Today, it is widely acknowledged that Francis Fukuyama’s predictions about the so-called “end of history”, following the counter-revolutionary overthrows in the USSR and other socialist states, were exposed as empty sophistry. The promises made by the imperialist staffs and bourgeois governments of a new world of peace and prosperity, supposedly dawning for the peoples, have turned out to be the very opposite: new imperialist wars and interventions; intensified exploitation of the working class internationally; capitalist crises borne by the peoples; deepening relative and absolute impoverishment; and waves of millions of migrants and refugees as a result of imperialist barbarity.

The KKE, like other communist parties around the world, stood against the tide of counter-revolution. It took bold steps towards its ideological, political, and organizational regroupment; examined major issues such as the causes of counter-revolution and the scientific laws governing the construction of socialism; drew conclusions from its historical course and from the strategy of the International Communist Movement during the 20th century; and adopted a new Programme and Statutes at its 19th Congress, held in in 2013. Through this process, it acquired renewed revolutionary tools to analyse the complex developments within the international imperialist system, upholding the banner of proletarian internationalism and defending the common interests of the working class worldwide against the bourgeois classes and their imperialist alliances, which drive the peoples to war and slaughter. Together with the Communist Parties participating in the International Communist Review (ICR) and European Communist Action (ECA), it wages significant battles to advance the task of forming a Marxist–Leninist pole within the international communist movement, fighting for its revolutionary regroupment.

Thirty-five years after the counter-revolutionary overthrows, the correlation of forces remains unfavourable to the class struggle worldwide, despite the problems of capitalism and the intensification of its contradictions. Capitalist power has succeeded in co-opting not only sections of the working class, the workers’ and trade union movement, and the popular middle strata, but also Communist Parties. Nevertheless, developments are increasingly pointing to a system in decay one that is now historically obsolete.

In the hands of capital, new technological possibilities, rather than being used to fully meet the expanding social needs, are instead employed to increase profitability and the concentration of capital, intensify the degree of exploitation, and repress and manipulate the working class and the people more broadly. Such capitalist exploitation of technology leads to the further intensification of the contradictions inherent in the capitalist system.

The deepening of relative and absolute poverty, alongside persistent long-term unemployment and the failure to harness modern scientific and technological capabilities to safeguard public health, meet educational needs, and protect the environment, underscores the intensification of the fundamental conflict between capital and labour and, more broadly, of all social contradictions within the capitalist system. 

The slowdown in the international economy in recent years highlights the large volume of over-accumulated capital, which cannot be recapitalized or invested in a way that ensures a satisfactory rate of profit. The over-accumulation of capital and the manifestation of crises are produced periodically by the normal functioning of the capitalist economy. They are not deviations from it, as bourgeois analyses would have us believe, but arise from the contradiction at the very heart of the capitalist system’s functioning in the sphere of production.

The previous period also demonstrated, once again in many countries, that no proposal for bourgeois management —whether Keynesian or neo-liberal, expansionary or restrictive fiscal and monetary policy— can override the laws of capitalist production, nor the contradiction between the social character of production and the capitalist appropriation of its results, which constitutes the fundamental contradiction of the capitalist mode of production and the principal cause of its economic crises.

All management formulas have been tested repeatedly, confirming once again that they only temporarily mitigate contradictions; they cannot resolve the growing contradictions inherent in the capitalist system.

In this context, there has been a shift towards a war economy and preparations for a large-scale imperialist war. The aim is twofold: on the one hand, to postpone the onset of the next major capitalist crisis through investment in the war economy; and, on the other hand, to create the conditions for a relatively controlled, large-scale devaluation and destruction of capital in the various hotbeds of war. This shift is accompanied by an increase in the degree of the exploitation of workers, reduced social policy spending, and intensified authoritarianism and repression in all imperialist centres.

Once again, it is clear that there is no crime that big capital will hesitate to commit in order to preserve its power and maximize its profits. For the same reasons that it is escalating its attack on workers’ incomes and rights during this period of imperialist peace, it is planning to drag the peoples into war. All these developments confirm that capitalism is a historically outdated system and highlight that the only progressive way out for our times is the revolutionary transition to socialism–communism. 

The imperialist system cannot be understood as a static, unchanging construct, frozen in time and space, but as an evolving reality. Monopoly capitalism —the economic essence of imperialism, as Lenin emphasised in many of his works— is defined by the dominance of monopolies in the economy and production, and, of course, by their political power. It develops at the national level and is shaped by specific historical conditions.

