The time period that opens with the foundation of several sections of the III International in Latin America and the caribbean is of heavy agitation; because of, besides the emancipatory ideas and influences of the Great Socialist October Revolution, were also present those of the Mexican Revolution, a democratic-burgoise revolution and the National Liberation Processes of Central America and the caribbean. Seen in perspective the 20’s position, and that between 1935-1936, it has a firm clasist and revolutionary orientation, for example; the polemics of the Mexican and Peruvian Communists with Haya de la Torre, The misunderstanding between the PCM and Sandino, and the correct opposition of the PCM against Lázaro Cárdenas, which were, no doubt, moments with a lot of pressure for the Communist Parties in the region.
Haya de la Torre expressed the ideological phenomenon of the petit-bourgeois radicalized and under the wing of the revolutionary wave that led to the takeover by the proletarians in Russia and the formation of the USSR. Same as M.N. Roy, they are temporarily travel companions, but relentlessly their political positions lead to misunderstanding and confrontation, because they express content that don’t belong to the proletarian interests.
Haya de la Torre sought a buried labour in the immediate peripheria of the Comintern Sections, talking about a intermediate period or in other words, a third way between capitalism and socialism, that propose as anti-imperialist struggle the strengthening of capitalism and bourgeoisie in each country and with the demagogic pretends to envelope the proletarians and communists in such position. Painted as “Marxisms” the Aprism of Haya de la Torre defends the specific character of América (Indoamerica in his lexic) and alludes the non-viability of marxism-leninism for being eurocentric, keeps a national capitalist development program as anti-imperialist platform and “Unic Front'' or several classes’ party as political instrument. These conceptions build the programmatic platform that the bourgeoisie require to fight against the influence of the October Revolution and the increase of the masses against the effects of the 1929 economic crisis. The communists faced and showed the truth in those positions. From the pages of El Machete (Organ of the Communist Party of Mexico Section of the Communist International), Julio Antonio Mella (despite being Cuban, dirigent and militant of the PCM) openly polemicized for the class’ ideology and its universal character, for the Communist Party as Revolutionary Party in that time period and with clear arguments for the socialism as solution to the social problematic,even in the 20’s of the last century. Mariategi also chained the resolution of the agricultural workers, the originary people, and of course the worker class, for the construction of socialism, foresaw the non-viable trust in capitalism to fight against the contradictions that the same capitalism generates. In those days the forces of Haya de la Torre were ridiculous, a small peruvian group in Mexico, but his platform expresses the capitalist development interests and because of that it projects itself as the governmental management in the following decades in the region. Since then the communists position themselves firmly to the principles and interests of the class.
Almost by those years happened the breaking up between Sandino and the PCM. Sandino, same as Farabundo Martí, were cadres that emerged with the work of the Mexican section of the Communist International that worked for the foundation of communist parties in Central America. All of them were PCM militants, and received unconditional support for the struggle in their countries. When Sandino took the armed fight against the tyranny in Nicaragua and against the northamerican intervention, he did it with a PCM carnet, and in his headquarters were prominent cadres, like Andrés García Salgado (responsable of the self-defense of the PCM, later international brigadist in Spain and Political Commissar of the 14th. International Brigade.) and Gustavo Machado (who later will be a foundational member of the CP of Venezuela). As no one in the PCM dedicate completely to the nicaraguan cause, without leaving aside their responsibilities in the class struggle in Mexico, reason because came the crash against the government that banned El Machete, and the PCM, the jailing of several communist cadres in the Marias Islands and the assassination of several militants, among them, J. Guadalupe Rodriguez, member of the Central Comitee.
At the same time in Mexico the government began a terror campaign against the working class and the communists, The bourgeois government decided to make a ridiculous gesture in support of Sandino, by giving to him a laughable amount of armament, him then gave declarations of support for the President who was repressing his comrades of the PCM, in consequence he was expelled from it. Until today many without knowing this situation, keep criticising the PCM for that determination, that was loyal to the principles.
