innocent people were killed on United States soil. In the murky waters of terrorism and the intelligence services, where intrigue and double-dealing are the currency, it may never be possible to know exactly who organised the attack or their motives. But two things are clear: first, the victims in New York join the millions of direct and indirect victims of the policies and actions of the US ruling class. Second, even greater crimes are in preparation.

The US declared a "year against Terrorism". With this, they are declaring their right to attack any and all forces and governments in a wide arc stretching from the Middle East through South Asia. Targets will be determined by how quickly one bows to US dictates  - a lack of democracy or a regime's use of terror against their own people or others need not exclude them from being an honoured US accomplice, as we can see in Pakistan's sudden transformation from potential victim to a US staging-ground. This war will be met with a storm of resistance not only in those countries designated as targets but throughout the whole world, including in the US and other aggressor countries themselves. It is a reflection of the conflict that pits world imperialism led by the US against the oppressed peoples and nations, the principal contradiction in the world today.

It is not surprising that many people moved by fear, ignorance or selfishness have been taken in by the attempts to march "Western civilisation" off to yet another bloodthirsty crusade. But even now, as the situation is just beginning to unfold, a growing number of people feel that the rulers are trying to hijack their sorrow at the loss of innocent lives to win support for a criminal war.

Why doesn't the US tell the victims that America's designated "number 1 suspect", Osama bin Laden and his movement, were sponsored by the US government: financed, armed and nurtured for a decade by the CIA, the United Kingdom's MI6 and their partners in the Saudi Arabian secret services, for use by the Western bloc against their Soviet rivals? Why don't they tell the world that the US also had the thoroughly reactionary Taliban recruited and trained in a subservient Pakistan and sent Pakistani troops into Afghanistan to put them in power? And now the same powers that inflicted the Taliban on the Afghani people want to unleash yet more punishment?

Bush originally called the US "new war" "Operation Infinite Justice", but it is infinitely unjust. After all, he represents a country that used the first atom bomb against the people of Japan in order to consolidate their empire at the close of World War 2 in a monstrous crime against humanity. It was US bombs and soldiers that killed well over a million Vietnamese and 600,000 Cambodians, and it was the CIA that stood behind the massacre of as many as a million people when Sukarno was overthrown in Indonesia in 1965. The very day of 11 September was already carved into the hearts of the people of Chile and the world as the horrifying moment in 1973 when the CIA toppled Salvador Allende and applauded whilst Pinochet proceeded to slaughter 30,000 opponents in that small country. The US government also backed the military and death squads who hacked and shot 150,000 people to death during the last four decades in Guatemala and provided lifelines for the infamous Contras in neighbouring Nicaragua and for the El Salvadoran regime's death squads in the 1980s. During the Gulf War it was US planes that rained "death from above" on tens of thousands - perhaps as many as 200,000 - Iraqis, including surrendering soldiers. The US-led blockade as well as the systematic destruction of the Iraqi economy has caused the death of at least half a million children according to UN statistics. Israel is the US' well-fed guard dog in the Middle East, the US has provided weapons and backing for each and every Zionist crime from the founding of the state of Israel on the land of others to the mowing down of Palestinian youth today and "smart" bombing of political leaders. Bush represents a country whose police wage a merciless war on its own minority nationalities, one that sends helicopters to patrol its own ghettos and even bomb its own people (the Move commune in Philadelphia in 1985, killing 11 men, women and children). It has 3,500 people on death row, including some of the world's best-known political prisoners. US "democracy" has responded to the September 11th events by proposing laws to allow the indefinite detention of any non-citizen. Abortion doctors are murdered there, and the most fundamentalist religious fanatics have the ear of the president.

Why don't Bush, Blair, Chirac, Schroeder, Berlusconi and the rest of them tell us that this war will not be for justice but for empire? What is going on is not a "clash of civilisations" but the efforts of these barbarous rulers flying the banner of "Western civilisation" to consolidate their control and contend among themselves for regions of strategic importance and for world domination. Other imperialist powers are supporting the US war moves while sometimes grumbling over the US' heavy hand toward even its partners-in-crime, - these are two sides of the same effort to protect their own place at the imperialist banquet table, where the labour and lives of human beings is the first, last and only course, washed down with the planet's natural resources.

