Who are we?

History and Basic Positions of the
Bolshevik Party (North Kurdistan–Turkey)

I) HISTORY OF THE PARTY

Establishment of the Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (TKP/ML) under the leadership of Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya [1972]

The second half of the sixties was a period in which the forces of revolution made progress in the worldwide contention between revolution and counterrevolution. In Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia People’s Wars made headway against the US imperialism and local reactionaries who linked their fate with it. In the Middle East, the liberation struggle of the Palestinian Arab nation came to the order of the day with armed actions. In Africa, the process of disintegration of the old colonial system proceeded rapidly, in Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Namibia and a host of other countries developed armed resistance of the peoples against colonialism. In Latin America, effects of the newly victorious Cuban revolution made themselves felt, and in many countries armed resistance movements came into being. The process of demarcation between revisionist and Marxist-Leninist wings in the World Communist Movement had already come out openly to the surface in these years. Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China – one of the parties leading the Marxist-Leninist wing during the process of demarcation –, China underwent a process of great upheavals. The outbreak of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in 1966 made a big impact throughout the world; in imperialist metropolises, too, student youth, inspired by the liberation struggles of the oppressed peoples and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, poured into the streets with the slogan: “Revolution! Here and now!”; and joining forces in various places – e.g. France – with the working-dass movement, left the imperialist bourgeoisie in a very precarious situation.

Parallel to all these developments, there began to develop in the sixties in Turkey–North Kurdistan a mass movement against the US imperialism and local ruling classes, drawing in ever growing masses of the people.

As a result of the growing popular movement and intensification of the contention among themselves, the fascist ruling classes knocked down the fascist “Democrat Party” government with the military coup d’etat of 27 May 1960 and saw themselves forced to make some concessions to the growing popular movement in order to stop it. Although these concessions were in the main for a show, nevertheless it was for the first time in this period that socialist works began to be published, socialism was propagated freely and openly, and the people began rapidly to sympathize with socialism. The TIP (Workers Party of Turkey), formed in 1963 on a reformist basis, managed to bring in 15 MPs to the National Assembly at the 1965 elections by gathering leftist circles around itself. Obtaining the right to strike – although watered down with the right to lock-out – legally for the first time in 1963, the working class gained mastery in using this weapon to improve her living conditions as the time went by. Bringing production to a standstill on 15/16 June 1970 in Istanbul und Kocaeli, hundreds of thousands of workers organized demonstrations and set the ruling classes – who wanted to repeal this right – in panic. On the other hand, anti-imperialist mass demonstrations led by the youth in higher education institutions above all against the US imperialism began to mark the order of the day at the end of 1968 and the beginning of 1969 in Turkey–North Kurdistan.

Among others, TIIKP* (Revolutionary Workers’ and Peasants’ Party of Turkey) was one of the organizations which came out of this growing mass movement, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya, the founder of our Party, and other revolutionary leaders were also in this organization.

TIIKKP was also known as “Şafak” [The Dawn] and “Proleter Devrimci Aydınlık — PDA” [Proletarian Revolutionary Daylight] under the name of its central organs.

Although claiming to uphold the gains of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the TIIKP was essentially an organization upholding the interests of the national/middle bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie, relying on a military coup d’etat. The events after 15/16 June, its stand on the 12 March operation were turning points which revealed this fact. A Marxist-Leninist opposition formed itself within the TIIKP, led by comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya. This opposition thought at first that it could bring TIIKP to Marxist-Leninist positions through a struggle from within. In the process of a brief but fierce ideological struggle, the opposition saw that it was impossible to bring TIIKP to Marxist-Leninist positions as the revisionist leadership of TIIKP turned out to be out and out plotters. On 9–10/2/1972 the “Resolution of the Eastern Anatolian Regional Committee” was published as a product of the struggle of the Marxist-Leninist opposition under the leadership of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya against revisionism. This resolution was practically a declaration of open war against the revisionist leadership by the Marxist-Leninist opposition, a call on all Marxist-Leninists to rebellion. Within two months after this resolution, some Marxist-Leninist cadres under the leadership of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya founded in April 1972 the COMMUNIST PARTY OF TURKEY/MARXISTLENINIST [TKP/ML] after breaking off all organizational ties with the TIIKP.

The following works written by Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya during the two year long struggle against the Şafak revisionists formed the basic programmatic documents of this newly founded Party:

·        Critique of the TIIKP Draft Programme

·        Theses of Şafak Revisionism on the Kemalist Movement, Kemalist Reign of Power, Second World War Years, Post-War Period and on 27 May

·        The National Question in Turkey

·        The Origin and Development of the Differences Between Şafak Revisionism and Us

·        Let Us Grasp the Teaching of Chairman Mao on Red Political Power Correctly.

The establishment of the TKP/ML as continuation and continuator of the communist heritage of the Communist Party of Turkey [TKP] established under the leadership of Comrade Mustafa Suphi in Baqu in 1920 was a tremendous step towards building a genuine Marxist-Leninist Party in Turkey-North Kurdistan.

In the conditions obtaining in 1972 under which the TKP/ML was established, the line representing the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism in the international plane was, inspite of all its errors, the line represented by the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Party of Labor of Albania (PLA). This line was elaborated in the struggle against the line of the modern revisionists who came to power after the 20th Party Congress in the Soviet Union. Although itself containing very serious revisionist errors and deviations, this line nevertheless upheld the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism, inscribing on its banner the smashing of imperialism and not coming to terms with it, calling the proletariat and the peoples to Proletarian World Revolution.

Ibrahim Kaypakkaya and the TKP/ML under his leadership took their place in the Marxist-Leninist ranks in the ongoing struggle of the two lines within the World Communist Movement and led the struggle against modern revisionism in Turkey-North Kurdistan.

Against the Şafak revisionists who couldn’t defend the dictatorship of the proletariat even theoretically as they couldn’t free themselves from the influence of Kemalism, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya defended the dictatorship of the proletariat; upheld essentially Marxist-Leninist views on the class character of the dictatorship of the proletariat, its absolute necessity for socialism and its tasks. Adopting the view that a revolution under the leadership of the proletariat could only be reached when it was based on the basic alliance of workers and peasants, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya elaborated and emphasized the double character of the national bourgeoisie in the democratic revolution very clearly.