Keeping the historical distance, that opportunist position repeats itself when some CP’s remain in silence in front of the progressism and its anti-worker and anti-people policies under pretext of the “Anti-imperialist” foreign policy of them. As the time went by the Mexican goverments with ferocity repressed the Mexican working class, assassinated cadres of the syndicalist movement, agricultural workers and students. At the same time making declarations about the Cuban sovereignty or Nicaragua’s, Cuba and Nicaragua; what continues today when expressing sympathies for the government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico, capitalist management of neoliberal continuity in essence, when it makes a certain demagogic disregard before the OAS or in allusion to Simón Bolívar, and despite the fact that it is a management favorable to the monopolies and therefore ratifies the Free Trade Agreement with the United States and Canada (T-MEC), it practices an aggressive anti-immigrant policy, deepens the militarization of the country, carries out a program that deepens the concentration and centralization of capital, as well as expands the profitability of capital at the expense of unemployment, precariousness and exploitation for the working class in North and Central America.
Another moment with notorious autonomy in the class policies of the communist parties in the region was the position of the PCM against the government of General Lazaro Cardenas (1934-1940). The 1929 crisis and its consequences generated interburgoise disputes in the dominant class, they expressed the communist slogan “No with Calles, no with Cardenas!”, fighting in favor of the proletarian interests in the frame of the class struggle, letting the communists become one of the leading forces in the worker and unions movements. In general, the Communist Party was in front of the political and ideological front against the bourgeoisie (Not only against their progressist expressions but also against the more reactionary supporters of fascism), the social-democrats, opportunism and trotskyism in a successful way, affirming itself as the working class Party and the class position of exploited vs exploiters. The PCM was growing, it rooted itself in the proletarians, agricultural workers and intellectuals, with strong ties in the worker union’s and with a central worker union without being majority but not at marginality, but with the capability to grow until conquer the direction.
There was a lot of pressure by measures by the capitalist government under Cardenas as it was the agrarian distribution or the State control of the industry, those increased when Cardenas proclaimed that the education was “socialist” (a nonsense because the processes of the capitalist relations in the economy, the centralization process and the centralization of the economy). The PCM was sturdy, but with the VII Congress of the Communist International turned around drastically and disastrous. When the Mexican delegation returned from the VI Congress of the International Communist Youth, and the VII Congress of the Comintern, the policies against the bourgeoisie and supporting the popular front were modified totally. The ideological struggle went down, and looked for mix itself with the ideology of the Bourgeois revolutions of the XIX Century taking its content down, loosing the revolutionary edge; The Party ceased to fight temporarily for being the vanguard, for being an autonomous force; the clasist worker’s movement was relocated in the anti-fascist unity in a Central directed by the yellow unionist Lombardo Toledano who himself was a platform for that objective, to catch the clasist unionists in Latin America in one controlledby the socialdemocrats in the CTAL. (Latin American Worker’s Central); in programmatic matters for the PCM was a step back from the Socialist Revolution objective, it was changed for a step by step development of the Bourgeois-democratic revolutions. If we observe other parties in the region like the Chilean,the Cuban, they were in the same defeatism, in the Colombian case, with the “Duranism” it has experienced an early post-war expression of the latter called Browderanism. Communist Parties like the Cuban and Colombian before the CPUSA with Browder abandoned the communist denomination, and modified the Leninist organization; In many cases as Mexico or Cuba they participated in the bourgeois government. Browder and his platform of liquidation wasn’t a surprise, all the decade 1935-1945 he was cementing his theory and practice to the point of expecting to project in the long term the collaboration with the United States, considering that gradually the transformation from capitalism to socialism will be to exist, while supporting the idea that the marxist-leninist party wasn’t needed and had to be replaced by ideological-educational clubs inside the democratic-bourgeois parties. We make this recount of known facts only to explain that despite the communist parties in the region were recuperating from the opportunist corrosion, Ideologically they were trapped in strategic conceptions of the Pluriclassist front and the socialism as far objective that needed to perfect capitalism.