It is very urgent, especially in the current situation, to thoroughly and completely study the immortal teachings of the classical marxist-leninists, the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, to evaluate and propagate them on the basis of the original writings, and not merely on the basis of secondary literature. The great works of Comrade Stalin, which are and which will remain relevant, should be defended in a particularly offensive manner against all opportunist and revisionist attacks and distortions.
In the context of defending the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin - complete in themselves - of defending the teachings of marxism-leninism, it is also necessary to take a clear and principled position on Mao Tse-tung.
Mao Tse-tung's marxist-leninist works on the democratic revolution and peoples' war must be unconditionally defended
Mao Tse-tung's fundamental and greatest world-historical accomplishment, which no one can deny, exists in the fact that he led the 600 million people of China, shoulder to shoulder with all other forces of the proletarian world revolution, based in Stalin's socialist Soviet Union, to victory in the anti-imperialist, anti-feudal stage of the revolution.
Mao Tse-tung's writings on the democratic stage of the revolution in China, contained in volumes l-IV of his Selected Works, as well as the points on revolution in colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries are based on marxism-leninism and in particular on the teachings of Lenin and Stalin.
With great brilliance Mao Tse-tung applied Lenin's and Stalin's teachings and the fundamental guidelines of the Comintern to the different periods within the democratic stage of the revolution in China.
Fundamental principles of the revolution in capitalist, not capitalistic developed, colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries: are :
The "Theses for Discussion" which have been reprinted without any update or revision, originally date from 1981. Some references or formulations are for sure outdated or bear the stamp of that time. We all know that the Party of Labor of Albania (PLA) and other Communist Parties the "Theses for Discussion" refer to do no longer exist. We have specified our positioning and formulations in extensive theoretical works. Nevertheless we believe that the basic content of the "Theses for Discussion" is still correct and worth reprinting.
• The stage of the democratic revolution is a prerequisite for the transition to socialist revolution and to the dictatorship of the proletariat in these countries. An agrarian revolution as well as an anti-imperialist revolution are necessary in these countries and must be treated as a joint process, whereas one of both of these aspects will always be in the forefront in the various periods.
• The struggle for the hegemony of the proletariat is, in any case, absolutely necessary in the consolidation of the worker - peasant alliance as the fundamental part of the united front with all anti-imperialist, and anti-feudal forces; a genuine victory in the democratic stage of the revolution is impossible without the leadership of the proletariat and its party.
• During the democratic stage of the revolution in colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries temporary alliances and blocs with a section of the bourgeoisie are fundamentally possible.
• A basic prerequisite for the victory of the democratic revolution is the creation of armed forces.
• It is a principle that already in the stage of the democratic revolution, the maximal program of the communist party, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the building of socialism and communism must be propagated, in order to proceed successfully to the socialist stage.
• The democratic revolution must be viewed and propagated as one part of the proletarian world revolution. The union with the proletariat of the imperialist countries as well as with the peoples of the world in general, the union with the existing socialist country or countries - all of these are unconditional necessities of proletarian internationalism.
Mao Tse-tung applied and concretized these teachings of Lenin and Stalin on the individual phases of the Chinese revolution in a principled manner.
The people of all colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries must study Mao Tse-tung's application of these teachings of Lenin and Stalin in the course of the Chinese revolution and then investigate how they can apply these marxist-leninist teachings to their own conditions.
One of Mao Tse-tung's most outstanding accomplishments is without a doubt the creative development of the teachings on revolutionary war, a revolutionary military strategy and tactics.
Stalin had already shown that in a country like China, the main cities could not be conquered first, but rather forces must firstly be gathered in the countryside.2
Mao Tse-tung developed and successfully carried out the military strategy of "enclosing the cities from the countryside", the creation of red base areas, and the strategy of protracted in the context of the conditions in China through a fierce ideological struggle.
In order to really learn from this great marxist-leninist teaching from Mao Tse-tung, a fundamental principle, which Mao Tse-tung himself emphasized, must be considered, that is the principle that marxism-leninism must be applied to the conditions in one's own country.
In order to draw lessons on the democratic stage of the revolution from the Chinese revolution and the works of Mao Tse-tung for other colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries, the concrete conditions in China must be analyzed so that those aspects which are not applicable for one's own country are not schematically adopted.
