ALLIANCE NOTES ON THE TWO STAGES OF REVOLUTION IN COLONIAL TYPE COUNTRIES & STALINíS CHINA POLICY IN 1928 Lenin modified his "Theses on Revolution in Semi-Colonial Countries" in debate with Mabendra Nath Roy; (M.N.Roy). The Theses On The National And Colonial Question Were Adopted At The 2nd Congress Of The Communist International (CI), [Petrograd and Moscow : July 19th to August 7th, 1920]. The Theses were adopted after intense study by The National and Colonial Commission of the Congress. Lenin and Roy disagreed over whether, and how much to ally with the national bourgeoisie.

Roy had an unrealistic view of the strength of the workers movements in colonial countries. Roy concluded that the working class of colonial-type countries were in full conflict with the entire bourgeoisie; thus support of a "liberation movement" with any section of native bourgeoisie, must be rejected :

"It would be a mistake to assume that the bourgeois nationalists movement expressed the sentiments and aspirations of the general population.. in the colonies we have two contradictory forces that cannot develop together. To support the colonial bourgeois movements would amount to helping the growth of the national spirit which will surely obstruct the awakening of the class consciousness in the masses." M.N.Roy: Draft Supplementary Theses On the National and Colonial Question, 2nd Congress CI, Cited in G.Adhikari(Ed); "Documents of the History of the Communist Party of India", Volume 1; New Delhi; 1971 p.184, 186-8. Royís formulation contradicted Lenin. Lenin thought that in the first stage of the revolution, the bourgeois democrats had some useful role to play: "All the Communist parties must assist the bourgeois democratic liberation movement in these (ie colonial type countries-ed).. The Communist International (CI) must enter into a temporary alliance with bourgeois democracy in colonial and backward countries." V.I.Lenin : Preliminary Draft of Theses on National and Colonial Questions, 2nd Congress; CI in "Selected Works", Volume10, London, 1946; p. 236-7. Leninís view was endorsed by the Commission. Only one change to Lenin's original Draft Theses was adopted by the congress. This clarified that the working class in a colonial type country should support a bourgeois-led movement only if it was genuinely revolutionary. The term "bourgeois democratic" was replaced by "nationalist-revolutionary": "I would like to particularly emphasise the question of the bourgeois democratic movements in backward countries. It was this question that gave rise to some disagreement. We argued about whether it would be correct, in principle and in theory, to declare that the CI and the CP's should support the bourgeois-democratic movement in backward countries. As a result of this discussion we unanimously decided to speak of the nationalist-revolutionary movements instead of the 'bourgeois-democratic' movement. There is not the slightest doubt that every nationalist movement can only be a bourgeois-democratic movement.. But it was agreed that if we speak about the bourgeois-democratic movement all distinction between reformist and revolutionary movements will be obliterated; whereas in recent times this distinction has been fully and clearly revealed in the backward and colonial countries, of the imperialist bourgeois is trying with all its might to implant the reformist movement also among the oppressed nations.. In the Commission this was proved irrefutably, and we came to the conclusion that the only correct thing to do was to take this distinction into consideration and nearly everywhere to substitute the term "nationalist-revolutionary" for the term "bourgeois-democratic". The meaning of this change is that we communists should, and will, support bourgeois liberation movements only when these movement do not hinder us in training and organising the peasants and the broad masses of the exploited in a revolutionary spirit.. The above mentioned distinction has now been drawn in all the theses, and I think that, thanks to this, our point of view has been formulated much more precisely." Lenin. Report Of Commission on the National and Colonial Questions, Ibid, p 241 Since Roy had pointed out the vacillating nature of the colonial bourgeoisie, Lenin acknowledged his role in the final formulation. Roy had said : "Afraid of revolution, the nationalist bourgeoisie would compromise with imperialism in return for some economic and political concessions to their class. The working class should be prepared to take over at that crisis the leadership of the struggle of national liberation and transform it into a revolutionary mass movement." M.N.Roy, "Memoirs", Bombay, 1964; p.382 In fact Roy had made some serious contributions as Lenin openly pointed out. Firstly: Lenin saw the sense in Roy's view - that a distinction had to be drawn within the bourgeoisie of a colonial-type country between a section which favoured national-revolutionary struggle against foreign imperialism (later called the "national bourgeoisie") and a section which favoured compromise with imperialism and while it might profess support of the national liberation movement, in practice objectively served imperialism by damping down national-revolutionary struggle (later called "comprador bourgeoisie").