In each capitalist state, different conditions of profitability for capital arise: a distinct rate of profit, a distinct organic composition of capital, a distinct productivity of labour, a distinct degree of concentration and centralization of capital, and a distinct composition of the sectors of the economy; furthermore, each country occupies a different stage of the capitalist crisis cycle. These factors determine the uneven development of capitalist states as an objective feature and scientific law of capitalism.

Lenin had pointed out in good time the need for a dialectical approach to the questions of imperialism: “It would be a mistake to believe that this tendency to decay precludes the rapid growth of capitalism (…) On the whole, capitalism is growing far more rapidly than before; but this growth is not only becoming more and more uneven in general, its unevenness also manifests itself, in particular, in the decay of the countries which are richest in capital (Britain)”.[1]

The intensification of the fundamental conflict between capital and labour resulting from capitalist development, and the decay and parasitic role of the bourgeoisie and monopolies, affects not only the most developed capitalist countries but also every capitalist economy which, according to the scientific laws governing the development of capital, is sooner or later drawn down the path of monopoly capitalism.

Lenin, applying scientific criteria to the development of capitalism in his time, speaks of the handful of imperialist powers that divide the world, the colonies, and natural resources, whose fierce competition culminated in the imperialist First World War. The partition of the world among the colonial powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was characterized by the expansion of capitalism into countries and regions where it had not yet fully developed or dominated, such as the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East, Africa, Asia. The imperialist colonizers ruthlessly exploited the colonies and their peoples, plundered their wealth-producing resources, and ruled through bloodshed and brutality. Yet they did so in a capitalist manner —that is, they developed capitalism in these colonies, thereby creating the very social forces that ultimately gave rise to the just anti-colonial and national liberation struggles of the 20th century. In Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Lenin cites the following characteristic passage from Hilferding’s Finance capital: “The old social relations become completely revolutionised, the age-long agrarian isolation of ‘nations without history’ is destroyed and they are drawn into the capitalist whirlpool. Capitalism itself gradually provides the subjugated with the means and resources for their emancipation and they set out to achieve the goal which once seemed highest to the European nations: the creation of a united national state as a means to economic and cultural freedom”[2]. The dissolution of the colonial system in the 20th century, significantly supported by the USSR and Communist Parties internationally, confirms this observation and demonstrates how unrealistic are the approaches of those communist parties that treat the modern imperialist system as if we were still 1900.

The historical development of capitalism confirms that monopolies arise in all capitalist countries, whether at a faster or slower pace, sometimes painfully in terms of internal accumulation, or initially dominated by foreign monopolies. The differing levels of the development of monopoly capitalism in each country determine its relative power and position within the international imperialist system, and consequently its varying capacity for political intervention and for promoting the interests of its monopoly groups.

Today, monopoly capitalism has prevailed internationally. Every capitalist state is part of the international imperialist system on the basis of its economic policy and military power, forming a complex network of uneven dependencies and interdependencies, with relationships of cooperation and, simultaneously, competition with other capitalist states. Even when a bourgeoisie cedes sovereignty and sovereign rights —as Greece and other bourgeois states do within the framework of the imperialist alliances of NATO and the EU— it does so to serve its overarching and long-term interests: the profitability of monopolies, the preservation of its power, and the subjugation of the people.

Of course, the relations of uneven interdependence among capitalist states change and are shaped by the course of capitalist development, without, however, negating the underlying unevenness in the economic, political, and military power of each country, which determines its position within the international imperialist system. Today, it is evident that countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, South Africa, and Indonesia have significantly strengthened their positions at both regional and international levels. Compared with a few decades ago, they have expanded their capacity for capital accumulation and export, while advancing the interests of their monopolies. Perhaps the most striking example is India, which, until 1949, was under the colonial yoke of Great Britain, yet today surpasses it in absolute economic size and military power.