Experience in the current ideological debate has shown that the following must be addressed:
• The experience of the period of the anti-Japanese war in China is a part of the great antifascist Word War. Mao Tse-tung's evaluation of the sections of the comprador bourgeoisie which were dependent on the US-imperialists have to be viewed in the context of the evaluation of the USA on a world scale and in the context of the USA's participation in the Anti-Hitler-Coalition.
It would be incorrect in today's situation - in the case of all semi-feudal countries occupied by one imperialist power - to enter alliances with those sections of the comprador bourgeoisie which are dependent on imperialists not currently occupying that country, or who have not yet occupied the respective country (in Afghanistan today,3 for example, it would be incorrect in the struggle against Russian social-imperialism, to make alliances with sections of the pro-American pro-Western comprador bourgeoisie.
• The history of the CP of China shows that there is no generally valid principle for the whole stage of the anti-imperialist revolution - neither for China, nor for other countries, which could be formulated, for example, as follows: "The work in the countryside is primary - the work in the cities secondary".
It is also completely incorrect for these countries to view the work in the cities as primary for the entire stage of the democratic revolution in the name of hegemony of the proletariat.
The CP of China itself worked primarily in the cities (until 1927), then primarily in the countryside, then just before the victory in 1949 again primarily in the cities.4
Every communist party must decide according to their conditions, when and for how long the work in the city is primary or secondary.
• In this context, it is crucial to state that the peasants, who made up the main army of the Chinese revolution, did not alone compose the Red
Army. One of the most important things to learn from the Chinese revolution is that numerous Communist-oriented workers went to the countryside and built the basic guerilla and partisan units as well as the Red Army.5
Further, it should be emphasized that every communist party must precisely investigate the conditions in its own country, in order to determine whether or not it is possible to build base areas. It does not correspond to the facts that automatically in all colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries the building of such base areas is possible.
* * *
The evaluation of Mao Tse-tung's Selected Works, volumes l-IV, particularly on the democratic stage of the revolution in China, shows that they are rich in marxist-leninist experience for Communists all around the world which they must absolutely defend and evaluate.
Such a fundamental evaluation of these works from Mao Tse-tung does not, however, mean that we do not see problems or that we do not have criticisms in several areas.6
Mao Tse-tung's views on the transition from the democratic revolution to socialist revolution and on the dictatorship of the proletariat are partly unclear and partly in contradiction to marxism-leninism
Mao Tse-tung's writings before 1966 did not make clear that the transition from the democratic revolution to socialist revolution must correspond on a political level to the transition from the dictatorship of all anti-imperialist, anti-feudal classes and forces to the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The dictatorship of the proletariat is the instrument of the proletariat in annihilating the bourgeoisie. Although at first following the victory in 1949 in China, the fundamental internal contradiction was termed that between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie,7 it became evident in Mao Tse-tung's central writing "On the Correct Handling of the Contradictions Among the People" (1957) that he considered it possible that a political alliance with the bourgeoisie existed in the dictatorship of the proletariat, and that he even assumed that the building of socialism in a political alliance with this bourgeoisie was possible.8
This viewpoints are incompatible with the teachings of marxism-leninism and practically supported the attempts of the Khrushchevite revisionists to establish the idea of class collaboration between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the international communist movement.
Marxism-leninism teaches that economically the existence of the bourgeoisie and of capitalist relations of production cannot be completely destroyed immediately (thus the NEP phase, which is generally valid, as Stalin taught9). Rather the liquidation of the economic positions of the bourgeoisie can only take place step by step. This is, however, only possible when the bourgeoisie no longer has a share in political power and this is why the building of socialism is not possible without the complete dictatorship over the bourgeoisie, the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The line of the Communist Party of China under Mao Tse-tung from 1957 until his death
It is an indisputable fact that no comprehensive theoretical writings from Mao Tse-tung from the period after 1957 (as well as from the years 1949-1955) are available, rather merely singular individual statements and brief theses, positions or quotes exist, the context of which is often unclear.
Therefore, an evaluation of Mao Tse-tung's works and his impact during this period must necessarily take this shortcoming into account that important indications in the evaluation of Mao Tse-tung must be drawn from an analysis of the line of the CP of China based on Mao Tse-tung's co-responsibility as leader of the CP of China.