Roy also pointed out a second correct view. Roy in his "Draft Supplementary Theses", saw that if the revolutionary process in a colonial type country were under the leadership of the working class, such a country could avoid a period of capitalist development.

"The supposition that owing to the economic and industrial backwardness the peoples in the colonies are bound to go through the stage of bourgeois democracy is wrong.. If from the beginning the lead of the revolution is in the hands of the Communist vanguard, the revolutionary masses.. would go straight ahead through the successive periods of revolutionary experience." Roy, Draft Supplementary Theses; Ibid. p.186 Lenin agreed with this, a concept that was not in his own Draft Theses : "A rather lively debate on this question took place in the Commission, not only in connection with the theses which I signed but still more in connection with Cmde Roy's Theses which Cmde Roy will defend here and which with certain amendments were adopted unanimously. The question was presented in the following way :

Can we recognise as correct the assertion that the capitalist stage of development of national economy is inevitable of those backward countries which are now liberating themselves?.. We reply to this question in the negative. If the revolutionary victorious proletariat carries on a systematic propaganda amongst them, and if the Soviet governments render them all the assistance they possibly can, it will be wrong to assume that the capitalist stage is inevitable for the backward nationalities. The CI must lay down and give the theoretical grounds of the proposition that, with the aid of the proletariat of the most advanced countries the backward countries may pass to the Soviet system and, after passing through a definite stage of development, to Communism, without passing through the capitalist stage of development." Lenin, Report of the Commission, Ibid, p.243

Hence Marxist-Leninists, see that if the working class gains leadership of the national-democratic revolution; this revolution can be transformed relatively uninterruptedly, into a socialist revolution. Mao disagrees with this key point.

Thirdly, Roy recognised that in some colonial-type countries - such as India and China - a significant native working class existed, objectively capable of gaining the leadership of the national-democratic revolution there :

"A new movement among the exploited masses has started in India, which has spread rapidly and found expression in gigantic strike movements. This mass movement is not controlled by the revolutionary nationalists, but is developing independently in spite of the fact that the nationalists are endeavouring to make use of it for their own purposes. This movement of the masses is of a revolutionary character." M.N.Roy. Speech 2nd Congress CI, Cited Adhikari, Ibid. p.191-2. This was why Lenin approved Roy's modified supplementary theses. Stalin later pointed out why Roy"s additions had been needed : "Both in his speeches and his theses (at the 2nd Congress of CI-ed) Lenin has in mind the countries where : 'There can be no question of a purely proletarian movement,' where, 'There is practically no industrial proletariat." Why were the Supplementary Theses needed? In order to single out from the backward colonial countries which have no industrial proletariat such countries as China and India, of which it cannot be said that they have 'practically no industrial proletariat'. Read the "Supplementary Theses", and you will realise that they refer chiefly to China and India...How could it happen that Roy's special Theses were needed to "Supplement" Lenin's theses? The fact is that Lenin's Theses were written and published long before the Second Congress opened.. prior to the discussion in the Special Commission of the Second Congress. And since the Second Congress revealed the necessity of singling out from the backward countries such countries as China and India the necessity of 'Supplementary Theses' arose." JVS W : "Questions of the Chinese Revolution", Vol 9; p.236-238. In the absence of a significant working class in the colonial country, a different leadership was necessary. Lenin in his Report and Theses at the 2nd congress of the CI saw here, the leadership of the national democratic revolution being exercised by the working class of the developed capitalist countries, in particular by the working class of Soviet Russia : "If the revolutionary victorious proletariat carries on systematic propaganda among them, and if the Soviet governments render them all the assistance they possibly can.. the backward countries may pass to the Soviet system, and after passing through a definite stage of development to Communism without passing though the capitalists stage of development." Lenin. Report on the Commission. Ibid, p.243. Roy had thought that the whole bourgeoisie in colonial-type countries is counter-revolutionary. This was incorrect. But it contains an element of truth. i.e. When the working class is seen to win the leadership of the national-democratic movements, even the national bourgeoisie will desert the national democratic revolution and go over to the imperialist counter-revolution. They will prefer even a subordinate exploiting position under imperialism, to the possibility that the working class will use its leading position, to transform the national-democratic revolution into a socialist revolution. This Marxist-Leninist position was put in the "Theses on the Eastern Question", adopted by the 4th Congress of the CI in November 1922. "At first the indigenous (national-ed) bourgeois and intelligentsia are the champions of the colonial revolutionary movements, but as the proletarian and semi-proletarian peasant masses are drawn in, the bourgeois and bourgeois-agrarian elements begin to turn away from the movement in proportion as the social interests of the lower classes of people come to the forefront." Theses on the Eastern Question, 4th Congress CI, J.Degras(ed)"The Communist International: 1919-1943: Documents",Volume 1; London; 1971; p.388. B) STALIN AND THE 1927 CHINESE REVOLUTION