The key conclusion is that the correlation of forces does not remain stable, but changes on the basis of the uneven development of capitalism. On this basis, inter-imperialist contradictions are intensifying, imperialist alliances are being shaken and rearranged, and contradictions within and among these imperialist alliances are sharpening, including intra-bourgeois contradictions within capitalist states. Today, Lenin’s words resonate even more strongly when he wrote: “Under capitalism the smooth economic growth of individual enterprises or individual states is impossible. Under capitalism, there are no other means of restoring the periodically disturbed equilibrium than crises in industry and wars in politics.” [3]

In the 1990s, following the counter-revolutionary overthrows in the USSR and other states where socialism was being built, the world entered what bourgeois analyses termed a “unipolar moment”, meaning that the US appeared to be the sole “superpower” and, more broadly, the Euro-Atlantic imperialist camp seemed cohesive, with no real competitor on the international stage. It imposed its interests through military force, dismantling Yugoslavia and invading Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries. However, this image proved illusory —a reality that has become even clearer today. 

Over the past twenty years, a profound shift in the correlation of forces has been unfolding. Opposite the “traditional” powers of the imperialist system —the US and other powerful capitalist states such as Germany, France, and Great Britain— new competitors have emerged. Today, growing evidence indicates that the primary factor driving and intensifying imperialist competition and conflicts at the international level is the decline of US economic power in relation to the strengthening of China, as well as the intensification of contradictions between NATO and EU member states, alongside internal contradictions. Countering the Euro-Atlantic alliance is the Eurasian alliance under formation, led by China, which is tending to take first place in the international capitalist market, and by Russia, which remains the second strongest military power.

Today’s rivalries have nothing to do with the confrontation between socialism and capitalism that unfolded for over 73 years during the 20th century, that is, the expression of class struggle at the international level, but are exactly the opposite. This is where bourgeois and opportunist theories that analyse international developments and competition from a class-blind perspective meet and fail. Both bourgeois geopolitical theories about competition between “great powers” and opportunist theories about a peaceful “multipolar” imperialist world have in common that they attempt to nullify the laws of motion and contradictions of capitalism, the competition between monopolies, and, of course, class struggle. The peoples are treated as passive pawns on the imperialist chessboard who must be dragged behind the plans and aspirations of one or another bourgeois class and imperialist alliances. The forces that support these theories deny the independent role of the working class and the peoples, the task of formulating an independent strategy for socialist revolution against the bourgeoisie, their imperialist alliances, and all kinds of bourgeois governments and bourgeois policies.

This problem is also evident in the international communist movement itself, with its tendency to adapt to the existing balance of power. Communist parties that are unable to study the character of our era as a period of transition from capitalism to socialism scientifically, armed with Marxist–Leninist theory, cannot defend the laws of socialist revolution and construction, nor can they objectively analyse the class character of today’s China and Russia, both of which are the result of counter-revolutionary processes and the retreat of the international communist movement. 

The Russian Federation is not only not the “heir to socialism” of the USSR, as the opportunists of the World Anti-Imperialist Platform would like to imagine, but is exactly the opposite, the result of counter-revolution and capitalist restoration. The Russian bourgeoisie plundered the enormous social wealth created by the proletariat during the decades of socialist construction and, on this basis, developed monopoly capitalism in a very short period of time. Today, it ranks among the top ten strongest capitalist powers, its economy is dominated by huge monopolies with an international role (e.g., Gazprom, Rosneft, Lukoil, Sberbank, and Nornickel), and it is the second strongest military power internationally. Due to these factors, its strong presence in the energy sector and other sectors, it plays a special role in the competitions within the imperialist system. The Russian people who were the main victims of the overthrow of socialism and the capitalist development that followed, saw their achievements destroyed, and today suffer harsh class exploitation, and hundreds of thousands of its children are being sacrificed on the plains of Ukraine for the interests of Russian monopolies.

Capitalist China, which today challenges the primacy of the US in the international imperialist system, is the result of capitalist restoration, which, with the turning point of 1979 and Deng Xiaoping’s reforms, gradually prevailed from within and from above, under the guidance of the Chinese Communist Party itself. Theories of NEP-style development, socialism with “Chinese characteristics”, and “pre-mature socialist revolution” are in stark contrast to the basic principles of Marxist–Leninist theory and the historical experience of the NEP as a temporary retreat to overcome the pressures of counter-revolution, to strengthen the socialist relations of production, and advance socialist construction. Capitalist relations of production in their monopolistic stage of development have completely prevailed in China, while extensive state intervention in the economy is not a historical novelty, but an element integrated into bourgeois management throughout the 20th century. 