In the last decade the basic tendencies of the world imperialist system have been intensified under the signboard of globalisation. The powers are exploiting every comer of the globe more deeply than ever before - and this has inflicted unbearable violence everywhere through both force of arms and the grinding out of profit in daily life. If this has brought some prosperity for some of the people some of the time in the imperialist countries, the decent lives and happiness they promised their own middle classes in return for silence have proved to be an illusion. In the oppressed countries, electronic gadgets and a taste of the worst of Western culture have been offered to a minority in hopes of purchasing their acquiescence, whilst the masses of workers and peasants are driven further into poverty and the dignity is trampled into the dust.

The US' towering crimes and its swaggering domination of the world made many people around the world glad that a big blow had been delivered at the heart of its empire. But those who want out from under the heel of the US boot and not just a fleeting and degrading revenge must look to history when the masses of people were able to take on and defeat even the mightiest of enemies. Most important to remember today is the heroic struggle of the Vietnamese people, which defeated the American army in the context of a worldwide revolutionary upsurge centred in Maoist China that not only rocked all the colonialist and imperialist powers but also saw unprecedented militant opposition and revolutionary mass movements in the rich countries themselves, including the US. That is a history lesson few dare talk about lately. But it is just history. Maoist-led people's wars, wars that rely on the people and embody the whole new kind of society they aim to bring into being, without oppressive relations, are being waged today in Peru, Nepal and other countries.

While support for an attack on peoples of the oppressed countries is one of today's war fever, the other is a widespread suspension of many rights and freedoms within the imperialist democracies themselves, along with a sweeping crackdown against all opposition to imperialism in the countries run by their lackeys - all under the banner of suppressing terrorism. In some countries the authorities are proclaiming that they will no longer tolerate the kind of opposition they have so far been unable to squelch by more indirect means. Cowardly attacks on Muslims and foreigners are being unleashed in the US and across Europe in an effort to create a generalised climate of fear.

Whether the resistance to the announced "crusade" advances as part of the worldwide battle to rid the earth of imperialism, or whether the struggle is hijacked by reactionaries, depends ultimately on what programme and vision lead the people's struggle. We can never allow people to be presented a false choice between exploitation and oppression in its modern, imperialist form and packaged as Western-style "democracy" or an impossible return to an oppressive medieval form of existence under the signboard of Islam or other religious movements. In the last two decades, history has proven again and again in Iran, Algeria, Afghanistan itself and elsewhere that Islamic movements will never liberate the people or defeat imperialism. On the contrary, history has shown that it is only when the masses have political power in their own hands, in socialist states or new-democratic republics led by the working class and its communist vanguard, that it is really possible to shape a new future.

The need for the communist vision of a world society based on the free and voluntary association of all human beings, no longer divided by classes and into oppressed and oppressor nations, no longer marked by the subjugation of women to men, cries out as never before. Even as we unite in struggle with masses who still embrace other ideologies, our scientific vision provides the backbone to stand firm in the crosscurrents of a tumultuous world and gives strength and courage to rally the people to meet the trials of the moment, to rise to the occasion.

The revolutionary Internationalist Movement calls upon the people of all countries to unite in their millions to oppose and resist every act of US aggression. Reject the hypocrisy of the imperialist enemies. Aim high and fight for genuine liberation. Remember that the darkest hour comes right before the dawn.

- Committee of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement 24, September 2001

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF THE PROLETARIAT IS AN URGENT TASK -Gaurav 

"There is one, and only one, kind of real internationalism, and that is working wholeheartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and the revolutionary struggle in one's own country, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line in every country without exception." - Lenin

"NEW WAR" - SITUATION

US imperialism, the only super power of the world today, has started its "new war" against Afghanistan. It is making a big show of lethal weapons that the US imperialism has, to the people of the world, in order to frighten and terrorize them against its military superiority. The arrogant super power has imposed this cruel war in the pretext of taking revenge against the September 11 attack on the twin tower of the World Trade Centre, the symbol of US financial might and Pentagon, the symbol of military brutality against the world people. But who has the right to take revenge against whom is not yet really decided, because it is none other than the US imperialism itself, who is responsible in creating the 'attackers', against whom it is shamelessly yelling of "taking revenge". Thus this right of 'revenge' goes to the American people to punish their own rulers, who are the main guilty of this horror.