Stalin, in 1925, distinguished "at least three categories of colonial and dependent countries":

"Firstly countries like Morocco who have little or no proletariat, and are industrially quite undeveloped. Secondly countries like China and Egypt which are under-developed industries and have a relatively small proletariat. Thirdly countries like India.. capitalistically more or less developed and have a more or less numerous national proletariat. Clearly all these countries cannot possibly be put on a par with one another." JVS W : Vol 7 : "Political Tasks of the University of thePeople's of the East. Speech Delivered at a meeting of Students of the Communist University of the Toilers of the East", May 18th, 1925. pp. 135-146. In each country the conditions were different and had to be concretely studied before deciding the exact tactic: "In countries like Egypt and China, where the national bourgeoisie has already split up into a revolutionary party and a compromising party, but where the compromising section of the bourgeoises is not yet able to join up with imperialism, the Communists can no longer set themselves the aim of forming a united national front against imperialism. In such countries the Communists must pass from the policy of a united national front to the policy of a revolutionary bloc of the workers and the petty bourgeoisie. In such countries that bloc can assume the form of a single party, a workers and peasants" party, provided, however, that this distinctive party actually represents a bloc of two forces - the Communist Party and the party of the revolutionary petty bourgeois. The tasks of this bloc are to expose the half-heartedness and inconsistency of the national bourgeoisie and to wage a determined struggle against imperialism. Such a dual party is necessary and expedient provided it does not bind the Communist Party hand and foot, provided it does not restrict the freedom of the Communist Party to conduct agitation and propaganda work, provided it does not hinder the rallying of the proletarians around and provided it facilitates the actual leadership of the revolutionary movement by the Communist party. Such a dual party is unnecessary and inexpedient if to does not conform to all these conditions for it can only lead to the Communist elements becoming dissolved in the ranks of the bourgeoisie to the Communist Party losing the proletarian army.

The situation is somewhat different in countries like India. The fundamental and new feature of the conditions of life in countries like India is not only that the national bourgeoisie has split up into a revolutionary part and a compromising part, but primarily that the compromising section of the bourgeoisie has already managed, in the main, to strike a deal with imperialism, Fearing revolution more than it fears imperialism, and concerned with more about its money bags than about the interests of its own country, this section of the bourgeoisie is going over entirely to the camp of the irreconcilable enemies of the revolution, it is forming a bloc with imperialism against the workers and peasants of its own country." JVS Works; "Tasks of University of People's of East", Ibid; May 18th, 1925. pp. 135-146.

