First Published: Discussion Bulletin #10, November 1980.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
The Communist Party of New Zealand has joined the revisionist anti-Mao chorus. This was made known to the world revolutionary movement through a Central Committee statement of March 6, 1980, published in the March/April issue of the Communist Review under the title “Carry the Struggle Against Revisionism Through to the End.”
The Central Committee statement makes it clear that the CPNZ now follows the line of the Party of Labour of Albania as outlined in Imperialism and the Revolution by Enver Hoxha and in other material. It virtually declares that Mao Tsetung was never a Marxist-Leninist but only a bourgeois democrat. It also repeats the distortions and misrepresentations of Hoxha on many aspects of Chinese history, on the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China and on the question of two line struggle within a revolutionary Party.
What makes this new line of the CPNZ so despicable is the fact that it completely reverses the line previously held and unanimously endorsed by the higher committees of the Party. The original line which contained sharp criticisms of many of the views and ideas of Hoxha and the PLA, was conveyed to the PLA by a delegation of two Central Committee members in August 1979. On their return the delegates reported to an enlarged Political Committee meeting (described as virtually a Central Committee meeting). The reports which made it clear that the Albanian position remained unaltered, were enthusiastically and unanimously approved and it was resolved that the PLA line was incorrect and must be opposed.
The content of the reports and resolutions were communicated to the whole Party through circulars, articles and special meetings of members in different areas. The membership with the exception of one or two individuals, endorsed the Party’s stand and line.
However, in late November the Chairman of the Party, aided and abetted by some other leading members, in violation of the norms of democratic discussion and practice, forced through a complete about-face in the Party’s stand and line. A leading Comrade who opposed this treachery was expelled. Later another Central Committee member and others of long standing as well as some newer members, and even one complete Branch, withdrew from the Party. They now regard it as a revisionist organisation.
It is now evident that the CPNZ, under the command of its present opportunist leadership, is committed to a revisionist ideological line. The fact that it clearly follows the PLA in the letter’s wholesale denunciation of Mao-tsetung shows beyond any doubt that it has abandoned revolutionary theory, Marxism Leninism. Furthermore, the repudiation of the concept and principle of two-line struggle in a revolutionary organisation is a total rejection of dialectics and therefore of objective reality. It is precisely through the operation of the law of contradiction, the unity and struggle of opposites, that |Marxist Leninist Parties and the revolutionary working class movement have developed.
Thus the leadership of the CPNZ are rejecting the lessons of the experience and history of their own Party and even what they themselves used to teach i.e., that the party cannot isolate itself from its class environment and that (contrary to the ideas of Hoxha), the proletarian party in reality is bound to be an arena of class struggle and conflicting class interests. This does not mean tolerating bourgeois lines or ideology in the party. The concept of two-line struggle is a weapon in the hands of Marxist-Leninists not for tolerating or accepting bourgeois ideology and its expression in revisionist lines, but for combatting and overcoming such ideology. It is a weapon for combatting liberalism and individualism and all opportunist lines trends which inevitably appear from time to time in a revolutionary organisation.
Bourgeois opportunist lines require bourgeois opportunist methods of work. The leadership of the CPNZ who formerly often quoted Mao “to be open and above-board” have introduced their new line by rejecting the basic principles of democratic centralism and repressing all efforts to have policy discussed in a democratic manner.
As the CPNZ correctly pointed out before its change in policy, the line of the PLA is causing considerable harm in the international movement and it is necessary to expose and oppose it.
In denying the experience of the Communist Party of China, specifically in relation to the struggle against the rise of a new bourgeoisie and using Mao’s principle of continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, the PLA are themselves opening the door to the emergence and development of a new bourgeoisie in Albania. The PLA refuses to accept the fact that bourgeois ideas and new bourgeois elements spring from contradictions in the production relations under socialism. If such bourgeois elements are not defeated they are certain to gain supremacy and control of the proletarian state precisely as has occurred in the Soviet Union and China.
It is a regrettable fact that the CPNZ which formerly enjoyed a high standing and prestige in the international communist movement as an implacable foe of revisionism and imperialism, has been transformed into a revisionist organization. However, new Marxist Leninist groups consisting of ex-members of the CPNZ and supporters have grasped the red banner of Marxism-Leninism and revolution thrown into the dust by the reactionary opportunist leaders of the CPNZ. They will continue the revolutionary struggle abandonee by the revisionist party, for the revolutionary cause of the proletariat.
July 22, 1980