The cry of "war against terrorism" is a mockery, it is a fraudulent slogan of the imperialists, who are the real terrorists, and architect and patron of terrorism. It is aimed at establishing total control over the world and expanding its empire, in order to intensify and expand its exploitation and plunder unbridled. Both Bush and Laden have declared this war as a crusade. Even then the governments of Islamic nations except the Taliban of Afghanistan, have knelt down to US imperialism by participating in the war directly or indirectly, against their own religion, which fantasy they are always playing to hoodwink the Islamic masses. And the US bombing on Afghanistan, killing thousands of innocent Afghan people, is going unrestricted.

There is no doubt that this war is a reactionary war and people have nothing to gain but only to lose from this war.  But imperialists are crushing a poor third world country and butchering thousands and thousands of innocent people, to which we communists can never be mute spectators. We have to expose and attack vigorously against imperialism in general and US imperialism in particular.

Also it is necessary to study deeply about this latest expression of the imperialism, so that it may be possible for the communist revolutionaries to draw a correct line to fight a decisive battle against it. It does not mean that this war of aggression has changed the situation dramatically. It has rather reaffirmed our previous opinion that the US imperialism is number one enemy of the world today.

Destructive and deadly bombs are being dropped by B-1, B-2, B-52 bombers and cruise missiles are being thrown from the US bases, along with British, on Afghanistan. But, in one or the otherway the war has acquired international shape. The aggression is led by NATO headed by US imperialism, whipping the reactionary rulers of the third world countries to support them. According to their character, clergies headed by Laden and Umar are making sentimental appeals to the Islamic masses to jump into the Jihad (holy war).

Islamic people seem to have responded the call positively and come to the streets in some countries. Islamic fundamentalist militant organizations headed by Al-Qaida and other like minded organizations are basically leading these protest demonstrations.

Imperialism, since its very birth is having international character and it has attained more global character through its "globalization". In this war NATO, the imperialist military organization headed by US imperialism, is leading the war of aggression. Even clergyman like Osama Bin Laden understands the importance of international organization at present international context and has tried to spread Al-Qaida at international level (according to the report given by FBI and CIA it has networks in more than 50 countries).

We, Maoists, like to convert this "crusade" into class war of international level. There is excellent possibility of carrying out 'anti-imperialist struggle' at the world level. But is it possible to launch such a struggle without any organization of the same level to lead it? The correct answer will be no. Therefore, the latest development, which has taken place, will reaffirm the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist approach of advancing towards a new international, for which the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) has been working as its embryonic centre. It will help those Maoist revolutionaries to re-think about their understanding and realize this necessity, which is being verified several times by the reality.

TAKING LESSONS FROM THE HISTORY

As communists, our goal is explicitly clear: Communism. Who have been deviated from this goal are not communists. Communism cannot be established in a single country or nation. To talk about communism in a single country, is a seer fraud, which Khruschev did.  Com. Gonzalo's explanation in this regard is very concrete and clear; he said, "Either we all will reach or none of us will reach". In order to achieve this common goal, we have common ideology: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Therefore, the communists are real internationalists. It was Karl Marx, who elucidated the principle: 'The emancipation of the workers is not a local, nor a national, but an international problem". It was imperative to translate it into the practice, for which a vehicle of international organization was obvious to be felt necessary, which caused the birth of the First International.

Lenin developed Marxist theory to the higher level also in this regard. It was Lenin, who fought relentlessly against Kautskyites, who abandoned this Marxist principle and became accomplice of the bourgeoisie of their own country, in course of the First World War. Lenin condemned Kautsky as renegade of the working class movement and described their conduct as treason. Even in course of the stormy years of October Revolution, Lenin exercised his enormous strength in the formation of a new International, which acquired a concrete shape in 1919. It is important to understand what Fernando Claudin has said, "One of the features that most sharply distinguished this new International from its predecessors was the absolute primacy accorded to the 'international' over the 'national'. From the very moment it elevated to a principle the necessity of 'subordinating the interest of the movement in each country to the common interest of the international revolution'." (The Communist Movement.- pp 16). Lenin's idea of the possibility of the world revolution has been clearly expressed in his concluding speech of the First Congress of the Comintem, "The founding of an international Soviet republic is on the way"

Stalin, who was the leader of the International Communist Movement for 30 years, after the death of Lenin, great hero of anti-fascist war, architect of the Soviet Socialist State, vowed to advance the Communist International after Lenin's death. He made promise, in 1924, "Departing from us, Comrade Lenin enjoined us to remain faithful to the principles of the Communist International. We vow to you, Comrade Lenin, that we shall not spare our lives to strengthen and extend the union of working people of the whole world the Communist International". But almost 30 years later the Communist International, which he vowed to 'strengthen and extend', he himself played decisive role in dissolving it. Some Maoist revolutionaries, instead of taking this event in a critical way are taking it as positive lesson and reach to incorrect conclusion of 'the international organization such as Communist International is not necessary to build up'.

