Title | The draft program of the Communist International |
Alternative Title | The draft program of the Communist International: a criticism of fundamentals |
Creator (LCNAF) |
|
Contributor (LCNAF) |
|
Publisher | "The Militant" |
Place of Creation (TGN) |
|
Date | 1929 |
Subject.Topical (Local) |
|
Subject.Name (LCNAF) |
|
Subject.Geographic (TGN) |
|
Genre (AAT) |
|
Language | English |
Type (DCMI) |
|
Original Item Extent | 139 pages; 20 cm |
Original Item Location | HX11.I5T73 |
Original Item URL | http://library.uh.edu/record=b8304416~S5 |
Original Collection | Socialist and Communist Pamphlets |
Digital Collection | Socialist and Communist Pamphlets |
Digital Collection URL | http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp |
Repository | Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries |
Repository URL | http://libraries.uh.edu/branches/special-collections |
Use and Reproduction | In Copyright: This item is protected by copyright. Copyright to this resource is held by the creator or current rights holder, and the resource is provided here for educational purposes. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without permission of the copyright owner. Users assume full responsibility for any infringement of copyright or related rights. |
File Name | index.cpd |
Title | Image 139 |
Format (IMT) |
|
File Name | uhlib_1984506_138.jpg |
Transcript | THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL 125 class collaboration in China, Stalin, Bucharin and others, have not even taken the trouble to explain what has become of the workers and peasants, the revolutionary, friendly and entirely our "own" nine-tenths of the Kuomintang membership. How ever, an answer to this question is of decisive im' portance if we are to understand in the future the fate of all these "dual composition" parties and have a clear idea of their very conception which throws us back far behind not only the program of the C.P.S.U. of 1919, but even the manifesto of the Communist Party of 1847. The question as to what has become of the celebrated nine-tenths becomes clear to us only if we understand, first, the impossibility of a dual com", position, that is, a dual class Party, expressing simultaneously two mutually exclusive historical lines —the proletarian and petty-bourgeois lines—secondly, the impossibility to have in capitalist' sc ciety an independent peasant party, that is, a party independent of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Marxism has always taught, and that was accepted by Bolshevism, that the peasantry and the proletariat are two different classes, that every identification of their interests in capitalist society is false, and that the peasant can join the Communist Party if, from the property viewpoint, he adopts the views of the proletariat. An alliance of the workers and peasants under the proletarian dictatorship does not do away with this fact, but confirms it, only in a different way, and under different circumstances. Were it not for the fact that they are DIFFERENT classes and have DIFFERENT interests, there would be no need for AN ALLIANCE. Such an alliance is compatible with the Socialist revolution only inasmuch as it exists within the iron frame of the proletarian dictator- |