The stages of the revolution flowed from the CI Theses. Stalin analysed the situation as follows: "What are the stages in the Chinese Revolution? In my opinion there should be three:

The first stage is the revolution of an all-national united front, the Canton period, when the revolution was striking chiefly at foreign imperialism, and the national bourgeoisie supported the revolutionary movement;

The second stage is the bourgeois democratic revolution, after the national troops reached the Yangtze River, when the national bourgeoisie deserted the revolution and the agrarian movement grew into a mighty revolution of tens of millions of the peasantry. The Chinese revolution is now at the second stage of its development;

The third stage is the Soviet revolution which has not yet come, but will come." J.V.Stalin; "On the International Situation and the Defence of the USS"; Joint Plenum of CC and the CPSU Control Commission; August 1 1927. Vol 10; p.16-17

Stalin"s First Stage And The Second Stage Together Constitute What Is Termed The Bourgeois Democratic Revolution. Stalin emphasised that the "main axis" was the agrarian movement: "The characteristic feature .. Of the Turkish revolution (The Kemalists).. is that it got stuck at the "first step", at the first stage of its development, at the stage of the bourgeois liberation movement, without even attempting to pass to the second stage of its development, the stage of the agrarian revolution." Stalin; Ibid; p.346 Unfortunately, the CCP rejected Stalinís advice on moving from the first stage to the second stage using the agrarian revolution. Because of this the CCP was defeated; allowing Trotsky And Zinoviev a pretext to attack Stalin.The desertion of the Chinese Kuomintang Right Faction had been fully anticipated by Stalin in February 1926: "It is necessary to adopt the course of arming the workers and peasants and converting the peasant committees in the localities into actual organs of governmental authority equipped with armed self-defence, etc.. The CP must not come forward as a brake on the mass movement; the CP should not cover up the treacherous and reactionary policy of the Kuomintang Rights, and should mobilise the masses around the Kuomintang and the CCP on the basis of exposing the Rights... The Chinese revolution is passing through a critical period, and.. it can achieve further victories only by resolutely adopting the course of developing the mass movement. Otherwise a tremendous danger threatens the revolution. The fulfilment of directives is therefore more necessary than ever before." ECCI Directive to the CCP; February 1926; Cited JVS W : Vol 10; p.21 Stalin had repeatedly urged the CCP, through 1926 and early 1927 to break the bloc with the right KMT and move to a militant revolutionary struggle. The CCP did not heed this. "The victory of the revolution cannot be achieved unless this bloc is smashed, but in order to smash this bloc, fire must be concentrated on the compromising national bourgeoisie, its treachery exposed, the toiling masses freed from its influence, and the conditions necessary of the hegemony of the proletariat systematically prepared. In other words, in colonies like India it is a matter of preparing the proletariat for the role of leader of the liberation movement, step by step dislodging the bourgeoisie and its mouthpieces from this honourable post. The task is to create an anti-imperialist bloc and to ensure the hegemony of the proletariat in this bloc. This bloc can assume although it need not always necessarily do so, the form of a single Workers and Peasants Party, formally bound by a single platform. In such centuries the independence of the Communist Party must be, the chief slogan of the advanced communist elements, of the hegemony of the proletariat can be prepared and brought about by the Communist party. But the communist party can and must enter into an open bloc with the revolutionary part of the bourgeoisie in order, after isolating the compromising national bourgeoisie, to lead the vast masses of the urban and rural petty bourgeoisie in the struggle against imperialism." J.V.Stalin "Stalin's Letters to Molotov"; Edited Lars T.Lih; Oleg V. Naumov; and Oleg V. Khlevniuk; Yale 1995; p.318-9. The EXECUTIVE COUNCIL CI (ECCI) adopted Stalin"s view; in a directive sent to the CC of the CCP in February 1926. At the 7th Plenum of ECCI, (Moscow November 22nd to December 16th, 1926), the "RESOLUTION ON THE CHINESE SITUATION" followed Stalin.The ECCI made clear that the working class had a choice: Either attempt to maintain the alliance with the national bourgeoisie, who were on the point of desertion of the national democratic revolution; Or; cement an alliance with the peasantry through the agrarian revolution. Failing to choose the latter would be disastrous : "The fear that the aggravation of the class struggle in the countryside will weaken the united anti-imperialist front is baseless.. Not to approach the agrarian question boldly by supporting all the economic demands of the peasant masses is positively dangerous for the revolution. To refuse to assign to the agrarian revolution a prominent place in the national-liberation movement for the fear of offending the dubious and disloyal cooperation of a section of the capitalist class is wrong. this is not the revolutionary policy of the proletariat.