What were the differences in thinking between Lenin and Stalin, regarding the unity of International Communist Movement and revolution in a particular country, has been expressed explicitly in the resolution of the Second National Conference of our glorious Party, Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), as follows: "It has to be remembered that Lenin, while organizing the Commintern, had given emphasis in the idea of World Revolution and World Communist Party and put forward clear opinion that every thing should be subordinated to it. But, under the leadership of Stalin, some mistakes were being made, in various occasions, in place of considering Soviet society as part of the world revolution, considered world revolution as part of the Soviet society. This is what Mao has said that Stalin had given some wrong counsel to the international communist movement." (Resolution put forward by Chairman Prachanda and adopted by the Second National Conference, 2001, Nepali).

Some Maoist revolutionaries draw wrong conclusion from why Mao opposed the Comintern at several occasions and did not take any initiative in the formation of new international, which he could do if he had felt necessary. No doubt, Mao had opposed bureaucratic method of functioning of the Comintern, which created and added more difficulties to the Communist Parties including the Communist Party of China (CPC) and Mao in resolving the two lines struggle in the party and also in some questions of party line. We think that these were the real weaknesses of the Comintern and it is necessary to take lessons from these mistakes that has to be avoided in the course of formation of the new International. Therefore, the Declaration of Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM)has pin-pointed this question as follows: "It also is necessary to evaluate the overreaction of the Communist Party of China to the negative aspects of the Comintern that led them to refuse to play the necessary leading role in building up the organizational unity of the Marxist-Leninist forces at the international level." (Declaration; pp.45)

In the opinion of our Party, CPN (Maoist), the negative experience of the Comintern is not only the reason for CPC and Mao not playing the leading role in the initiation of a new International. More than that specific situation existing during that time in the ICM, the role of Communist and Workers' Parties of Vietnam, Korea and Albania was the main hurdle in taking initiative of a new International. The resolution says, "In this respect, there is another point, why Mao did not take initiative of organizing a new International on the basis of experience of the historical struggle against Khruschovite revisionism and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Partly, there can be a possibility of due to the negative experience of latest period of the Comintem, but it can not be the main reason. Virtually, Mao was leading the International Communist Movement ideologically, by launching the struggle against Khruschovitc revisionism, by leading the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and by assisting, supporting and propagating in favor of the national liberation, New Democratic and Socialist Movements. Objectively, there were serious practical difficulties in that situation, to give it an organized form. Among the visible difficulties, there were dogmato-revisionist and centrist and chauvinist Parties of Albania, Vietnam and North Korea, which denied Mao's universal contributions in the development of Marxism-Leninism. During that time it was not possible to form an International by simply ignoring all these things." (Ibid).

Therefore, it is not sufficient for the Maoists just to simplify the question of why Mao did not take initiative in the formation of a new International and reach to a hypothetical conclusion. It should not also be made any pretext to justify one's own mistaken idea about the formation of a new type of International.

But, does it mean that the situation is disappointing for the onward march towards the formation of a new International? No. Here the arithmetical number is not decisive. Mao's principle that 'correctness or otherwise of ideological political line decides every thing' precisely applies here too.

It is well known that Peruvian Communist Party (PCP) and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) are leading the most advanced People's War, which have become source of inspiration for the revolutionaries of the world over; are founding participating members of the RIM. Other parties and organizations of the RIM are also striving hard to initiate revolutionary movements and PW in their own countries. It is important achievement for the RIM, that some Maoist parties and organizations leading strong revolutionary armed struggles since many years are joining the RIM. 

South Asia is storm center of the world revolution and bastion of the RIM. Formation of Coordination Committee of the Maoist Parties and Organizations of South Asia (CCOMPOSA) is an important step forward in carrying out joint and unified activities of the Maoist forces of South Asia, in which RIM and the RIM-parties have important role. In a short span of time of its formation CCOMPOSA has become source of inspiration for the struggling people of South Asia and a big challenge for the enemy. 