Although the CP of China under Mao Tse-tung's leadership took a wavering position on the CPSU's XX. party congress at first, and supported it at least in public, the CP of China publicly took a stand after 1960 against the modern revisionists' main positions, thereby encouraging the anti-revisionist forces around the world in the struggle against Khrushchevite revisionism. Even if this struggle on the part of the CP of China included many mistakes and deficiencies, it should be defended as an energetic beginning in the struggle of the CP of China against Khrushchevite revisionism.
At the same time, however, it is important to overcome the mistakes and deficiencies which occurred in this struggle in the spirit of self-criticism of the international communist movement.
In this context, it is also indisputable that the CP of China under Mao Tse-tung's leadership - at the latest after 1966 - propagated holding firm to class struggle, the strengthening of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the "life and death struggle" 10 against the bourgeoisie opposing the revisionist forces in the CP of China (and to some extent took appropriate measures against the bourgeoisie).
We have determined that the CP of China waged an inspiring, fierce struggle against bureaucratism and revisionism after the Khrushchevite revisionists' betrayal during the time of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1969). Even today this struggle provokes cries of rage from revisionists and opportunists of all types. In particular, the practice of carrying on internal party struggle before the masses, the open and public debate is a marxist-leninist principle, which was applied broadly during the Cultural Revolution under Mao Tse-tung's leadership.
However, we must keep in mind that on the theoretical and ideological levels, the incorrect development of the CP of China's political line on the national bourgeoisie was not analyzed and not self-critically corrected. It was instead the case that Mao Tse-tung's "On the Correct Handling of the Contradictions among the People" was given much importance, in which the national bourgeoisie's share in power in the construction of socialism was called for, and in which the transition of the antagonistic contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to a non-antagonistic contradiction was declared to be possible.
To act against the bourgeoisie using non-antagonistic methods instead of antagonistic methods, that is to say, to act against the bourgeoisie democratically, using the method of convincing, instead of dictatorship and force - this means denying one of the central ideas of the dictatorship of the proletariat, namely that of the forced oppression of the bourgeoisie and the struggle to annihilate the bourgeoisie. Further, this means adopting the revisionist theses of the "democratic road to socialism".
The Cultural Revolution is itself an example of the impossibility of resolving the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie by any means except that of "class struggle", in the sense of "one against one".
Even more serious is the fact that the ideological education of the masses in China, particularly in the Cultural Revolution, took place on the basis of "Mao Tse-tung-thoughts".
"Mao Tse-tung-thoughts" was further propagated following the X. party congress of the CP of China, which concluded that this epoch is still the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution. The old definition was not really discarded, therefore the mistakes essentially remained.
We would like to emphasize that we regard all positions which view Mao Tse-tung's teachings as a general further development of marxism in respect to the theory of the dictatorship of the proletariat, mass line and the proletarian party as incorrect. In these areas, none of Mao Tse-tung's teachings qualitatively advance those of Lenin and Stalin.
On the contrary, the CP of China propagated - in the name of "Mao Tse-tung-thoughts" - some viewpoints which were incorrect and directed against Lenin and Stalin, for example the position on the existence of the bourgeoisie as a class up until communism, or the position on the "two-line-struggle" as a generally valid rule within the party.
Regarding the period after the Cultural Revolution, an increasingly openly revisionist line of the CP of China became evident, particularly in the area of foreign policy, for which Mao Tse-tung was likewise at least co-responsible.
The revisionist "three worlds"-scheme existed without a doubt in the CP of China before Mao Tse-tung's death and also before 1974, when Teng Hsiao-ping officially presented it. We have no indication of Mao Tse-tung disassociating himself from this reactionary theory; moreover there are elements and points in Mao Tse-tung's statements from the beginning of the 1960s linking them to the "three worlds"-scheme.
The attacks on and condemnation of Mao Tse-tung are directed primarily at the people's democratic revolution and the teachings on peoples' war
The Russian modern revisionists were the ones who began - in a thousand and one publications -with the virulent campaign against Mao Tse-tung, after it had already become clear that Mao Tse-tung would not subordinate himself.