Thoroughly appropriating the Marxist-Leninist theory in the national question, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya essentially managed to combine this theory with the concrete conditions of Turkey-North Kurdistan masterfully. At a time when die-hard Turkish chauvinistic views were being vindicated in the name of revolutionism and Communism, at a time when there were almost no national or national minority movements, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya handled the national question in Turkey-North Kurdistan in a Marxist-Leninist way, emphasized the existence of the Kurdish nation and her right to secede and set up her own State, and full equal rights for all nationalities, and laid down the ways of solving the national question and the basic policies hierto.

At a time when Kemalism was sold off as progressiveness, anti-imperialism and even revolutionism, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya boldly asserted that Kemalism and National Pactism (Misak-i Milli) meant Fascism, and marked the fascist nature of the present-day State of the Turkish Republic in the guise of Kemalist dictatorship.

Against the views which tried to keep the anti-fascist struggle within the framework of the existing order, Ibrahim Kaypakkaya correctly upheld the necessity of waging the anti-fascist struggle as a struggle for revolution and stressed the necessity of subordinating the struggle for reforms to revolution.

Ibrahim Kaypakkaya stressed the absolute necessity of a Communist Party as the vanguard of the proletariat for the leadership of the proletariat in the revolution and for the uninterrupted continuity of the revolution, the necessity of this Party being the Party of the working class.

Ibrahim Kaypakkaya above all grasped the necessity of creating a Communist Party nucleus to smash the fascist State of the comprador bourgeoisie and landlords by a violent revolution, set up people’s democratic dictatorship in its stead and continue the revolution uninterruptedly, start to build Socialism under the conditions of the dictatorship of the proletariat and move towards the goal of reaching Communism, and acted accordingly.

The TKP/ML, grounded on these basic views of comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya, became subject to intensive attacks of the ruling classes right from the onset. Removing the fascist Demirel Government from power with a Note on 12 March 1971 owing to its inability to suppress the growing popular movement, and setting up a “Government of National Consensus”, the fascist ruling classes soon thereafter declared martial law to arrest the revolutionary rising. Strikes, mass actions and demonstrations were forbidden. All revolutionary periodicals and mass organizations were closed. A witch-hunt was started against the revolutionaries. Savagely attacking the revolutionary movement, the fascist State managed to arrest almost all the leaders of the Party, including Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya in the spring of 1973. After months of savage torture, Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya, sacrificing his life but not giving away his secrets, was killed by his blood-thirsty tormentors on 18 May 1973. The exemplary conduct of Comrade Ibrahim Kaypakkaya before his tormentors, his communist stance of uncompromising defence of his political convictions but not giving away an iota of organizational information, left a tremendous impression in the consciousness of all revolutionaries from Turkey–North Kurdistan.

Restoration of the dismembered Party [1973–1978]

As a result of these attacks of the ruling classes, tens of Party cadres were killed, and aside from a few regional committees which managed to maintain themselves under these very difficult conditions, central structure of the Party was completely destroyed. During the beginning of this period, regional and local work was carried out without a central leadership, on its own, so to speak.

At the beginning of 1974, a “seIf-criticism” was published in the name of TIIKP. This “self-criticism” led one to believe that many criticisms Ibrahim Kaypakkaya made on many a point were accepted, but did not squarely point to the fact that Ibrahim Kaypakkaya brought these criticisms forward, obscured the existence of a split on this basis and called on all “Party forces” and Marxist-Leninists to unite on the basis of this “self-criticism”, branding the TKP/ML as “Second Liquidators”. As Marxist-Leninists outside the “Party forces” were those forces meant which went out of the THKO (People’s Liberation Army of Turkey) and the THKP/C (People’s Liberation Party and Front of Turkey), inclined to accept the theory of social-imperialism. This attempt to unite all forces on the basis of a fogey “self-criticism” ended with a fiasco.

This call to unite on the basis of “self-criticism” was justly rejected by the incarcerated leaders of the TKP/ML. Pointing to the fogey character of this “self-criticism”, these comrades upheld the view that, when the views in this self-criticism were really considered to be correct, the correct thing to do was to join the TKP/ML. This “self-criticism” was not supported by the imprisoned leaders of the TIIKP either. It was called “liquidationism”.

At the end of 1974, the ruling classes announced a general amnesty in order to show that the 12 March period was being closed. Besides many other revolutionaries, some TKP/ML prisoners also benefited from this amnesty. Some TKP/ML cadres released from prison set up a Coordinating Committee to coordinate the work of the regions. It was also during this time that the original documents of the TKP/ML were published and found large acceptance within the Abroad Organization of the TIIKP. Thoughts of dissolving the Abroad Organization of the TIIKP and individually joining the TKP/ML became widespread and lastly dominant in this organization. At a conference held in the beginning of 1975, it was resolved to dissolve the Abroad Organization of the TIIKP and join the TKP/ML. In accordance with this resolution, the Abroad Regional Committee of the TKP/ML was set up with the consent and approval of the Coordinating Committee. A series of regional committees were set up in Turkey–North Kurdistan as well. The Coordinating Committee, set up especially to rebuild the Party organizationally, in the meantime turned into a movement to liquidate the Party. The ideological struggle between the Coordinating Committee and the regions reached its climax in 1976. The liquidationist Coordinating Committee, which after the split presented itself as the “TKP/ML Movement”, turned towards liquidationism by saying there was no Marxist-Leninist Party in Turkey–North Kurdistan, there were many Marxist-Leninist groups, and our Party, the TKP/ML, was also one of these groups, and the party would come out of the unity of these groups. Combatting the Coordinating Committee which worked towards the de facto liquidation of the Party on the grounds that “we are not a Party, but a movement”, some of the regional committees vindicated the correct views of Ibrahim Kaypakkaya on this score and set up an Organizing Committee in 1977, entrusted with the task of preparing the I. Congress.*)ʉn February 1978 the I. Party Congress was held. Two years before this Congress, the Abroad Organization of the TKP/ML (the future Bolsheviks) had already settled accounts with the “Three Worlds Theory” and the “Superpowers Theory” in a programmatic article on the international situation.

*) Until the “Organizational Conference” in 1989, we called all these institutions with their democratically elected delegates and the authority to pass decisions on all matters as the highest organs of the Party “Conferences”. In 1989 we realized that we should actually call them “Congresses”. That’s why we now call them Congresses.