The rapid expansion of capitalist relations of production is reflected in the growing inequalities in China today. In 2024, the richest 10% of Chinese received 43.3% of the total income (27.8% in 1978), while the poorest 50% received only 13.7% (25.2% in 1978). In 2024, the richest 10% of Chinese had accumulated 68% of the total wealth (the corresponding figure in the US in the same year was 70%).[4] At the same time, there are now more than 1,000 billionaires in China, with 100 of them having a net worth of more than $4.5 billion each! [5] According to data from China’s own Statistics Bureau, in 2025 the private sector will account for over 60% of the country’s GDP, 57% of fixed capital investment, 49% of foreign trade, and over 80% of urban employment. [6] It should be noted that corporate capital as private property was zero in 1978 and has already skyrocketed to 33% since 2014, in a process of continuous strengthening of private ownership of the means of production. In the 100 largest companies listed on the Chinese stock exchange, the private sector accounted for over 50% of capital value in 2021, while in 2010 the corresponding figure was only 8%. [7]

From Latin America to Greenland, and from the plains of Eastern Europe to the Indo-Pacific region, everywhere fierce imperialist competition is being waged for control of the mineral wealth, energy sources, rich lands, water resources, energy and commodity transport routes, geopolitical footholds, and market shares, which has led to two regional imperialist wars, in Ukraine and the Middle East, in which a large number of capitalist states around the world are involved in one way or another. In addition, there are dozens of flashpoints on all continents, where people are being slaughtered for the interests of the monopolies and the bourgeoisie. Imperialist alliances are being formed and reformed, and the contradictions within them are intensifying.

Under these conditions, diplomatic means are becoming less and less important for bourgeois states, and commercial and economic wars are taking priority, the trend towards the so-called war economy is becoming widespread, war budgets and armaments are increasing, new weapon systems are being tested and nuclear arsenals are being modernized, and overall, the preparation of bourgeois states for a generalized military confrontation is accelerating. 

The new US National Security Strategy is an expression and adaptation of the immediate priorities of the US in the arena of the great confrontation with China. The targets and priorities they admit, “We want a hemisphere that remains free from hostile foreign invasion or ownership of key assets and that supports critical supply chains”, highlight the goals and dangerous plans being implemented by US monopolies and the US state to counter China’s economic, commercial, and political penetration of the American continent.

Over the last decade, China has become the largest trading partner of most Latin American countries, ranks first in capital and investment exports, particularly in critical infrastructure, and is the largest importer of agricultural products and raw materials, holding a significant portion of the sovereign debt of various countries. In previous years, the common denominator among many of the region’s “progressive” social democratic governments, namely challenging the strong economic and military intervention of the US, has turned into greater alignment with capitalist China, participation in the “One Belt, One Road” initiative, participation in or association with the imperialist BRICS alliance, which acts in the interests of the monopolies of the states that comprise it.

A recent example is Panama, when in the early months of 2025 the Trump administration threatened military intervention and forced the local government to expel Chinese monopolies such as COSCO, CK Hutchison, and others that had penetrated the country’s infrastructure, the ports of Balboa and Cristobal at the entrances to the Canal, and more broadly into its operations, while the Canal is a strategically important passage for US trade and its Navy.

In Venezuela, which a few months ago became the target of US imperialist intervention, the social democratic government of the PSUV has for years been strengthening its economic, political, and military relations with Russia and China. China purchased 65–70% of Venezuela’s total oil production and had invested $60 billion in various sectors (energy, telecommunications, construction, transport) and was also a supplier of weapons systems. Similarly, Russia provided loans to Venezuela, which were repaid in oil, the Russian monopolies Gazprom and Rosneft had obtained licenses to exploit huge natural gas reserves, and the country was the largest buyer of Russian weapons systems in the region.

In this context, the US, through its military intervention and the arrest of Nicolás Maduro, paved the way for the penetration of American monopolies, now having the consent and cooperation of part of the state apparatus and key officials of the social democratic government, as developments show. Their stated goal is to exploit Venezuela's enormous mineral wealth, which includes the largest proven oil reserves in the world and huge natural gas reserves, while its subsoil is rich in gold, iron, bauxite, nickel, copper, and rare earths such as thorium and coltan.