An analysis of these "criticisms" shows that the modern revisionists furiously attached Mao Tse-tung's teachings, primarily those on the peoples' democratic revolution and peoples' war, and opposed them with their theories of the "peaceful road". Even their "criticism" of Mao Tse-tung's genuine mistakes preceded from an anti-marxist, anti-leninist standpoint.
One of the most serious errors made by the international communist movement was that of having failed to go deeper into the struggle against modern revisionism and to thoroughly analyze and refute the attacks on Mao Tse-tung. It is an equally serious error that the international communist movement did not notice nor publicly and comradely criticize Mao Tse-tung's visible mistakes, nor those of the CP of China.
In this context, the situation arose which made it possible that the Party of Labor of Albania (PLA) almost literally repeated the attacks of the modern revisionists in 1978,11 whereas at the same time a tendency developed among those forces who refuted these attacks on Mao Tse-tung, a tendency which linked up precisely with the deviations of the CP of China in the time before Mao Tse-tung's death as well as with his mistakes, which systematized these errors and which tended to basically be anti-Stalin and generally anti-marxist-leninist.12
The tasks of the marxists-leninists regarding the refutation of the attacks on Mao Tse-tung
Marxists-leninists view all questions of the ideological struggle, the struggle against the revisionist attacks on Mao Tse-tung as well, in the context of the principal teachings and methods of marxism-leninism.
First of all, it is necessary to make up for what has been neglected, to beat back the modern revisionists' "criticism" of Mao Tse-tung as an attack on that in his works, which is, without any doubt, marxist-leninist; at the same time, it is necessary to thoroughly analyze and criticize Mao Tse-tung's mistakes as well as those of the CP of China. This is even more important in view of the fact that not only the Russian revisionists, but also the Teng-Hua revisionists increasingly attack Mao Tse-tung's marxist-leninist positions.
This ideological struggle against the revisionist enemies has to be the basis in leading the struggle against the incorrect viewpoints of those parties and forces tailing along behind the PLA, as well as in the struggle against the incorrect path taken by those forces, who, in opposing the PLA, practically use the incorrect basic positions of the CP of China's line before Mao Tse-tung's death.
Such a struggle on two fronts is absolutely necessary in the ranks of those who we do not view as forces of counter-revolution, in order to defend the foundations of marxism-leninism and in particular the works of Stalin against those forces led by the PLA (who claim to be the no. 1 Stalin defenders, but who in reality disregard and distort Stalin's teachings), as well as against those forces who base themselves on incorrect positions of the line of the CP of China before Mao Tse-tung's death (who want to more or less "replace" Stalin through Mao Tse-tung).
Each of these directions has its particularities and the tendency of each of these is presently to increase in its incorrectness.
The particular danger of the incorrect viewpoints of those forces led by the PLA is based in the PLA's authority. Although this authority is rapidly declining in the face of the increasingly-less restrained and more unprincipled attacks on Mao Tse-tung and in the face of the absolute absence of the willingness to discuss.
The particular danger of the other ideological tendency is based in the broad circulation of the CP of China's documents from Mao Tse-tung's time, the mistakes of which have barely or not at all been criticized, which enables them to use Mao Tse-tung's extraordinary authority, whom they generally and uncritically defend, complete with his errors.
To attempt to now define which of these deviations is more "dangerous" for the building of unity in the international communist movement, now when the ideological struggle has just begun, disregards Stalin's statement - which precisely addresses such cases as these - that every deviation is dangerous, against which one is not struggling.
The goals of the ideological two-front struggle are: the defense of the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, adhering to that in Mao's works which is marxist-leninist, and the determination of Mao Tse-tung's errors, as well as those of the CP of China during Mao's lifetime.
Did Mao continue the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin as a classical marxist-leninist?
The teachings of Mao Tse-tung from the time before 1949, as reflected in his Selected Works, volumes I-IV, are a great application of marxism-leninism to China and an important concretization of Lenin's and Stalin's teachings on colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries. But these works can, in no way, be viewed as a fundamental advance in the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin or Stalin on the problems of the proletarian world revolution.