The present situation is characterised by its transitional nature when the proletariat must choose between allying itself with a considerable section of the bourgeoisie or further consolidating its own alliance with the peasantry. If the proletariat does not put forward a radical programme it will fail to attract the peasantry into the revolutionary struggle and will lose its hegemony in the national-liberation movement. Under direct or indirect imperialist influence, the bourgeoisie will regain the leadership of the movement once more." Ibid; p.318.

As well as mass work, the CCP should work through the KMT government and the revolutionary army: "The revolutionary armies will strike root in the peasant masses as the standard bearer of agrarian revolution.. The CCP and their revolutionary allies must penetrate the new government, so as to give practical expression to their agrarian programme by using the government machinery to confiscate land, reduce taxes, and invest real power in the peasant committees, thus carrying out progressive reforms on the basis of a revolutionary programme.

The Communist must enter the Canton government in order to support the revolutionary Left wing in its struggle against the weak and vacillating policy of the Right..

The Communists must stay in the Kuomintang and intensify their work in it.. The CCP must strive to develop the KMT into a real peoples' party.. a solid revolutionary bloc of the proletariat, peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie and the other oppressed and exploited strata of the population. For this the CCP must work along the following lines

a) Systematic and determined struggle against the .. right wing attempting to convert the KMT into a bourgeois party.

b) Definite formation of a Left wing in the KMT and establishment of close cooperation with it." Ibid; p.140-141.

To help implement the ECCI 7th Plenum Theses by the CCP, in January 1927, M.N.Roy was sent as a special ECCI representative. But the CCP did not heed the warning signs and advice, to escape the struggle from the CI and Stalin. The Chinese national bourgeois led by Chiang Kai-Shek; launched its coup on April 12th, 192, viciously butchering the Shanghai workers, and the militants of the CCP. Stalin commented : "In the First period of the Chinese revolution.. the national bourgeoisie (not the compradors) sided with the revolution...Chiang Kai-Shek's coup marks the desertion of the national bourgeoisie from revolution". April, 1927. JVS Works:'Question of Chinese Revolution' Vol 9; p. 226, 229

Even now, Roy"s arguments were rejected. But Roy managed to pressure the CCP to hold the 5TH CCP Congress in Wuhan (April 27th to May 9th 1927). Chen argued to delay the agrarian revolution. But Royís pressure forced the CCP, to verbally accept the ECCI line; however this was short lived. The CCP leadership refused to follow even their own 5th Congress directives. On May 21st, 1927 Colonel Hsu Ke-hsiang seized control of Changsha, and launched a White terror. 20,000 workers and peasants were killed. The CCP sabotaged the peasant army in its attempt to fight back, and forced a retreat. They were then of course easy fodder, and were slaughtered. Still, the CCP and Borodin refused to go to the masses. Chen Tu-hsiu's line was traitorous:

"The basic point in all Chen Tu-hsiu's speeches has been the demand that the general leadership in the movement be handed over to the KMT". Tsia Ho-sen: "Istoriia opportunizma v Kommunisticheskoi Partii Kitaia" (An account of Opportunism In the Chinese Communist Party) In :"Problemy Kitaia" (Chinese Problems); No. 1, 1929; p.35. Desperate, Roy wired the ECCI for support. A reply telegram from the ECCI, on May 30th, 1927; buttressed Roy. Meanwhile the Wuhan Left KMT met Chiang Kai-Shek, and Feng Yu-hsiang and combined against the CCP. Roy again warned the CCP leadership that a coup was imminent. Again this warning was ignored. The CCP refused to launch agrarian struggle. Instead Chen Tu-hsiu wrote a telegram to the ECCI : "90% of the National Army are.. opposed to excesses in the peasants' movement. In such a situation, not only the KMT but also the CCP is obliged to adopt a policy of concessions, It is necessary to correct excesses and to moderate the activities of the confiscation of land." Chen Tu-hsiu: Telegram to ECCI; June 15th 1927; In M.N.Roy :"Revolution and Counter revolution in China"; Calcutta; 1946; p.482. Now the CC dismantled the workers struggle and peasants struggles, fearing a rupture with the KMT. The two Communist ministers resigned, to make the government appear "more respectable"! All to no avail. On July 15th, the KMT expelled members of the CCP from the KMT and the army.