In the Middle East, the US is promoting its plan to reshape the entire region in the interests of its monopolies, elevating Israel to the status of a key “player” through the so-called “Abraham Accords”. The Palestinian people are being sacrificed to the “gods” of imperialist plans for a “New Middle East” and the new Indian trade route of the IMEC, as opposed to the Chinese Silk Road. Following the razing of Gaza and the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, the US and Israel are promoting a plan to turn the Gaza Strip into a protectorate and, together with other capitalist states, have formed the so-called “Board of Peace”, trampling on Palestinian territories in the name of reconstruction, with investments of billions of dollars, to seize and exploit its natural wealth and geographical advantages, looking ahead to the future value that the region may have as a crucial link in the IMEC trade route.

The promotion of the monopoly interests of the US, Israel, and the EU is the motive behind the military imperialist attack which began on February 28, 2026 against Iran, a large capitalist country that has aligned itself with the emerging Eurasian imperialist camp and stands in the way of EU–NATO plans. Iran, among other things, is a crucial hub in China’s Silk Road, an important supplier of oil to China, while the strategic agreement signed by the two countries in 2021 provided for Chinese investments of $400 billion over 25 years. The new military offensive by the US and Israel against Iran targets the Iranian people and serves the US strategy of “living space” to maintain its leading position in the global imperialist system. This has serious consequences for the capitalist market for the production and transport of oil and natural gas, particularly if the Strait of Hormuz is blocked. The peoples are paying the price for this. At the time of writing, the American imperialists, along with Israel, have not achieved their stated goals, while tough negotiations and simultaneous military preparations are underway, carrying the risk of further military escalation. These developments highlight the system’s inability to resolve its contradictions through peaceful means.

The struggle to divide up the imperialist spoils is also sharpening contradictions within the ranks of the EU–NATO camp. These contradictions intensified due to the war in the Middle East. The recent friction over the US trade deficit with the EU, the Trump administration’s threats of high tariffs, and the new US–EU trade agreement that puts EU monopolies at a disadvantage, the US claim to control Greenland has been added. The US government insists that it will gain control of the strategically important island belonging to Denmark in order to project its power in the Arctic Ocean, one of the emerging fields of imperialist competition, where Russia, primarily, and China, secondarily, have a significant lead. This is an issue that raises scenarios of even the dissolution of NATO.

In Ukraine, the war and the inter-imperialist struggle and bargaining continue, with a view to a possible settlement of the imperialist conflict and the legitimization of its outcomes. Any compromise, in the case of Ukraine but also on other fronts, will be fragile and temporary, will prepare the next round of conflict, and will literally be a “peace with a gun to the head” of the peoples. At a time when the US and Russia are literally dividing up territories as if they were their own plots of land and calculating future profits from the plundering of Ukraine’s infrastructure and wealth-producing resources, the capitalist states of Europe have formed the so-called “Alliance of the Willing” in an attempt to join in the divvying up, intervene on behalf of their own monopolies, and participate in security guarantees. In this context, the debate on the EU’s “strategic autonomy” is intensifying, with hundreds of billions of euros being channelled into the military industry through the “ReArm Europe” programme and other military preparedness programmes.

The intensification of inter-imperialist rivalries and the outbreak of the imperialist war in Ukraine have generated new ideological–political problems and further deepened existing ones within the international communist movement. Inevitably, the ideological struggle has sharpened. Among the most critical issues are the following:

This is a deeply erroneous theoretical position that confines imperialism to the framework of the aggressive tendencies of the foreign policy of the USA and certain powerful European states, and excludes even China and Russia, which indisputably possess a strong monopoly base, from the imperialist system. Such a view distorts and downgrades the essence of imperialism as monopoly capitalism and as the full maturation of the material preconditions (productive forces and relations of production) for the transition to socialism–communism and, as a result, reduces socialist revolution and construction to a vague vision. It detaches the exercise of imperialist policy by bourgeois states from the economic essence of imperialism, the formation and domination of monopoly capital. It underestimates the development of monopoly capitalism on a global scale, its evolution from Lenin’s time to the present, and the changes this has brought about within the various capitalist economies. It approaches the international correlation of forces in a schematic and ossified manner, as if frozen in time, ignoring its constant transformation under the law of uneven development.

Under today’s conditions, the forces that uphold this position recycle the mistaken notions of permanent and growing “dependence” (and underdevelopment) of the vast majority of capitalist countries worldwide upon the same strongest capitalist powers. They misconstrue the character of imperialist alliances and unions, and exonerate the capitalist states that do not stand at the top of the imperialist pyramid from their responsibility for participating in the shaping and implementing of NATO’s and the EU’s aggressive policies and crimes against the peoples. Such perceptions narrow the tasks of the revolutionary movement and detach the struggle against imperialist organizations from the struggle against bourgeois power itself in each country.

