Of course the theoretical battles of Leninism against opportunism, as well as the substantial enrichment of Marxism with the question of imperialism and the State, the theory of the party and the theory of socialist revolution, have been a precondition for the revolutionary advance of the proletariat, and the great test is the victory of the Great Socialist Revolution of October 1917. And under that banner the Third Communist International forges a unified strategy that successfully guides the class struggle in a very complex period of history, because it is unleashed coordinated by the imperialist countries, the counterrevolution that aims to stifle socialist construction.
The III International elaborates its strategy and tactics based on the fact that with the triumph of the October Revolution of 1917 a new era of social revolution opens, of the historical transition from capitalism to socialism, an era that we agree to point out - the communist parties that we give life to the International Communist Review - as of full force. It is within this framework that the essential elements of the strategy and tasks of each section of the Comintern unfold; on which it is necessary to insist, in dialogue and debate, fruitful, deep and meticulous with each Section, as is evidenced in the documentary sources.
In the Communist International the debate on strategy is a constant, whoever wants to define it static is in error, because it adjusts to the rhythm of the class struggle, or as Lenin explained on several occasions, it corresponds to the offensive and the defense, to ebb and flow; However, it is based on communist principles and on the general features of the time, since as stated in the important editorial of the magazine The Communist International in 1933, "For Marxist-Leninist theory":
"On the solid foundation of Marxism and Leninism, and on the basis of all the historical experience of the international revolutionary movement, in general, and on the practice of the Bolsheviks in three Russian revolutions, in particular, the tactic and the strategy of the Third International, as the immediate continuation of Marx's tactic and strategy, as the continuation of the cause of the First International”. 
Now, already in the Communist International some tendencies arose that questioned the need for a unified strategy and that placed the accent on the particular and the specific, above the general and the regularities. And we don't want to refer exclusively to Browder, but also to Togliatti and others. This trend was exposed with the turn of the VII Congress
of the Communist International and the alliances with the social democracy and bourgeois forces to confront fascism. With fascism defeated, a joint elaboration was not carried out for a common strategy of the CPs, except in the area of the Cominform, which didn’t cannot to fill out the void that the Third International leaved for the elaboration of an only revolutionary strategy on a period that furthermore the ideological conflicts of the international communist movement intensify.
Browder carried to the last consequences the thesis of the alliance with the parties of capital and social democracy, even considering unnecessary the existence of the PC of the USA, which he tried to dissolve. Its influence was fatal in the CPs of Cuba, Mexico, Chile, Colombia, and although it was confronted by the international communist movement, similar ideas were developed in other CPs, especially in Europe.
The fight against this opportunistic trend, however, gave way when the turn that occurs in the CPSU is expressed in the theses of the XX Congress, in that the correlation of existing forces at the international level between the socialist and capitalist fields opens the possibility for the peaceful coexistence of the two systems, point in that the opportunist argumentation established the possibility of a peaceful transition to socialism through parliamentary action and the gradual accumulation of forces, which elaborated it some communist parties like the Italian, French and others; and on this thesis of the national pathways to socialism was elaborated. Drawing a caricature of the Marxist-Leninist theory of the socialist revolution which was presented as a dogmatic, stagnant and dispensable recipe book. This trend was deepened by the platform of the XXII Congress of CPSU and posterior decisions with a big responsibility by many communist parties in the international communist movement. That strategy has painful cost, by example the denominated Chilean pathway to socialism, which was drowned in blood by the 1973 Chilean Coup d’état, and in other cases conclude with the liquidation of many communist parties.
We underline that it is a complete elaboration that has to do with structural modifications not only of the strategy, but also of the role of the Party, the proletarian worldview and even the programmatic objectives.
It is striking that the originality, the own elaboration, the richness of the peculiarities are insisted on. In contrast, when viewed as a whole each national pathway to socialism is so identical to others that there are few differences, which gives a picture of a joint strategy, but limited to opportunistic positions.
Today it might seem that we are evaluating a process that boomed more than half a century ago and that went into crisis quite a few years ago. But in our opinion it is not a matter limited to a balance of the errors of our movement - under those theses the CPM and the communist movement of our country were liquidated, and under them the reorganization began between 1994 and the IV Congress of 2010, until in the latter a self-criticism is made and a turn occurs with verifiable results - but it is at the root of opportunistic theses that are active today.