First Congress of the TKP/ML [1978]

The basic documents of the First Congress held in February 1978 were “The Political Report on the Evaluation of the International Situation”, “The Party Rules” and “The Self-Criticism”. The most important aspect of the political report was the rejection of the basic theses of the “Three Worlds Theory”. The First Congress rejected the determination of a “wordlwide main enemy and main contradiction”, the evaluation of the USA and Russian sosial-imperialism as superpowers and consequently the underrating of other imperialist great powers, and the revision of the Leninist thesis of imperialist great powers and their contention for world hegemony. While appraising Mao Zedong as a great Marxist-Leninist, Lin Piao’s thesis of Mao Zedong Thought being the Marxism-Leninism of our era was rejected.*

This self-criticism wass passed through mainly by the future Bolsheviks, and the Bolsheviks uphold this self-criticism today as well. At the Third Conference of the Menshevik TKP/ML (in 1987), this self-criticism was withdrawn by saying that it was “false”.

However, aside from these correct views, the political report contained some important political weaknesses and errors. Particularly with respect to the evaluation of the situation in Turkey–North Kurdistan and the armed struggle, the political report followed an erroneous line. (It was observed, for instance, that work in the countryside was primary.)

The self-criticism assessed the development of the Party from its foundation to the First Congress, approaching particularly the 1973 defeat in a critical manner and pointing to the political and organizational errors which led to this defeat (for instance, the subjective observation that the then obtaining conditions in the world and in Turkey were most favorable for the revolution).

One of the basic merits of the Congress was to give the Party a renewed organizational structure. After the Congress, “Worker-Peasant Liberation” was published as the illegal central organ. There was also an internal organ, a legal periodical, and a mass newspaper abroad. After its organizational restructuring, the Party began to gain strength and broaden its agitation and propaganda activities and gathered a not underestimable influence among the masses.

Struggle of the Two Lines from the First to the Second Congress of the TKP/ML [1978-1981]

In the period of re-organization and agitation and propaganda work after the First Congress, the newly elected Central Committee began to intervene and carry the views of the TKP/ML more intensively into the ideological discussion of various Marxist-Leninist forces in the international sphere.

Within the context of this process, a detailed ideological discussion was conducted with three Marxist-Leninist groups, i. e. MLPÖ (Marxist-Leninist Party of Austria), GDS (Against the Tide/West Germany) and WBK (West-Berlin Communist). On many issues of principle, especially concerning the World Marxist-Leninist Movement, we held the same or very similar positions. Within the framework of discussions and cooperative work with these organizations, we mutually developed our views on many points. The discussions revolved mainly round the evaluation of the international situation within the framework of the evaluation of Mao Zedong, of settling accounts with the “Three Worlds Theory” and the “Theory of Superpowers”.

The “Joint Declaration of TKP/ML and MLPÖ on the International Situation and the Situation of the World Marxist-Leninist Movement” was a product of this cooperative work. This Declaration appraised Mao Zedong as a great Marxist-Leninist, but at the same time pointed to the necessity of investigating his errors, and stressed the necessity for the World Marxist-Leninist Movement to wage the ideological struggle openly and publicly. The “Three Worlds Theory” and the “Theory of Superpowers” were rejected, and the declaration approached the struggle of the Party of Labor of Albania and the Communist Party of China in a critical manner, pointing to the weaknesses and errors in this struggle. The Declaration touched upon the merits as well as the shortcomings of the struggle of the Party of Labor of Albania against the “Three Worlds Theory”.

In 1978 and 1979, the TKP/ML managed to broaden its activities especially in the countryside. The Party stopped being a loose organization of regions acting aloof from one another. The influence of the Party in the working-class movement also developed in a considerable manner. Some guerrilla units were also set up with the understanding that they should be the initial nuclei of the armed wing of the Party, of the Worker-Peasant Liberation Army of Turkey. The Party tried to combine these units into a centralized organizational structure.

In the period between the First and the Second Congress various ideological discussions and discussion campaigns were conducted. In 1978/79 an extensive campaign was organized: “To defend Stalin is to defend Marxism-Leninism”. To this end a joint declaration was brought out with the sister organizations of the time (MLPÖ, GDS, WBK) and discussion meetings were held in a series of areas. Likewise in this period a campaign was launched to defend socialist Albania, and within the framework of this campaign a joint declaration was worked out with the sister organizations, upholding the merits and criticizing the errors of the Party of Labor of Albania. These campaigns were mainly realized by the Abroad Organization.

The IV. International Youth Camp organized by the Party of Labor of Albania in August 1979 played an important role for us in seeing in practice how the ideological struggle was conducted within the World Marxist-Leninist Movement and what methods were predominant. The youth organization of the TKP/ML, the Marxist-Leninist Youth Union of Turkey, and the Federation of Students from Turkey in Germany (ATÖF), an organization under the ideological influence of the Party, wanted to take part at the camp with their delegations. Pro-PLA organizations, however, attacked these delegations with police methods and prevented the participation of our delegations.

On 12 September 1980, i.e. nearly ten years after the 1971 junta, the fascist Turkish ruling classes resorted again to a military operation in view of the growing mass movement and launched another operation against revolutionary forces to “sweep them up”. Army and other State forces under the leadership of fascist Evren, the head of the junta, carried out an intensive terror campaign in all corners of the country, aspiring to create a rose garden without thorns. Like the entire revolutionary movement, the TKP/ML also became subject to these attacks and lost the great majority of its cadres. Errors in the fields of organization and conspiracy played an important role in the extent of the losses suffered by the revolutionary forces.

The ongoing struggle of the two lines within the Party found its reflection in the appearence of two ideological wings at the Second Congress: the Marxist-Leninist opposition (mainly the Abroad Organization), laying the foundation of the future TKP/ML(Bolshevik), on the one hand, and the Menshevik wing, inhibiting the ideological-political development of the Party, evolving it uninterruptedly towards opportunism, on the other (the future TKP/ML[Partisan]). The efforts of the Bolsheviks, remaining a minority at the Congress, to overcome the errors in the Party line were frustrated by the Menshevik majority organized as a secret faction before and during the Congress. The differences of opinion revolved mainly round the evaluations of Mao Zedung, the PLA, the 1963 Polemics and Ibrahim Kaypakkaya, and the situation and tasks of the revolution in Turkey–North Kurdistan.