Politically, this opportunist conception of imperialism leads the labour movement onto disastrous paths of class compromise, tailing the bourgeoisie and erasing the fundamental dividing line between capital and labour. These views inevitably result in cooperation with bourgeois forces and support for bourgeois governments.

A number of forces within the international communist movement arbitrarily and unscientifically gloss over inter-imperialist contradictions and the corresponding rivalries —the root cause of imperialist wars. They argue that sooner or later a “just,” “peaceful,” “multipolar world” will emerge. Some even support China, Russia, or the European Union as “new poles” or “counterweights” to the United States, identifying the aspirations of the bourgeois classes of these states or unions with the interests of the working class and the popular strata in their own countries.

At best, these are classless and utopian conceptions. Their errors begin at the philosophical and methodological level and lead to political impasse, nurturing the illusion of a capitalist/imperialist world without fierce competition and the inevitable wars of the imperialist era, as if the wolves could become lambs. In September 2025, Chinese President Xi Jinping, presenting the “Global Governance Initiative”, called on countries to cooperate toward a “more just and equitable global governance system” based on the principles of “sovereign equality”, respect for “international law”, “multilateralism”, and a “people-centred approach”.[8] In essence, the Chinese President is expressing China’s growing influence within the international imperialist system and its bid for a leading role within existing intergovernmental organizations, including through their corresponding “reform”.

Theoretically, “multipolar” conceptions revive —in modernized form— variations of Kautsky’s opportunist theory of “ultra-imperialism”, which holds that the further development of the imperialist system could erase its contradictions and lead to a peaceful world, without the occurrence of a series of socialist revolutions and without overturning the root causes of war, namely the capitalist system and its rivalries.

Leninist theory clearly establishes that the political essence of imperialism is an all-encompassing turn toward reaction. As Lenin emphasized, “Both in foreign and home policy imperialism strives towards violations of democracy, towards reaction”.[9] Crimes against peoples, imperialist interventions, anti-communism and persecution of Communist Parties, racist and reactionary theories, the glorification of war as a “supreme ideal”, irrationalism and obscurantism, intensified repression of workers’ and popular struggles, the curtailment even of formal bourgeois-democratic rights, and the utilization of far-right and fascist forces, etc. — all are manifestations of the political essence of imperialism. These phenomena are not exclusive to the fascist form of capitalist power. They have marked the entire history of the capitalist system and have been embodied by all kinds of bourgeois governments —social-democratic and liberal, democratic and dictatorial alike.

Today, reactionary tendencies are intensifying across the capitalist world, from the US and the EU to the Eurasian imperialist camp under formation.

• In the USA, the Trump administration reinforces longstanding hysterical anti-communism, escalates brutal repression against popular movement, deploys military forces such as the National Guard against demonstrators, and invokes ludicrous anti-communist rhetoric to justify imperialist aggressiveness against Cuba and other countries.

• Within the EU, attempts to ban Communist Parties in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states are escalating, as seen recently in Poland. The reactionary “theory of the two extremes” is being institutionalized, the unhistorical equation of fascism with communism is promoted, the tendency to criminalize trade union struggles is reinforced, and far-right and fascist forces are strengthened by the bourgeoisie, etc.

• In Russia, Marxist–Leninist ideology is being criminalized. A recent example involves members of a Marxist study group who were sentenced to long prison terms simply for studying the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin and concluding that a revolution was necessary in Russia. Notably, the committee of experts appointed by the court to provide an opinion concluded that Lenin’s work “State and Revolution” constitutes a “terrorist manual”.

• In Venezuela, anti-communist persecution against the Communist Party of Venezuela has marked the course of the social-democratic PSUV government.

Meanwhile, certain communist parties —particularly in Russia— that support the Russian bourgeoisie in the imperialist war continue to reproduce the pretext of an “anti-fascist special operation” in Ukraine. They turn a blind eye to Putin’s explicit declarations at the war’s outset regarding “real decommunization”. They pretend not to have seen the fascist meeting of the “Paladins” a few months ago in St. Petersburg, where, under the official auspices of the Russian state and the ruling party “United Russia,” fascist scum from all over the world gathered, including members of the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn.