Following the XX. party congress of the CPSU and the complete condemnation of Stalin, following the beginning of the CP of China's open polemic in 1963, the beginning of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the idea became firmly established in many parties, that just as Stalin stood at Lenin's grave, and moved on to advance the cause of marxism-leninism around the whole world, that after Stalin's death, Mao Tse-tung would further the cause of the worldwide defense of marxism-leninism, of the theory and practice of the world revolution, that he would take the unity of the international communist movement upon himself and would, thereby take his place in the ranks with Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.
Our opinion is that Mao Tse-tung did not realize this possibility, and this fact is based not only on his serious errors in the question of the dictatorship of the proletariat (participation of the bourgeoisie in political power).
Moreover, it became evident that the first beginnings in building an ideological platform for the international Communist movement (the 25-Point-Proposal), which was composed under Mao Tse-tung's leadership,13 contained serious errors and was not further pursued, discussed, nor corrected.
Serious errors in the 1425 Point Proposal" and the following "Nine Commentaries" which should have been corrected through ideological struggle were (among others):
• The construction of the scheme of two possible roads to revolution: "peaceful and not peaceful"
• The complete neglect of the agrarian revolution in capitalistic not developed countries.
• The directing of the struggle in all capitalist countries primarily versus US-imperialism instead of the "own" bourgeoisie.
• The incorrect and unproven criticisms of Stalin.
• The rotten theses of the "norm" of the exclusive internal discussion, which was directed against public debate and which allowed mutual criticism at the most behind closed doors.
It became evident that Mao Tse-tung did not assume the role of the leader of the international communist movement like Stalin did in the following of Lenin after his death; nor did he wage a comprehensive ideological theoretically consistent struggle against modern revisionism.
At the end of the 1970s, Mao Tse-tung barely took part in the great ideological struggles in the international communist movement in form of comprehensive articles, brochures or books. Even the meetings with leaders of other communist parties came to an end in the late of the 1960s/ early 1970s.
Therefore one cannot say that Mao Tse-tung took up the continuation of the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin on an equal level, that is as a
classic representative of marxism-leninism.
For these above-mentioned reasons, we have come to the conclusion that it is incorrect to place Mao Tse-tung in the ranks with the classic representatives of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.
As far as we know, Mao Tse-tung himself never wanted to be placed in the ranks with Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin or regarded himself as a classic representative of marxism-leninism.
Concluding statement
Many comrades formulate the question as follows: Mao Tse-tung is either in sum a marxist-leninist, or he had in sum revisionist viewpoints. Or:
If Mao Tse-tung led a revolution as great as the Chinese revolution to victory and applied marxism-leninism on China correctly at that time, it is impossible that he later took revisionist positions.
Other comrades conclude the opposite: If Mao Tse-tung held revisionist viewpoints in 1957, it is impossible that he previously held marxist-leninist viewpoints.
All of these conceptions are fundamentally incorrect.
Those who argue in this manner assume that marxist-leninists cannot make basic errors.
Behind this argumentation one finds the idea, which dulls one's alertness, that a marxist-leninist can never put out a revisionist line. This understanding also includes the opposite of this: that a revisionist or a representative of a revisionist line can never have been a marxist-leninist. Such an idea is, however, extremely mechanical. It necessarily overlooks the necessity of criticism and self-criticism and of ideological struggle, in preventing that marxist-leninists take up a revisionist line or become revisionists.
This determination is necessary because it became evident in the course of heated discussions around the question "was Mao Tse-tung a marxist-leninist or was he not?" that such a simple scheme was at the base of these discussions.
Our opinion is that one must come to the following conclusions - based on Mao Tse-tung's theory and practice which is well-known, rich in proof and verifiable:
• Mao Tse-tung as a great marxist-leninist successfully applied the teachings of marxism-leninism to the democratic stage of the Chinese revolution.
• Mao Tse-tung represented in a later stage several serious revisionist positions.
• These errors do not justify though, a denial of Mao Tse-tung's extraordinary accomplishments.
We decisively refuse the viewpoint therefore that the fact that Mao Tse-tung for some period of time put out incorrect and revisionist positions is sufficient to portray him as "degenerated" or even as revisionist right from the beginning.
Likewise we refuse to defend all of Mao Tse-tung's viewpoints and his political line as a whole and to propagate this as being in agreement with marxism-leninism or even as a further development in marxism-leninism.