Deservedly, RIM is developing itself according to the overall development of the revolutionary situation of the world. In 1984; the basis of unity within the RIM was agreement with the position of the Declaration. In 1993, RIM adopted Maoism as the guiding ideology of the proletariat and basis of unity was developed and shifted to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This advance of the RIM was able to give rise to new polarization in the Movement, the organizations which were not really Maoist left or were expelled and other forces who were really Maoist joined or are joining the RIM. The Fourth Expanded Meeting of the Committee of RIM held at the beginning of the new millennium adopted a new basis and new criteria - People's War, for the basis of unity in the Movement.

New waves of world revolution are emerging and are clearly visible at the horizon. It is the responsibility of Maoists to seize this opportunity and translate into the revolution in reality for which a vehicle of international organization, such as RIM, is indispensable. It is high time for all Maoists of the globe to think it up earnestly.  Regarding this, it will be relevant to cite a few more sentences from the decision of our Party: "But, lot of change has taken place in the situation today. Not even a single socialist state is existing now. Real revolutionaries of the world have acknowledged Maoism as higher development of Marxism-Leninism. New wave of the world revolution is appearing at the horizon. In this situation, ideological basis of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism has been prepared for building a new Communist International. It is necessary on the part of all the communist revolutionaries to give it an organized form in a creative way in the midst of the class struggle and ideological struggle. Today Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) has been born in its embryonic form. All of us should strive hard to refine and develop it further In this regard it is necessary to pay specific attention to organize many of the revolutionary parties in the Movement by carrying out debate and interactions."	

[Resolution of the Second National Conference of CPN(M)]

World Revolutionary Socialist Review

(edited extracts from a variety of anti-imperialist struggle).

Muddied Zapatistas press on, still unclear about the need for total anti-imperialism and world socialist revolution.

"Fox says we have peace in Chiapas, that there is no conflict," said Comandante David from the podium. "Is the conflict settled in Chiapas?" he asked.

"N0000!" was the emphatic reply from the multitude, banging their machetes and sticks, holding up burning torches, as the black smoke from the multiple bonfires engulfed the town centre. The masked insurgents packed the expansive central plaza and still thousands more were left chanting in the surrounding streets. The mood was combative and the chants, banners and speeches from the stage were uncompromising - Fox Is The Same As Zedillo, PAN Equals PRI, No Evictions From Montes Azules, Globalise Rebellion And Dignity!

"We came to say that here we are still, stronger than ever and we resist," said Comandante Mister." Before a globalisation of death imposed by the powerful, we proclaim a globalisation of freedom..."

"Are we here to surrender'?" shouted Commandante Tacho, and the crowd responded with such a hell-raising clamour that a lady next to me was prompted to mutter  "Oh Lord, I think they're going to burn down the town!"

BETRAYAL AND OBLIVION

This is the first-public mass mobilisation of the Zapatista Comandancia and rank-and-file in almost two years. The last Zapatista event was the hugely popular Caravan to the Capital in February of 2001, bringing out Mexicans in their hundreds of thousands in support of indigenous demands, as Sub-Comandante Marcos and the EZLN command journeyed up to Mexico City.

The crowning achievement of that odyssey was presenting an Indigenous Law granting a form of autonomy for ratification through Congress. But as soon as the Zapatistas turned their backs and returned home to Chiapas, that Law was modified and watered down by government legislators, amidst charges of betrayal. Appeals to reinstate the original Law before the Supreme Court were rejected.

With this constitutional rejection of Indigenous Reform, Congress, the Federal government and the Supreme Court of the nation was seen to negate the legitimacy of the San Andres Accords, signed between government and. rebels in 1996.

With this failure, it seemed the legal and political means to resolve the Chiapas conflict had been exhausted.

The Zapatistas seemed exhausted too, and lapsed into a long silence tasting 20 months. The Fox government worked hard to provoke divisions within the base communities, offering numerous financial incentives. The Mexican army remained, if a little less visible, encircling the Zapatistas areas, and paramilitaries upped the ante, murdering four Zapatista leaders in August 2002. The EZLN did not respond to these provocations, remaining silent throughout the wave of killings, prompting rumours of impotence and inner turmoil. Marcos had fallen out with the Clandestine Committee, ran the rumour-mongering and had been sent into exile. Rank and file were deserting the ranks in floods. President Fox, ever the opportunist, attempted a public relations coup amid the silence, claiming the conflict had been resolved. "We have brought peace to Chiapas," he boasted. A peace of military occupation, continuing extreme poverty and slow death by strangulation of the land. The peace of oblivion?