Against the Menshevik wing which maintained that Mao Zedong was a classic of Marxism-Leninism, the Bolsheviks contended that Mao was a great MarxistLeninist, but had made grave errors, too, and held that he was not a classic of MarxismLeninism. Against the Mensheviks who alleged that the PLA had already become revisionist, the Bolsheviks maintained that the line of the PLA was revisionist, the evaluation of the PLA as a whole, however, that it had already become revisionist, was premature, this should first be proven. With respect to the 1963 Polemics, the Bolsheviks demanded the suspension of upholding these polemics as Marxist-Leninist, and contended that these polemics should first be studied, as these documents were not sufficiently known, even totally unknown, within the Party. In addition, the Bolsheviks asserted that the 1957 and 1960 Declarations of the Moscow meetings of the representatives of Communist and Workers’ Parties of Socialist Countries were essentially revisionist documents, containing correct and false views one after another. As far as the socio-economic structure of Turkey–North Kurdistan, the stage and path of the revolution were concerned, the Bolsheviks, relying on the principles of Marxism-Leninism, countered the false generalization of the experiences of the Chinese revolution by the Mensheviks, countered the all-out generalization of these experiences by the Mensheviks in a mechanical way to include the application of these experiences to all “semi-colonial and semi-feudal” countries, including Turkey–North Kurdistan, and asserted that Turkey–North Kurdistan was a backward capitalist country dependent on imperialism, containing to a certain degree considerable remnants of feudalism. The predominant mode of production was that of comprador capitalism. Against the Mensheviks who maintained the thesis that “in semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries the revolutionary situation was permanent”, the Bolsheviks stressed that this was not a Marxist-Leninist thesis and after the military operation of 12 September 1980 there was no revolutionary situation in the country.

The Bolsheviks demanded at the Congress that the ideological differences should be discussed openly and publicly before the revolutionary public. By comparison, the Mensheviks forbade to discuss the differences of opinion even within the Party.

The Second Congress of the TKP/ML came to pass under these circumstances.

Establishment of the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) [March 1981]

After the Second Congress, the revisionist Menshevik wing, making up the majority, not only forbade to discuss the ideological differences of opinion, but also made efforts to liquidate the Abroad Organization which stood under Bolshevik dominance. In view of this situation, the Bolsheviks inside the TKP/ML held their First Congress in March 1981 and declared their organizational rupture with the TKP/ML. This was a step in line with the teaching of Bolshevism that ”there can be such cases of violation of principles, that breaking off all organizational links becomes a duty” (Lenin). Opposing to reconcile themselves with opportunism in the TKP/ML, the Bolsheviks hoisted the banner of Bolshevism and established the COMMUNIST PARTY OF TURKEY/MARXIST-LENINIST (BOLSHEVIK) in March 1981.

This rupture, opening a new page in the history of the Marxist-Leninist movement in Turkey–North Kurdistan, was carried out mainly by the comrades in the Abroad Organization of TKP/ML. Electing a new central leadership at the Congress, the Bolsheviks stressed that “the Party itself must stand at the center of attention of the Party”, and set themselves a correct task at the first stage of Party-building. Basic views of the Bolsheviks concerning the universal validity of the “two stages of Party-building”, adopted in a formal resolution, were already formulated at this Congress.

From the First to the Second Bolshevik Congress
[March 1981 – February 1982]

During the short period of eleven months from the First Congress of the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held in March 1981 to the Second Congress in February 1982, the Bolsheviks demonstrated that they frankly took up the goal of pushing the Party forward towards a Bolshevik Party by upholding and developing all that was correct, Marxist-Leninist in the history of the Party and overcoming the errors by self-criticism. During this period, an open and public debate and discussion was held on almost all controversial points and the Bolsheviks severed off all organizational ties with the TKP/ML Mensheviks, creating their own central structures.

The Bolsheviks grasped it as their main task to settle accounts with the TKP/ML Mensheviks ideologically and politically and to enlighten the revolutionary public about the reasons of this split, and accomplished this task all-in-all successfully during this short period of time. To obscure its political bankruptcy, the Menshevik wing charged the Bolsheviks with such accusations as the Bolsheviks were “materially and immaterially non-existent” in Turkey–North Kurdistan, that they were an “exile organization”, and built their policies on such gossips and innuendoes as “they squandered money”, “we called them to Turkey, but they did not comply” etc., which appeal to the basest feelings of the masses. Where demagogy did not suffice, the Mensheviks resorted to counterrevolutionary acts of violence, physical assault, house-raids and similar methods against our comrades. The Bolsheviks, however, did not let themselves into any provocations and waged an ideological-political struggle based on documents, and demonstrated the political bankruptcy of the Mensheviks.

During this time, the Bolsheviks published a bi-monthly central organ, “BOLŞEVİK PARTİZAN”, and a monthly mass newspaper (abroad). Moreover, they brought out an extensive brochure criticizing the Second Conference of the TKP/ML and three volumes of the documents of the struggle of the two lines in the Party. Developing their ideological-political line, the Bolsheviks also further clarified their mainly correct line on the vital questions of the International Marxist-Leninist Movement.

The Second Congress and Watershed with the Sister Organizations

The TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held its Second Congress in February 1982. The Second Congress played a major role in the comrades becoming conscious of the real situation and the magnitude of the tasks before us. The Second Congress marked that the key link to grasp for the Party was that of theory in the triad of theory, organization and cadres for a Party at the first stage of Party-building.

At the Second Congress participated representatives of the sister organizations as well, who sided with the Bolsheviks in their struggle against the Menshevism of the TKP/ML. Before and during the Congress, the sister organizations brought forward correct critiques to many points of the preparatory documents for the Congress and pointed to some mistakes. At a certain stage of the discussions at the Congress, representatives of the sister organizations began to contend that the mistakes in these documents were of such dimension, that it was impossible to “reform” them. The sister organizations who brought radical critiques before and during the Congress influenced and to a considerable extent marked the proceedings of the Congress. This situation led many a Party member to lose his/her ideological-political self-confidence in view of these radical critiques, and led to an infatuation in the sister organizations by a section of the comrades.

