First Published: Progressive Worker, Vol. 1, No. 4, January 1965.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Malcolm and 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.
Before founding the Communist Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec, we believe it wise to await the results of the Sino-Soviet conference next January in Peking. If the direction of the Communist Party of Canada remains revisionist and by its actions refuses to return to a Marxist-Leninist base, we shall be forced to found a Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Quebec, for the existing one is not that. It bears the name, and that alone. Ours will be a Communist Marxist-Leninist Party. It will respond to the true aspirations of the Quebec people. It will thus be completely independant of the existing Communist Party well-known for its discrimination against the French-Canadians and the Chinese. Its leadership will be chiefly French, as is fitting, and a minority will represent English, Jewish, Italian, Ukrainian, Chinese and other elements. The leader will be a bilingual Frenchman. This is not through chauvinism but through logic. All the other political parties have French-Canadians as leaders because Quebec has a French population of 80% . At the moment, the leadership of Canadian Communist Party has no French-Canadian on its national executive, and up to last March in the national committee of 62 members there was only one French-Canadian. The French-Canadians, however, are one of the two nations which founded Canada and form 30% of the total population of Canada. As a reason for this discriminatory, undemocratic and anti-Marxist attitude, the leadership says (as perpetual excuse) that among the few members who are French-speaking, not one has been found capable of fulfilling such a task. This must not be wondered at, for the leadership of the party in our own province has always been refused to us. Feeling aliens in our own home, we have all run off. The colonialism of the national leadership toward Quebec has resulted in a complete fiasco. Worse still, the national leadership continues to refuse us the leadership of its Quebec section. In imposing Sam Walsh [MIA Note: leader of the Quebec section of the Communist Party from 1962 to 1990], it stubbornly dictates its revisionist anti-Marxist line to us and laughs at the will of the Quebec people. Sam Walsh said recently that there are 35 party clubs in Quebec, a statement which is exceedingly false. There are no more than 50 members in good standing of whom only about twenty are French. Like Diefenbaker and by order of the national committee, Sam Walsh clings to power in Quebec, even though the French-Canadians detest him. The colonisers of every political party , including the C.P.C. shall henceforth exercise their apostleship elsewhere than in Quebec, for Quebec is moving. We have been right in condemning the revisionism of Khrushchev and his followers both of the world and especially those of Canada , and in Quebec particularly the revisionism of Sam Walsh. Every day facts are proving us more and more correct.
The Socialist bloc must and can unite and consolidate itself on a Marxist-Leninist base. And for this reason, Khrushchev, the chief obstacle to any dialogue with this unity in view having been cashiered, we can now hope that the long and serious bilateral discussions which will take place in the coming months and even in the coming years, will cement this unity based on Marxism-Leninism between Communist parties, but particularly between the Russians and the Chinese.
The Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Quebec will stand for complete independence of Quebec in political, economic, trade union, military and social fields. Lenin said: “We must first struggle for national independence.” This is doubly true in our day, both in Quebec and throughout the world. We stand 100% with all Quebec patriots, whether they are R.I.N., N.P.D., P.S.Q., separatists or only independentists. We respect the noble goal some extremists wish to achieve, that is, the complete independence of Quebec, but we condemn the violence for this hurts Quebec’s independence.
Marxism is that ensemble of the doctrines of Karl Marx which, by means of the class struggle, proposes the establishment of collectivism, as a term of the evolution of societies.
Leninism is the doctrine of Karl Marx put in practice for the first time with great success by Lenin during Imperialist times. We are still in these times.
Peaceful coexistence is the concomitant existence of different ideological systems tolerated between countries. This coexistence must embrace three principles; it must be impartial, and work not only in one way; it mast be firm; it must not be provocative. Modern Revisionism, the opposite of Marxism-Leninism, is that ensemble of teachings which have as their ultimate goal the making.over of the teachings of Karl Marx. All its results lead to the same end – social democracy, the last rampart of capitalism.
Marxism-Leninism admits peaceful coexistence as was preached and practised by Lenin. In Lenin’s time, there was peaceful coexistence between the U.S.S.R. and the capitalist countries, but the class struggle still went on in all the countries of the world. If this class struggle had not existed, all the countries which have obtained their independence would not have gained it. Independence is gained by struggle. Castro rightly said that he knew of no country which had gained its independence peacefully. Modern revisionism, under the guise of peaceful coexistence (ala Khrushchev) rejects the class struggle and by that fact alone repudiates Marxism-Leninism which preaches the class struggle. The revisionism of Khrushchev and his followers abandons the class struggle under cover of peaceful coexistence, as well as the struggle for the liberation of colonial countries and the international proletariat, and this to the greatest joy of the Imperialists. All the African countries, in particular, the Congo, North Viet Nam as well as South Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos and even Communist China itself are threatened by American Imperialism, and, we can add, almost all the countries of South America. And what has the revisionism of Khrushchev done in this struggle? Absolutely nothing, save for a rather timid remonstrance, a rather capitulating remonstrance stripped of firmness. And the appetite of American Imperialism under cover of revisionism is feverishly preparing for the conquest not only of those countries which desire their independence (all South American countries, South Viet Nam, etc.) but also those which have more or less obtained it, such as the Congo, and even dreams of conquering the Socialist countries with the aid of the revisionists and the capitulationist peaceful coexistence. The American Imperialists are committing aggression all over the world. China interprets peaceful coexistence as did Lenin and Stalin, that is to say as non-provocative, non-capitulationist, not unilateral, but firm. Like Lenin, China does net provoke, neither does it retreat. American Imperialism believes in peaceful coexistence in one way only: its own. The aggressor, it yields in nothing and commits nuclear blackmail the world over, and the revisionists, instead of resisting, submit. Peaceful coexistence must not come about at the expense of people who are struggling for independence, including the independence of Quebec. This would not be peaceful coexistence any longer but cowardice and betrayal. China is now the safeguard of Marxism-Leninism toward which the oppressed peoples look with hope. However, China is relatively new in the Socialist bloc and has 700,000,000 human beings to feed, to educate, whose standards of living must be raised. But by the Marxist-Leninist line and with Mao Tse-tung as leader, the greatest Marxist of the day, she cannot but succeed, despite all the evasions of capitulatory revisionists You will understand this more if you read Peking Review which the party leadership prevents you from reading. Our reconciliation with the C.P.C. will only be made on a Marxist-Leninist base. For those who can read between the lines, the cashiering of Khrushchev says a great deal. His capitulatory revisionist line is a complete fiasco in the U.S.S.R. and in all the Communist parties who have followed this arch-traitor Khrushchev in the Socialist bloc.
Forward then with Marxism-Leninism which has given us Socialism in one-third of the whole world. And when such a doctrine gives us such a dazzling success, this is not the time to switch to revisionism which in the past has always led to disaster. We would have liked very much to have given you the biographies of Khrushchev and of Sam Walsh, as well as the stupid things they have done, but space and money are lacking. You have only to reread our 20-page document of last March, however, and you will better understand the dismissal of Khrushchev and the wrong Sam Walsh is doing here in Quebec. Give yourself a Christmas present by subscribing to Peking Review. It will explain everything to you in black and white, all that has happened, is happening and will happen in the future. To the Marxists of our times, this is the most interesting.
Antonio Villeneuve
Interim Secretary