Envisaging a series of colossal dams, construction of super-highways and the development of a vast sweatshop area, the planners intend to develop southern Mexico and Central America into a manufacturing hub and production corridor. "The Plan Puebla Panama is a thousand times more important than any indigenous Zapatista community" according to President Fox.

Plan Puebla Panama has three goals - a) increase the transit and industrial infrastructure of the region, improving the capacity for export industries, b) catalyze a shift of the region's economy from agriculture to assembly plant manufacturing, and c) expand private control over the vast natural resources in the region.

The process is already underway. The first sweatshop has opened in Huixtla. Road construction is currently a boom industry. Land ownership is changing - 11% of land in Chiapas is held communally (in Ejidos) and most of the ejidos are in the strategically important Jungle region under control of the Zapatistas. A government programme Procede offers incentives to communities to divide their land and individualise holdings. Once it is privatised, the land can be sold on to investors, or agents for foreign companies, thereby opening up the process of capitalist development.

The battle between bioprospectors and the indigenous inhabitants of the jungle region has already intensified. Bio-piracy, ie. patenting plants that can be turned into pharmaceutical drugs, pesticides or other marketable products, has become highly profitable prompting the title Green Gold, and the current rush to patent rights the Bio-gold rush.

Influenced by the Zapatista struggle, communities of small farmers are organising across southern Mexico and all the way down Central America, forming international coalitions and coordinating their protests like the Day of Action last 12 October (Colombus Day) against the PPP and capitalist globalisation. A masked protester from the Regional Coordination of Civil Society organisation, blocking a highway in Chiapas last October, articulated their demands, linking them with those of the Zapatistas.

'We have seen that all Fox and Salazar (State Governor of Chiapas) have done is for the benefit of the rich and in favour of the owners of money,... with little benefit for us, the farmers. We are against the PPP,  NAFTA and ALCA, and as you can see from the banners, in favour of honouring the San Andres Accords."

	In all Mexico about a quarter of the population, 25 million, live off the land, and 80% of them in extreme poverty. Approximately 600 campesinos are forced to abandon the land for the cities 	every single day. The agriculture sector is in severe decline, and NAFTA is one of the chief reasons. The influx of  cheap corn and wheat from the giant commercial farms of the US is driving small farmers to ruin.

Rather than promote a sustainable agriculture sector, the Fox government, firmly committed to NAFTA, and ALCA (Free Trade Agreement of the Americas), encourages the desertion of the land. Migration is rife. Official figures quote 150,000 migrants from Chiapas to the US each year, but the growth industry in bus companies running to the US border - 80 new companies registered in the last three years, suggest an even greater number. Alongside the internal migration to work in Cancun and the oil fields of Tabasco, a whole way of rural life and indigenous culture is in danger of disappearing.

"The PPP will respect the territorial integrity of the communities and promote a sustainable development," says Fox, which flies in the face of the events on the ground.

Thirty indigenous communities on Montes Azules in the Lacandon Jungle are currently facing violent eviction. This local struggle has become the front line for widespread resistance against the Plan Puebla Panama. The Zapatistas have sworn to fight eviction in Montes Azules to the death.

'This traitorous government and the voracious capitalists know that this land is ours, and we won't abandon it,' says Rosa, a fiery Zapatista Choi from Tumbala, "and its wealth belongs to those who have lived here and worked these lands for centuries. We resist their globalisation in the same way the indigenous people resisted the Conquest, and our corn will resist their transgenic corn!"

THE NINTH ANNIVERSARY

The nine years of struggle of the Zapatistas has, on the ground, been both beneficial and circuitous. The initial armed uprising opened up vast swathes of occupied land taken from the finqueros. Thousands of campesinos continue to occupy and work these territories, a de facto rebel zone under the authority of the 38 Autonomous Municipalities. This is the one great achievement for the bases of support of the Zapatistas. On the other hand, the autonomous zones are constantly under threat, surrounded by the army and menaced by paramilitaries.

The government's attempts to buy off the rebel communities has been successful in some areas, and traditional pre-1994 Zapatista strongholds are often the focus for the most persistent counter-insurgency programmes. The historical Zapatista village of Morelia, for example, has seen the level of support for the insurgents fall to below 50% of the populace. Support in another Aguascalientes, Roberto Barrios, has fallen to less than 25%. However, the younger communities on occupied land remain staunch, and Zapatista numbers swell as children of the rebellion grow up and form their own communities.