After the Second Congress the ideological-political struggle waged against the sister organizations and inside the Party played a decisive role in the ideological and political development of the Bolsheviks. The first point where the polemic with the sister organizations intensified was on the occasion of a jointly planned May Day activity in 1982. The sister organizations raised this contradiction to a question of principle in the approach to proletarian internationalism, whereas the Bolsheviks held that this difference of opinion sprang from a different approach to mass work. After this first public conflict and confrontation with the sister organizations on the occasion of May Day 1982, sisterly relations with these organizations deteriorated abnormally, and after a ten month polemic which to a considerable extent took place one-sidedly,* the sister organizations announced their severing of relations with our Party. During this polemic, the sister organizations, taking the usage of some terms as their starting point, one-sidedly and in a wholesale manner contended that the Bolsheviks followed a Turkish chauvinist line in the national question, held reformist positions with respect to the relation between reforms and revolution, and followed a Menshevik-bureaucratic line with respect to Party-building. The Bolsheviks replied to all these charges before the public and on the basis of documents and demonstrated the wholesaler character of the sister organizations.

"One-sidedly", because the Bolsheviks wanted to reply to these principal critiques after discussing them at least one round inside the Party, whereas the sister organizations polemicized that their “critiques would not be answered", ant then took to the road of abnegating, ignoring the documents which did reply to their critiques.

It was at this time that a few cadres who worked in the Abroad Organization, supported by the sister organizations, appeared as an opposition in the Party and later on split from the Party, calling themselves “Spartacus”. The distinctive character of this group was its blind faith in and infatuation with former sister organizations.

After the split with the sister organizations, the Bolsheviks began to make some headway in settling over to and organizing in Turkey–North Kurdistan. They started propaganda and organization work among the most advanced sections of workers, especially in some industrial centers. The fascist Turkish state, however, dealt a heavy blow to this thrust of the Bolsheviks by seizing and imprisoning many comrades in 1984. This meant a setback in our efforts of reorganization in Turkey–North Kurdistan.

Not paying enough attention to conspiracy, moreover, capitalutionist conduct of some comrades by the police played a major role in the gravity of the 1984 defeat.

The Third Congress and the First Extraordinary Party Congress [1986 – 1987]

After breaking off with the sister organizations, the Bolsheviks focused themselves on grasping the teaching of Party-building in their internal work. They took up the study of Marxist-Leninist classics on this subject to develop the MarxistLeninist line in struggle against all hues of opportunism and revisionism. The Third Party Congress, held in the beginning of 1986, concluded this theoretical work and the extensive discussion on this subject by adopting a resolution on the universal validity of the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building”.

According to this theory, every Communist Party is built in two stages in the pre-revolutionary period. The main task to be solved in the first stage is that of winning the vanguard of the proletariat; the main task in the second stage is that of winning the broad masses of workers and peasants for the Party. In the first stage the Party itself stands in the center of its attention and worry; in the second stage the Party stops being a self-sufficing force and turns into a tool to win the worker and peasant masses, into a tool to wage the struggle of the masses for the overthrow of the rule of capital. In the first stage, the basic form of work is in general propaganda; in the second stage, the basic forms of work are practical actions of the masses as foreplay to the decisive battles. In the first stage the strategy of the Party is necessarily limited and the Party restricts itself to outlining the strategic plan of the movement; in the second stage the strategy of the Party gains momentum, and the question now is that of the application of this strategic plan, and the Party is strong enough to apply this plan successfully. Of course, there is no Chinese Wall between these two stages, and the tasks of both stages must be handled as intertwined tasks, provided that we realize the difference between primary and secondary tasks.

The III. Congress also concluded the discussion inside the Party on the subject of the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism and advanced the Party line on this subject by adopting a resolution on what these criteria are and how they should be used. (See “Some Ideological Starting-Points of the BOLSHEVIK PARTY”.)

As the Congress adopted resolutions on the universal validity of the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building” and the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism and appraised the polemic with the former sister organizations, a minority formed itself, which had no firm internal unity, but whose common feature was that of opposition to the adoption of the resolutions on the universal validity of the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building” and the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism.

The common ideological feature of this minority was lack of self-confidence in the Marxist-Leninist line of the Party, was its search for other forces to unite with outside the Party. They feared that the adoption of definitive resolutions on the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism and the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building” would be too demanding an attitude and a barrier to possible unions, and objected to passing Congress resolutions on these issues even when their content was correct. This was a reflection of the defeatist attitude of the petty bourgeosie, lacking self-confidence. After the III. Congress the differences with this minority at the Congress deepened more and more and led to a ruthless two-line struggle on the issues of the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism as well as the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building”.

Although the resolutions on the universal validity of the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building” and the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism were adopted also with the votes of the great majority of this minority at the III. Congress, this minority now purportedly held the adoption of these resolutions for false and propagated the thesis that “we were not a Party, but a pre-Party group”, and after an open and public discussion announced its organizational breach. (After two years of existence, this group, called “M?cadele Bayragi” [Banner of Struggle], announced its dissolution.)

The I. Extraordinary Party Congress, held at the end of 1987, put an end to this period of open and public ideological discussion. The I. Extraordinary Party Congress appraised this period and declared that the resolutions on the universal validity of the teaching of “the two stages of Party-building” and on the present-day criteria of Marxism-Leninism passed by the III. Congress were among the most fundamental elements of the Party line. The Extraordinary Congress appraised and condemned the line of this minority which demarcated itself organizationally from the Party as a line hostile to Leninism, a line which made it impossible to solve the tasks of “Party-building”.

First Women’s Conference

Within the framework of meetings held on the occasion of 8 March 1986, some women comrades, Party members and sympathizers alike, proposed the organization of a Women’s Conference to develop and deepen the discussions. After a year-long discussion, women comrades in and around the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held a successful Women's Conference on 7 March 1987 abroad. Leaving aside the women's activities realized within the framework of the Communist International, this Conference had a historic importance from the point of view of Communist movement in Turkey–North Kurdistan. The Women's Conference took up the situation of women in and around the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK), discussed what to do to advance women ideologically and politically, and started off a preliminary discussion on the Comintern’s methods and forms of work among women. For the first time the Conference marked the necessity of a central commission or someone responsible for directing the Party work among women.