National routes or national pathways to socialism placed bourgeois democracy as a starting point for socialism. Programmatic issues were in the sphere of "expanding the democratic regime", of widening and defending democracy decontextualized from its class content; what is ideologically a renunciation of the revolutionary positions of analyzing any state as a class dictatorship, and specifically the bourgeois state as a class dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. This of course leads to other errors, but the essence is that the overthrow of the bourgeois state is not sought, but rather its improvement. What prolonged for decades led the militancy of those parties to consider reform as the objective and when the time came, for example with the dissolution of the Italian CP, they began to form ranks in a party of order such as the Democratic Party. The revolutionary theory was blurred in this process and, for example, the dictatorship of the proletariat was subjected to a vulgar manipulation to the point that it was considered expendable and accessory; and several CPs, not only the Eurocommunists, but some who formally claimed Leninism, decided to withdraw it from their programs, absolutizing the defense of democracy, that is, the class dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. What configures on the one hand the renunciation of the seizure of power, and on the other the defense of the power previously established. And of course, if it was an apostasy in the 70s, 80s and 90s, today it is too. At this point, Lenin's idea that his opponents have to dress in "Marxist" clothing is proven.
On the basis of this, Palmiro Togliatti, one of the main theorists of the national routes says:
We find the main elements of what we will call the search and the affirmation of an Italian way towards socialism, in the first speech related to the program, delivered in Naples, on April 11, 1944, in which it is openly stated: Today he presents the Italian workers with the problem of doing what was done in Russia. " In September of the same year, Rinascita states: "The working class knows that its main task today is not to fight for the immediate establishment of a socialist regime." In 1947, on the eve of our VI Congress, we said: "Without a doubt, the Italian people have the task of following this path (that of socialism) using their own method, which must take into account all the particularities, the condition of our country , its international situation, its economic and political structure and its possibilities and needs for progress (...) A general strategic objective is indicated below: the creation of a progressive democracy regime, which carries out a series of reforms to the structure economic and social, while at the same time involving all the organized forces of the working classes in the direction of the country. 
Up to a certain point the defense of democratic conquests can be part of the demands of the communists, understanding the class nature of the bourgeois state, but being clear that the objective of the working class is the dictatorship of the proletariat as the foundation of the revolution: that is to say, the displacement of one class by another in the State direction, and that in socialism such a State is totally new, sustaining in the destruction of the previous one. On the other hand, the passing of the years and the experience of the class struggle have shown that the so-called democratic conquests can only be resolved, consolidated and / or expanded with the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist revolution.
It should not be forgotten that absolutizing democracy led several CPs to clash with the principles, because assume the parliamentarism and the bourgeois democracy conducted it to the polemic with the socialist construction in the Soviet Union, questioning scientific laws that rules the revolution and the socialist construction and then renounce the principle of proletarian internationalism. But if the called democratic question is a constituent element of all national pathways to socialism, in Italy as well as in France, Japan or Mexico, the deformation of Marxism-Leninism or the open resignation of it became a kind of competition about who took the most distance from the principles. Thus, for example, on the Mexican pathway to socialism, it is argued that the State is above the classes, that it is an arbitrator who mediates between the existing conflicts since it is placed above them. This misrepresentation led to errors of several years in the fight.
Returning to what Togliatti pointed out, there is nothing but millimeters of distance in the drift of Berlinguer's historical Commitment or the liquidation led by Natta-Ochetto. In other words, there is continuity between one position and another, a link.
Under this concept, to distance themselves from socialist construction, programmatic objectives in economic matters are inscribed in the management of the capitalist economy: policies of tax regulation, of redistribution of wealth, of social subsidy; nationalizations, but with a capitalist state; and of course mixed economy system, with state (capitalist) and private participation, which projected to this day prefigures what several CPs call market socialism.
To materialize this proposal, an alliance policy is designed that includes the social democracy and other parties of the capitalist order. Who went further was the historical Commitment that came to contemplate the Christian Democracy; however the left coalitions between communists, social democrats and other formations do not differ in essence, although the form may be different. These are coalitions to impose austerity, including privatizations, measures to devalue labor, in Europe with support for NATO and even the European Union as an imperialist union. Furthermore, some of these coalitions participated in imperialist aggressions against the peoples. No communist party should participate in government coalitions to manage capitalism, and such a tactical orientation was established by revolutionary Marxism in its criticism of the ministerialism of the Second International. But such coalitions, which per se already presuppose a renunciation of class independence and autonomy of the Communist Party, also contain the possibility that the Party itself may be replaced by the front / coalition with whatever name (democratic, left, plural). , broad) or even merge into a new left party, thus liquidating the communist party.
After several decades, did national pathways bring us closer to socialism? In Italy, France, Spain, Belgium, Mexico, England and other countries, where the CPs advocated such a conception, not only did the class struggle not advance, but it receded and the CPs suffered heavy blows, some liquidated and others have mutated to another political form although they retain the name. The processes of reorganization of the communist parties in such countries can only carry out with the criticize and leaving back the intermediate stages strategy and elaborate their programmatic objectives based on classist guideline.
The national pathways in most cases exercised government and the balance is negative. Ideologically it produced a shift of important sectors of the working class to the influence of the Social Democracy. Furthermore, such governments made possible the rise of reactionary forces.