"We are united here," says Don Anselmo of the 100% Zapatista village 10 de Abril, "although I do worry about some of the other communities." Five or six of the surrounding smaller villages have dropped out of the struggle. Ex-Zapatista Esteban explains why he dropped out and left 10 de Abril to live in one of the other non-Zapatista villages - " I got tired, and I needed to feed my kids. The (Zapatista) Organisation takes up a lot of time and you get little in return." Taking advantage of a government scheme, he received some construction materials and his children receive state schooling. (It's true, the autonomous school in 10 de Abril was not functioning well.) Is he finished with the Zapatistas? "No," says Esteban, "I'm taking a rest."

RENEWAL OF STRUGGLE

And this is the importance of the strong, militant demonstration on 1 January. As rumours of significant desertion of the ranks, internal division and impotency abound, such a powerful manifestation of hardcore allegiance rallies the troops and demonstrates that the Zapatistas are still the only show in town. As the constitutional path - marked by betrayal, seems exhausted and the enemy takes a more global face, the Zapatistas appear to be changing their tactical direction, renewing the spirit of resistance and pursuing a more confrontational strategy.

At midnight on 1 January 2003, the night sky above San Cristobal is thick with pungent smoke and the old colonial streets are jam-packed with hordes of spirited masked Zapatistas, taking control of the town, deserted of locals and security forces. As Chiapas faces an uncertain future regarding the Plan Pueblo Panama, one thing is sure from this insurgent demonstration - the conflict has entered into a new phase. The Zapatistas have returned from their forays into national constitutional reform to once more address the needs and demands of their base constituency. From the stage, Comandante Bruce Lee (no, really) directed the cadre to build bigger bonfires to warm the cool night air. 'This struggle has hardly begun. Let the fires shine bright so that the people can see how we have maintained our rebellion!"   •

E P S R

Leaving the world to be run by the greed of the capitalist monopolies can never stop resulting in periodic crises where trade-war destruction MUST rule, and to which the only antidote is Revolution and a strong workers state, --- as these essentials of Marxist-Leninist SCIENCE explain.

Only the crisis events of collapsing imperialist rule interpreted in this Marxist-Leninist light will educate a mass workers party of leadership to do the necessary tasks.

The Revisionist retreat from the Soviet workers state because of crawling to shallow Western glitz and shame at their own past bureaucratic mistakes has only proved the soundness of Lenin's 'State & Revolution' science about a very long period of proletarian dictatorship being the only way for the world to see-off monopoly imperialist warmongering, now back with a vengeance.

***********

It is often said and written that the main point in Marx's teachings is the class struggle; but this is not true. And  from this untruth very often springs the opportunist distortion of Marxism, its falsification in such a way as to make it acceptable to the bourgeoisie. For the doctrine of the class struggle was created not by Marx, but by the bourgeoisie before Marx, and generally speaking it is acceptable to the bourgeoisie. Those who recognise only the class struggle are not yet Marxists;  they may be found to be still within the boundaries of bourgeois thinking and bourgeois politics. To confine Marxism to the doctrine of the class struggle means curtailing Marxism, distorting it, reducing it to something which is acceptable to the bourgeoisie. Only he is a Marxist who extends the recognition of the class struggle to the recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This is what constitutes the most profound difference between the Marxist and the ordinary petty (as well as big) bourgeois. This is the touchstone on which the real understanding and recognition of Marxism is to be tested. And it is not surprising that when the history of Europe brought the working class face to face with this question as a practical issue, not only all the opportunists and reformists, but all the "Kautskyites" (people who vacillate between reformism and Marxism) proved to be miserable philistines and petty-bourgeois democrats who repudiate the dictatorship of the proletariat.

*********

"The last cause of all real crises always remains the poverty and restricted consumption of the masses as compared to the tendency of capitalist production to develop the productive forces as if only the absolute power of consumption of the entire society would be their limit." (Capital. Vol III. P568.)

*******

" For many a decade past", wrote Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto of 1848, "the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeoisie and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that by their periodical return put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly. In these crisis a great part, not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity - the epidemic of overproduction. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed. And why? Because there is too much civilisation, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary...they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them."

Name ............................

Address.........................

Postcode........................

For a £25 annual subscription to receive EPSR by firstclass post
every Wednesday, write to (but send no money initially):
EPSR, PO Box 50, L0NDON, SW17 9NL