The afore-mentioned minority in the Party prepared a brochure entitled “Feminism or Leninism?” to this Conference and contended that holding such a Women’s Conference was a product of the feminist deviation in response to feudal-bourgeois approaches. This charge was refuted by the Conference and characterized as a male-chauvinist attitude.

The Women’s Conference was a turning-point from the point of view of developing and concretizing our line on the emancipation of women. Thereafter Party work among women gained a great deal of momentum and four conferences were held in all, which constituted an important preliminary work in lending our line some new elements.

First Organizational Conference [1988]

The years 1986 and 1987 were years in which the graveyard stillness created by the 12 September military operation began to dispel, the national independence movement of the Kurdish nation in North Kurdistan began to flare up, the resistance of workers deprived of their right to strike began to rise again, the poor peasants, especially tobacco toilers, began to raise their voices and the struggle of the students and women attained new dimensions. The Party began to take concrete steps towards re-organization. She began to wind up the losses of the 1984 defeat. In this context, it was of special importance to discuss and solve some of the problems of organizational construction. After a process of intensive discussion and preparation – on the basis of studying the Marxist-Leninist classics as well – about various problems of organizational construction in the Party, the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held its I. Organizational Conference in June 1988.

The Organizational Conference established that, after the organizational split with the “M?cadele Bayragi”, the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) experienced its most fruitful period with a rapid development. The Conference was a most significant step towards solving the tasks of Party-building, towards Bolshevization in the organizational field.

The Organizational Conference noted that important headway was made in ideological, political and theoretical fields of Party-building, but in comparison, the steps taken in the field of organizational construction was lagging behind, and adopted decisive resolutions on the organizational structure and modes of operation on the basis of studying the experiences of the World Communist Movement and of the Communist International in particular, and a self-critical appraisal of the Party’s own experiences.

Noting the grave situation of the revolutionary and Communist movement in Turkey–North Kurdistan with respect to illegal organizational structure and rules of conspiracy, the Conference resolved to effect a radical break with legalism.

The Conference also noted that a pyramid type of organization was inexpedient in our present situation.

Appraising the then existing Statue of the Party, the Conference criticized its errors and shortcomings, and taking its Marxist-Leninist essence, adopted a new Party Statue.

The Conference appraised our past from the point of view of rules for illegal work in the light of the experiences of the Communist Intemational, and adopted new directives.

The Conference reviewed our past with respect to “revolutionary conduct by the police, in prison and before the court”, noted the unsatisfactory situation of revolutionaries and Communists not equalling to the stand demanded of them, and declared it to be a treachery to give the ruling classes any inforrnation about the Party and the Party members. This was a question of principle.

The Conference acknowledged that a section organization in North Kurdistan which takes the national peculiarities of the region into account was the correct Marxist-Leninist approach, set the Party the task of organizing the North Kurdistan Section which was in a certain sense a separate Party, and resolved to set up the North Kurdistan Section/Organizing Commission as a first step.

In a special resolution, the Conference announced that resorting to violence against women and children was incompatible with Party membership.

All this went to show the lead position of the Bolsheviks in these ideological fields. All other groups speaking in the name of revolutionism, Marxism, Socialism etc. were forced to discuss and take their stand on the topics resolved at our Organizational Conference.

The Fourth Congress [1990]

At the end of 1990, the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held its Fourth Ordinary Congress to review the work of the last three years and fix the orientation of the work in the next period.

One of the basic documents discussed and adopted by the Congress was the Political Report of the Central Committee, analyzing the developments in the world and in Turkey–North Kurdistan in the light of Marxism-Leninism.

This report demonstrated the validity of the basic theses of Lenin’s theory of imperialism by a concrete analysis of the concrete situation today.

The report handled the rapid and significant world-wide developments in 1988 to 1990, pointed to the fact that the disintegration of the “Eastern Block” led by Russian social-imperialism gave the imperialist bourgeoisie a great deal of propaganda material for the so-called “death of Communism”, but it was not socialism that collapsed, but the system of bureaucratic capitalism indeed.

The report portrayed how these developments turned the balance of forces in the imperialist world upside down, how Russian social-imperialism lost a great deal of its old power and the West German imperialism became stronger by annexing East Germany and how it was pushing for the patronage of Eastern Europe. The report also stressed the role of Japanese imperialism in the contention for world hegemony. The report went on to point out that all these changes did not touch upon the essence of imperialism, imperialism continued to be parasitic, decaying, morbid capitalism, leading the world to barbarism.

With respect to the situation of the camp of world revolution, the report pointed on the one hand to the fact that imperialism had not been able to extinguish the struggle for revolution, on the other hand, however, to the fact that world Communism was going through one of its weakest and most difficult periods.

Concerning the developments in Turkey–North Kurdistan, the report noted that world-wide developments were also having their effects on the fascist Turkish ruling classes, Turkish chauvinism and racism were being aggravated, and once more stressed that the struggle for independence and People’s Democracy in Turkey–North Kurdistan would be won through the revolution, the way to socialism would be opened up through People’s Democratic Revolution under working-class leadership.

The Fourth Congress developed our line in the national question further in the light of Marxism-Leninism, reviewed our past, and laid down our programmatic views concerning the solution of the national question with a view to the oppressed Kurdish nation and minority nationalities in Turkey–North Kurdistan – in this prison of peoples.

Concerning the Armenian question, the Congress drew attention to the fact that the right of Armenians in the diaspora to settle down in West Armenia also meant upholding the right of these Armenians – when they do settle – to secede, and made a self-criticism of our earlier stand which understood the Armenian question as a “historical injustice” not impeding the development of class struggle. This is of historic importance for the Communist movement in Turkey–North Kurdistan. The Bolsheviks are the only force today upholding this position.

Adopting a resolution on the protection of nature and nature’s balances for the first time in Party history, the Fourth Congress developed the Party line and drew attention to the task of formulating the demands of the one and only thoroughly revolutionary, vanguard class of society, the working class, and waging a special struggle in this field against the main enemy of nature, against imperialism. The Congress stressed that propaganda and agitation in this field were an inseparable part of the revolutionary activity in Turkey–North Kurdistan.

The Fourth Congress noted the considerable development in the propaganda and agitation activity of the Party in Turkey–North Kurdistan in recent years, drew credit for the translation and publication of the works of Marxist-Leninist classics and documents of the World Communist Movement in Turkish, and assessed that this was a most intensive and productive period in this respect.