In order to make a correct evaluation of Mao Tse-tung, his role in the Cultural Revolution and the struggle he led versus Teng Hsiao-ping directly before his death are essential. It appears that Mao Tse-tung recognized some of his errors in this period and attempted to correct them. It is possible that he made - even if not public - a self-criticism during this time (which it is unfortunately not possible to confirm in the near future because of
the lack of documents). The Cultural Revolution shows, in any case, that he no longer wanted to build socialism in alliance with the bourgeoisie, rather that he viewed this struggle as one of "life and death".
"To defend Mao Tse-tung", this should not mean, in our opinion, to conceal the problems and to present things as if he always represented marxist-leninist positions. To defend Mao Tse-tung means above all that we defend his work on the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal democratic revolution and peoples' war, but at the same time we criticize his later revisionist positions and his errors.14
1 See the definition of the three types of countries in the "Program of the Communist International" (1928), p. 49 (German edition).
2 See Stalin: "A Talk with the Students of Sun-Yat-sen University" (1927), in: Collected Works, vol. 9 (German edition), p. 221.
3 That means 1981.
4 See Mao Tse-tung: Selected Works, vol. IV, p. 359, 360, 386 (German edition).
5 For example the workers from Schuikouschan and Anyiian, see Mao Tse-tung: "The Struggle in the Mountains of Djinggang", 1928, vol. I, p. 88, 116 (German edition).
6 It refers to some special passages and formulations of Mao Tse-tung concerning the following areas: problems of transition to the socialist revolution, concrete tactical problems in the parts of the democratic revolution as well as concrete and perhaps exaggerated formulations of Mao Tse-tung in struggle against dogmatism and sectarianism during the inner-party-struggle.
7 Mao Tse-tung: "Report on the Second Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, elected on the 7th Party Congress" (1949), vol. IV, p. 393 (German edition).
8 See Mao Tse-tung: "On the Correct Handling of the Contradictions Among the People" (1957), "vol. V", p. 435-437 (German edition).
9 See Stalin: "On the Program of the Comintern" (1928), Collected Works, vol. 11, p. 128-129 (German edition).
10 See "Important Documents of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution", Peking 1970, p. 132 (German edition).
11 See Enver Hoxha: "Imperialism and Revolution" (1979), second part, third chapter: "The Mao Tse-tung-thoughts - an anti-marxist theory" (German edition).
2 See: RCP USA and RCP Chile: "Summary of a Text Proposal on the Basic Principles on the Unity of Marxist-Leninists and on the Line of the International Communist Movement (Proposal)", 1980.
13 On the 11th Plenary Session of the VIII. CC of the CP of China it was pointed out that the "25-Point-Proposal" was "written under the personal leadership of comrade Mao Tse-tung" (see "Important Documents of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution", Peking 1970, p. 189, German edition).
14 The text of this analysis of Mao Tse-tung's work resulted on the basis of extensive preparatory work done by the three editorial staffs of "Gegen die Strömung" (Against the Current"), "Westberliner Kommunist" ("West-Berlin Communist") and "Rote Fahne" ("Red Flag", Austria). It was published under the title "Investigations Towards the Evaluation of the Teachings and the Work of Mao Tse-tung", part I and II (1981 and 1985).
Other publications of "Gegen die Strömung" in English:
· The General Evaluation of the Teachings and the Work of Mao Tse-tung is also available in German, Turkish, French, Spanish and Italian.
· Investigations Towards the Evaluation of the Teachings and the Work of Mao Tse-tung (240 pages), brochure of "Gegen die Strömung", published 1981, English edition 1984.
• The Scheme of the "Peaceful and Non-peaceful Path" contradicts Marxism-Leninism, part IV of the work "On the 'Proposal' of the CP of China's 'General Line of the International Communist Movement" (84 pages), brochure of "Gegen die Strömung", published 1981, English edition 1984.
• Beat back the Revisionist Attacks against Marxist-Leninist Philosophy! (72 pages), brochure of "Gegen die Strömung", published 1986, English edition 1989.
Contact thru:
(* Do not underrate the secret services of all countries!)
Drucker, Herausgeber und verantwortlicher Redakteur: J. Strütt, Osnabrücker Str. 26,10598 Berlin