The ECCI Resolution of July 14th had noted that :

"The revolutionary role of the Wuhan Government is played out; it is becoming a counter-revolutionary force". ECCI: Resolution On the Present Situation on the Chinese Revolution, in : "International press Correspondence", Volume 7, No. 44; July 28th; 1927; p.984.

A White Terror ensued :

"Between January and August 1928 alone, more than 100,000 people lost their lives. The Party organisations suffered serious damage. By the end of 1927 Party membership had been reduced from more than 50,000 to some 10,000." Deng Mao;"Deng Xiaoping - My Father"; New York; 1995; p.119

Stalin characterised the new development as the desertion of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia from the revolution: "The present period is marked by the desertion of the Wuhan leadership of the KMT to the camp of counter-revolutionary intelligentsia from the revolution.. This desertion is due firstly to the fear .. In face of the agrarian revolution and to the pressure of the feudal landlords on the Wuhan leadership, and secondly to the pressure of the imperialists in the Tientsin are who are demanding that the KMT break with the Communists as the price for permitting its passage Northwards." J.V.Stalin Works: "Notes on Contemporary Themes"; Vol 9; p.366-67. But Stalin pointed out that NOW it was correct to propagandise in favour of the formation of soviets : "If in the near future - not necessarily in a couple of months, but in 6 months or a year from now, a new upsurge of the revolution should become a fact, the question of forming Soviets of Workers and peasant" deputies may become a live issue as a slogan of the day, and as a counterpoise to the bourgeoisie. Why? Because if there has been an upsurge of the revolution in its present phase of development, the formation of Soviets will be an issue that has come fully mature. Recently a few months ago it would have been wrong for the CCP to issue the slogan of forming soviets, for that would been adventurism, which is characteristic of our opposition, for the KMT leadership had not yet discredited itself as an enemy of the revolution. Now on the contrary, the slogan of forming Soviets may become a really revolutionary slogan if (If!) A new and powerful revolutionary upsurge takes place in the near future. Consequently alongside the fight to replace the present KMT leadership by a revolutionary leadership it is necessary at once even before the upsurge begins to conduct the widest propaganda for the idea of Soviets among the broad masses of the working people, without running too far ahead and forming Soviets immediately, remembering that Soviets can only flourish at a time of powerful revolutionary upsurge." J.V.S. W: "Notes on Contemporary Themes"; Vol 9; p.366-7. Here Stalin rebuked Trotsky who had been calling for "Soviet Now!" for some time, quite incorrectly. The ECCI instructed the CCP to resign from the Wuhan Government apparatus whilst simultaneously staying within the KMT, and turn it into a bloc LED by the working class; that the arming of peasants and workers was crucial; that an illegal party apparatus be built up. Finally, the resolution attacked the CCP for its grave right opportunist errors : "The leaders of the CCP have pursued a policy of damming back the masses. The revolutionary instruction of the ECCI were rejected by the leaders of the CCP. Matters even went so far that the CCP "agreed" to the disarming of workers"" Resolution of the ECCI: "On the Present Situation of the Chinese Revolution"; Ibid; Inprecorr July 28th; 1927. Unfortunately, The CCP now swung from Right Opportunism into Left Wing Adventurism. They tried to organise an uprising in Nanchang, in July 1927. Zhou En Lai, Mao Ze Dong, Chu De, Li Li-San and others were involved. Stalin disavowed this military adventurism : "The whole business of the Southern revolutionary movement, the departure of the troops of Yeh Ting and Ho Lung from Wuhan, their march into Kwantung and so forth- I want to say that all this was undertaken on the initiative of the CCP". J.V.S. Works: "The Political Complexion of the Russian pposition"; Vol 10; p.161-2. The CCP eventually did launch agrarian struggle. But they were now consistently ultra-left in their theory and practice. Mao Ze Dong was one who preached at this stage: "Socialism now". Stalin stated : "The Comintern was and still is of the opinion that the basis of the revolution in China at the present period is the agrarian -peasant revolution" J.V.S. W: "The Political Complexion of the Russian Opposition"; Vol 10; p. 161. Yet Mao took a Trotskyite line. He argued that the line of the ECCI and Stalin had been wrong for some time. On August 20th Mao wrote to the CCP CC misrepresenting the ECCI position: "The international proposes the immediate establishment of Soviets of workers and peasants and soldiers in China. Objectively China has long since reached 1917, but formerly everyone held the opinion that we were in 1905. This has been an extremely great error. Soviets of workers, peasants, and soldiers are wholly adapted to the objective situation. In the period of soviets of workers, peasants and soldiers, we should no longer use the flag of the KMT. We must raise high the flag of the CCP to oppose the flag of the KMT." Mao : In "Chung -Yang tung-hsin" (Central Newsletter) No.3; August 30th 1927, p.38-41.