The First Youth Camp [Summer 1993]

In summer 1993, young people in and around the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) held their first Communist Youth Camp abroad. First steps were taken towards elaborating and grasping the principles of Communist youth work.

Taking the experiences of the Communist Youth International as its startingpoint, first tentative basic views were laid down on the organization of young women and men around the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) and youth organization in general, and which perspective should the youth work have.

The Fifth Congress [1994]

The Fifth Congress of the TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK), held at the beginning of 1994, analyzed the political developments in the world and in Turkey–North Kurdistan in the light of Marxism-Leninism, reviewed its forces and the tasks solved, and set the Bolsheviks new objectives.

Turning a new page in Party history, the Fifth Congress resolved to alter the name of the Party from TKP/ML (BOLSHEVIK) to BOLSHEVIK PARTY (NORTH KURDISTAN-TURKEY).

After the Party’s split at the beginning of 1981, we on our part used the name COMMUNIST PARTY OF TURKEY/MARXIST-LENINIST (BOLSHEVIK) (TKP/ML[B]) to distinguish us from the Mensheviks (TKP/ML Partizan) and at the same time to give expression to the fact that we take over the communist heritage of our communist leader Ibrahim Kaypakkaya. Drawing attention to the fact that the suffix “Bolshevik” expressed the real character of our Party best and distinguished us from the rest, the Fifth Congress resolved to alter the Party name, ruling out the possibility of confusion with opportunist organizations which continue to use the old name TKP/ML. Thereby the expression “Turkey” was removed from the beginning and appended at the end of the Party name together with North Kurdistan, clearly indicating that Turkey and North Kurdistan were for us two equal fields.

The Fifth Congress adopted a very important resolution, according to which the period in which theoretical work was the key link has ended and the key link in the period ahead is that of organizational construction. At the same time, the Congress stressed the decisive importance of the cadre question in organizational construction. This resolution was adopted with the objective of turning our ideological, political and theoretical superiority into organizational superiority and riveting it.

With the “Theses” on fascism, the Fifth Congress concluded the theoretical analysis of fascism, a long-standing question in internal Party work.

Further, the Fifth Congress adopted resolutions in such areas as the youth movement and the organization of youth, correct combination of legal and illegal work, and methods of struggle, developing and concretising the Party line.

Concerning some comrades – primarily those from the second and third generation – in the Abroad Organization of the Party who have become a part of the revolution in these countries, the Fifth Congress adopted the policy of “new orientation” with the objective of working towards building communist parties in these countries. This is another epoch-making resolution, demonstrating how one should understand proletarian internationalism.

II) SOME IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THE POLITICAL LINE OF THE BOLSHEVIK PARTY

1) Concerning the appraisal of the world situation

Proceeding from the radical rejection of such theories as the “Three Worlds Theory”, the “Superpowers Theory” as well as their current versions (such as the present “North-South Theory”), the BOLSHEVIK PARTY holds that the world imperialist system as a whole is reactionary and must be overthrown. Imperialist domination can be destroyed only through people’s armed revolutions in each and every country, can the victory of the revolution be ascertained under the hegemony of the proletariat and the leadership of the Communist Party. The only real, genuine alternative to imperialism is Socialism and Communism!

The final aim of the struggle for proletarian revolution against the rule of capital and imperialist system is to reach the communist society via the dictatorship of the proletariat and construction of socialism.

In the struggle for proletarian world revolution to reach Socialism and Communism, the only class revolutionary to the last – among the forces fighting against capitalism – is the working class of all countries. Therefore is the world proletariat the main force and vanguard of proletarian world revolution. Therefore is the slogan: “Workers of all countries, unite!” the most elementary slogan for whose realization we fight.

Among a host of other things, imperialism is at the same time the system of exploitation and subjugation of oppressed peoples, making up the overwhelming majority of the world population, by a handful of “civilized” countries. The most fundamental condition for a successful world-wide struggle against imperialism is a firm alliance of the workers of the oppressing countries with the peoples of the oppressed and dependent countries. Our slogan is therefore:ʦldquo;Workers of all countries and oppressed peoples, unite!”

In the imperialist world, imperialist great powers are waging a ruthless struggle of rivalry for world hegemony, for a redivision of the spheres of influence and markets. Other imperialist powers are also actively participating in this struggle of rivalry for the expansion of their share of the spheres of influence and markets. Wars strengthening, consolidating the imperialist system are reactionary; wars directed against the imperialist system, dealing blows at it are progressive. Proceeding from the principle that war is a continuation of politics by other means, the BOLSHEVIK PARTY sides actively with progressive, revolutionary, just wars against imperialist, reactionary, counter-revolutionary wars, and upholds revolutionary wars as the only way of eliminating counter-revolutionary wars. Our slogan is therefore: “Down with reactionary, counter-revolutionary, imperialist wars! Long live revolutionary wars!”

2 - Concerning the appraisal of the Situation in Turkey–North Kurdistan

Revolution in Turkey–North Kurdistan is an inseparable part of the world proletarian revolution.

The democratic revolution in Turkey–North Kurdistan has not been completed to this day, many fundamental tasks of the democratic revolution have not been solved. The national movement under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal, who paved the way for the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, was a movement of the Turkish muslim bourgeoisie and landlords which in its further development turned against the tasks of the democratic revolution.

Bourgeois democracy in its real sense has never been implemented in TurkeyNorth Kurdistan. Ever since its establishment in 1923, the State of the Republic of Turkey has always been of a fascist character with a parliamentary mask. That during certain periods one could partially make use of democratic rights, doesn’t alter this fact in the least.

The stage of revolution in Turkey–North Kurdistan is that of democratic, antiimperialist people’s revolution. On the basis of worker-peasant alliance under leadership of the Communist Party and under the hegemony of the proletariat, this revolution will bring independence from imperialism and the liquidation of dependent capitalism and remnants of feudalism, and set up the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of workers and peasants. It will pave the way for the socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat. After a democratic revolution under the leadership of the proletariat, objective conditions exist for going over to socialist revolution and successful construction of socialism by waging an unrelentless class struggle.