Fascism is the iron fist of capital against the worker’s movements, the revolutionary movement, and the Communist Parties. It is a form of capitalist power. The bourgeoisie internationally exploits fascist organizations to advance their reactionary agendas and to strike at the workers’ and popular movement, against which communists must wage an uncompromising struggle. However, the struggle against fascism cannot be separated from the struggle against the capitalist system that gives rise to it. Long historical experience shows that such a separation leads CPs to unacceptable compromises, alliances with bourgeois forces, and support to governments within the framework of capitalism, ultimately driving the workers’ and popular movement into disillusionment and ideological and political disarmament.

The victory of the October Socialist Revolution bequeathed a valuable legacy and experience regarding the task of exploiting every rift, every division, and every difficulty within the bourgeois camp, and of making the necessary manoeuvrers to serve the main objective: the overthrow of bourgeois power, and the construction and defence of socialism. As Lenin wrote, “The more powerful enemy can be vanquished only by exerting the utmost effort, and by the most thorough, careful, attentive, skilful and obligatory use of any, even the smallest, rift between the enemies, any conflict of interests among the bourgeoisie of the various countries”. [10]

This indisputable revolutionary truth is today being distorted and vulgarized by various opportunist forces in order to support the bourgeoisie of one imperialist camp or another. In a recent article —a monument to shameless opportunism— the “organizer” of the so-called World Anti-Imperialist Platform, who appears under the pseudonym Stephen Cho, states, among other things, “Anti-imperialist forces including the communist forces can’t form a tactical joint front with chauvinist and conservative forces, but they can engage in tactical cooperation with them”, and continues “Tactical cooperation, in the sense of acting in step tactically, refers to a situation in which anti-imperialist forces and conservative chauvinists, for the purpose of isolating and striking more forcefully at their common enemy —the globalists [..]”[11] meaning, of course, by chauvinist and conservative forces the government of Donald Trump and its allies…!

He even attempts to justify the above by claiming that it is comparable to the “Non-Aggression Pact”, also known as the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, which the USSR signed in 1939 to gain valuable time for its defence by taking advantage of inter-imperialist contradictions.

In a similar way, as a representative of the Eurocommunist current, the former MEP of the Communist Party of Spain, Manu Pineda, attempts to distort the experience of the Bolsheviks, invoking the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk [12] to claim that they are comparable to the cooperation currently being promoted by the sinful social democracy in Venezuela with the US government (!), in order to preserve the myth of “Bolivarian socialism”.

Such arguments reveal that a section of opportunism fantasizes about so-called “anti-imperialist axes”, supposedly composed of bourgeois states and governments, all the while fully aware that their ruling classes pursue their own agendas and participate in the international imperialist competition. They distort and falsify historical truth to entrap peoples, undermining their independent struggle for their own interests against their own bourgeoisie and its imperialist alliances, for the overthrow of the exploitative system. These are dangerous views that must be confronted with a firm ideological and political front.

Eighty years after the end of the Second World War, the danger of a generalized third imperialist world war looms ever closer. Many aspects of the present situation recall the interwar years (1930-1940) of the 20th century.

The KKE has programmatically clarified —and reaffirmed at its recent 22nd Congress— the duties of the Party and of the workers’ and popular movement in the event of Greece’s involvement in war and regarding the path out of war. In other words, the Party and the people, the revolutionary movement, must not place themselves under a foreign flag, that of the bourgeoisie and its allies. They must organize their struggle independently, forming the workers’ revolutionary front that will bring peace and progress to the people through a change of class in power, and build the new society —socialism.

In this direction, it works daily among the masses, strengthening its capacity to respond under all circumstances —whether the bourgeoisie, its parties, and international allies encounter setbacks and the masses rise up, or whether the bourgeoisie imposes measures of repression and restriction against the movement and the KKE, or even imposes a total ban on the Party’s activities.

We are confident that we will succeed. Our confidence is grounded in historical necessity. It springs from confidence in the power of the working class and its allies. It stems from the certainty that, as the world of capitalism decays and becomes more aggressive, the conditions for its overthrow mature, its contradictions and rivalries come to the fore, that is, the inherent great weakness of the system of capitalist exploitation. The overthrow will not emerge as a natural phenomenon, but through conscious, organized, and militant action by the working class and the people, under the leadership of the Party. This is the path: difficult and demanding, yet the only one that leads forward. In this struggle, the KKE will stand at the forefront.