 

It was in this Ultra-Left spirit that a hastily and ill prepared insurrection was carried out. The Canton Insurrection of December 11th, 1928 was an instance of a completely failed "putsch", as opposed to a proletarian uprising. Here a major portion of blame lies With Heinz Neumann an Ultra-Left ECCI representative. The "Canton Commune", was drowned in blood as the KMT smashed it. The ECCI again criticised the CCP, in February 1928 at the 9th Plenum of the ECCI : "The Canton Insurrection.. A heroic attempt of the proletariat.. Revealed a whole series of blunders by the leaders:- Insufficient work among the workers and peasants, and among the enemy forces, a wrong appraisal of the yellow trade unions; inadequate preparation of the party organisation and the Young Communist League... complete ignorance of the national party center of the Canton events, weaknesses in the political mobilisation of the masses". Resolution On Chinese Question of the 9th Plenum of the ECCI In "International Press Correspondence", Vol 8, No.16;March 15th, 1928; p. 322. Mao helped "plan" this adventure. He also organised another putsch the military attack upon CHANGSHA. This was a part of a mission he was given to enter Hunan to carry out the "AUTUMN HARVEST UPRISING". "In September 1927 Mao Ze Dong was entrusted by the Central Committee to go to Hunan as its special representative to organise the.. Autumn Harvest Uprising and to found the 5,000 strong 1st Division of the 1st Corps of the Chinese Workers and Peasants Revolutionary Army." Deng Mao Mao; Ibid; p.121. Unfortunately, Mao again would not apply Marxism-Leninism. Mao explained his Programme to Edgar Snow :

"My programme there called for the realisation of 5 points:

1. Complete severance of the provincial party from the KMT;

2. Organisation of a peasant worker revolutionary army;

3. Confiscation of the property of small and middle and as well great landlords; 4. Setting up the power of the CP in Hunan independent of the KMT; and

5. The organisation of the Soviets.

The fifth point at that time was opposed by the Comintern." Mao Ze Dong: Cited by E.Snow; "Red Star Over China"; London; 1937; p.163. In fact only on points 1, 2 and 4, was Mao fully consistent with the ECCI. The other points were Leftist deviations. Stalin had pointed out that IF conditions were mature, Soviets were appropriate : "If in the near future - not necessarily in a couple of months, but in 6 months or a year from now, a new upsurge of the revolution should become a fact, the question of forming Soviets of Workers and peasant" deputies may become a live issue as a slogan of the day, and as a counterpoise to the bourgeoisie. Why? Because if there has been an upsurge of the revolution in its present phase of development, the formation of Soviets will be an issue that has come fully mature.... if (IF!) A new and powerful revolutionary upsurge takes place in the near future". JVS Works : "Notes on Contemporary Themes" Ibid; vol 9; p.366 Given the "putchism", and the decimation of forces, conditions were not ripe, as Mao alleged. As Stalin had pointed out to Trotsky : "The opposition does not understand that the point is not at all to be the "first" in saying a thing; running too far ahead and disorganising the revolution, but to say it at the right time and to say it in such a way that it will be taken up by the masses and put into practice." JVS W: "Notes On Contemporary Themes"; Vol 9; p.369.

ML Review     |     Alliance ML     |   WB Bland Archive    |    Albania Society