The main question of every revolution is that of State power, and the overthrow of counter-revolutionary State power is possible only on the basis of a violent revolution, i. e. an armed revolution of the popular masses. Therefore it is of decisive importance to propagate the idea of a violent revolution among masses of workers and other toilers and to win over toilers to this idea.

In Party’s agitation, propaganda and organizational work the BOLSHEVIK PARTY gives priority to industrial centers. In building the Party organization, the BOLSHEVIK PARTY bases itself on factory cells to be set up in factories, and considers it not only an organizational question, but also a decisive political question to build the Party on the basis of factory cells.

The Bolsheviks set themselves today the objective of building class unions against reactionary trades unions which hold the working class under sway in Turkey–North Kurdistan, and towards this end, hold it for an indispensable task to work in reactionary trades unions and win their bases.

The main form of work of the Bolsheviks in reactionary trades unions is communist fraction work. The Bolsheviks consider it important to organize and spread “Strike and Struggle Committees” to organize the spontaneous struggle of workers independently of reactionary trade-union bureaucracy and lend these struggles a revolutionary character.

The burning question in Turkey–North Kurdistan is presently the national question. To defend the right of the Kurdish nation to secede and set up its own state and equal rights for all nationalities is a prerequisite of consequent democratism. Taking into account the national peculiarities of the region, the BOLSHEVIK PARTY works to set up the Bolshevik Party (North Kurdistan) which will conduct its activities on the basis of a common program with the Bolshevik Party (Turkey). The Bolshevik Party (North Kurdistan) is a separate Party making up one part of the joint united Party.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY supports the democratic essence of the national liberation movement developing under the leadership of the PKK [Kurdistan Workers Party], a party with a bourgeois-nationalist line, and declares that she sides with this movement in the struggle against the fascist Turkish State. Proceeding from the fact that not only the final victory of social emancipation, but also that of national liberation in its true sense can not be obtained under the leadership of bourgeois-nationalist PKK, the BOLSHEVIK PARTY sets itself the task of strengthening the communist alternative in North Kurdistan.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY condemns the first genocide of the twentieth century on the Armenian nation perpetrated by the Turkish ruling classes, and underlines in its propaganda and agitation activity the co-responsibility of Turkish and Kurdish toilers for this genocide. The BOLSHEVIK PARTY upholds and defends the right of the Armenians in the diaspora to return to and settle in West Armenia and (when they do settle) their right to secede.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY condemns the occupation of Northern Cyprus by the fascist Turkish army in 1974, demands the unconditional withdrawal of the fascist Turkish army from Cyprus, and actively supports the united struggle of the peoples in Cyprus for the democratic revolution.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY grasps the question of women’s emancipation right from the start as one of the central questions of revolution, and notes that communist work among working and toiling women is half the Party work. The BOLSHEVIK PARTY recognizes the necessity of special methods and forms of work among women for the success of communist propaganda, agitation and organizational activity among working and toiling women. The objective of this activity is to create a “Communist Women’s Movement”.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY declares that the main responsibility for the plundering of nature, meaning the destruction of the foundations of human life, lies on imperialism, and holds the struggle against the plundering of nature for an integral part of its agitation and propaganda work and the struggle for revolution.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY considers work among youth as one of the most important fields of work, and carries on a special work and organizational activity to win the youth to the cause of revolution and Communism. The objective of this activity is to create a Communist youth organization and “Communist Youth Movement”. The Communist youth organization must be a proletarian youth organization from the viewpoint of its class composition. To this end, work among working youth is principal right from the start.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY considers it possible to make temporary alliances and carry out joint activities with petty-bourgeois revolutionary organizations on the basis of unity of action and freedom of agitation and propaganda. Unity of action and freedom of agitation and propaganda is an indispensable principle for safeguarding independent Communist propaganda.

The BOLSHEVIK PARTY rejects the use of force in relations between revolutionaries and revolutionary organizations on principle, and combats the practice of organizations which stamp persons, their own comrades or other revolutionary organizations as “agent-provocateur” or “counter-revolutionary” without a clue of a proof and so pave the way for using force against them. Likewise the BOLSHEVIK PARTY rejects the use of force instead of ideological-political struggle in situations where ideological-political differences lead to a split in the organization.

III) SOME IDEOLOGICAL STARTING-POINTS OF THE BOLSHEVIK PARTY

THE BOLSHEVIK PARTY holds the revolution in Turkey–North Kurdistan for an inseparable part of the proletarian world revolution and fights for the victory of proletarian world revolution. Her final goal is socialism and the establishment of a communist society. Towards this end, presently it is one of the most important tasks to create the unity of the World Communist Movement. The World Communist Movement must be re-united on the basis of a Communist platform that defends and upholds the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism in the dayto-day struggle. To fight for this goal is the task of the Communists of all countries. Within the context of such a program that should bring about the unity of World Communist Movement, the Bolshevik Party takes the following starting-points as her basis in what should be considered the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism today:

·        To uphold and defend Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin as classics of Marxism-Leninism;

·        to oppose Khrushchevite modern revisionism; to grasp and condemn Khrushchevite modern revisionism as the ideological pillar of the now collapsed Russian social-imperialism;

·        to accept that ideological struggle against Khrushchevite modern revisionism has not been completed, that in this struggle very important mistakes and deviations were committed, that it stands before us to bring this struggle to completion;

·        to condemn the “Three Worlds Theory” as a counter-revolutionary theory; to grasp the struggle against the roots and all variations of this theory as a task;

·        in the appraisal of Mao Zedong, to combat both appraising him as the fifth classic of Marxism-Leninism as well as generally appraising him as a revisionist for the period after 1957;

·        to appraise and condemn the post-1978 line of the Party of Labor of Albania as revisionist;

·        in order to bring about the unity of the World Marxist-Leninist Movement, to accept the work for the creation of the platform of the World Communist Movement as the key link to grasp; to accept open and public ideological struggle based on principles as the method of bringing about the unity of World Marxist-Leninist Movement;

·        to uphold and defend the Leninist Party teaching, and today especially that field of this teaching relating to how this party is to be created, the teaching of the two stages of Party-building, as a universal teaching;

·        to adhere closely to methodological propositions of Marxism-Leninism, especially to the method of unity of theory and practice, and the method of self-criticism.

February 1994
(Endorsed by the Vth Congress of the
BOLSHEVIK PARTY)