It is well known that in the process of its development the capitalist social-economic formation adopted and used various forms of organization and rule, when leaving its essence, i.e. its capitalist nature intact. Thus Imperialism is not a separate type of social-economic formation, but it is a certain stage of Capitalism’s development, a form of its existence under certain historical conditions. This stage is characterized by changing of certain properties of Capitalism – some of them discontinue, whereas others appear – these processes were first described by Lenin, i.e. first of all Capitalism acquires the monopolistic nature as well as some other known features.
We are all familiar with such an occurrence as Fascism and know its scientific definition given at the 7-th Congress of Comintern: “Fascism in power is the open, terroristic dictatorship of the most reactionary, the most chauvinistic, the most imperialistic elements of finance capitalism, a special form of class domination of bourgeoisie… Fascism is not the power that is above all the classes, it is not the power of petty bourgeoisie and lumpen-proletariat over financial capital. Fascism is the power of financial capital itself. This is the organization of terroristic massacre of working class and the revolutionary part of peasantry and intelligentsia. Fascism in international relations means chauvinism in its cruelest form practicing zoological hatred towards other nations”. This definition has not lost its significance, it is still valid. Based on this definition we can come to a conclusion that Fascism is just one of Capitalism-Imperialism’s manifestations, yet another form of its existence. Yes, it’s a special form, but still a form of exactly Capitalism-Imperialism.
Every time when there appeared a new form of the capitalist formation, Marxists not only provided scientific analysis of that form, but in line with the spirit of Marxism and based on the above analysis, they elaborated practical recommendations pertaining to concrete situations and defined adequate tactics of the revolutionary struggle. Lenin for example on having carried out the analysis of Imperialism, scientifically substantiated the existence of possibility of the socialist revolution’s victory in several countries or even in a single country first. As we remember, the dogmatists of all sorts that had not been able to percept the basics of Marxism’s dialectics, violently disputed the Lenin’s conclusion, whereas it was the practical experience only that fully confirmed the correctness of that conclusion.
As soon as Fascism had sprung to life, Bolsheviks-Leninists analyzed that new occurrence in accordance with the Marxist science and came to corresponding conclusions as well. They considered the task of anti-fascist struggle to be of top priority; hence they offered the tactics of making temporary alliances including those with certain bourgeois-democratic forces, such tactics known as the tactics of creating anti-fascist fronts.
Yet another reason why the 7th Congress is especially important is the fact that this congress described the conditions under which a united workers’ front should be created. It was stressed at the 7th Congress that Comintern “didn’t impose any conditions but for the one, that would be basic and acceptable to all the workers, i.e.: the unity of actions should be aimed against Fascism, against the advance of Capital, against the threat of war…”.
The Congress used a new approach again while touching upon the issue of the establishment of the People Front’s government, the conditions for such establishment being given exact description: in case there is a political crisis in the country, whereas the bourgeoisie have been disorganized and paralyzed to such an extent, that they are not in a position to interrupt with the formation of such government, when the working masses actively oppose Fascism and reaction, while not yet being ready to fight for the Dictatorship of Proletariat, when the file and ranks of Social-Democratic parties together with Communists actively oppose Fascism as well as the anti-communist right wing of Social-Democrats.
Thus the government of People’s Front was government of struggle against the advance of Fascism and reaction. Its future development might turn it into a government of a broader dictatorship of proletariat and peasantry, such government being a transitional form to a government of proletarian dictatorship. The 7th Congress declared that communist parties express their willingness to enter such government together with the other parties-participants of the People’s Front. Thus such joining the government doesn’t mean any deviation from the Marxist basic principles – it is a type of communists’ revolutionary tactics applicable in the clearly defined cases of class struggle’s development in the course of anti-fascist struggle.
Here we should specially stress that under different circumstances, i.e. under the conditions of an ordinary crisis when there is neither Fascism or an obvious threat of Fascism, the joining a bourgeois government by communists could only be explained by quite different reasons that have nothing to do with Antifascism, and the aim of such joining is in fact the salvation of Capitalism. Thus in this case it would mean a betrayal of the working class’ cause.
We see that Capitalism-Imperialism can take different shapes, can manifest itself in various ways depending on concrete circumstances. Russian Imperialism, for example manifests itself in different ways when dealing with Georgia, or with the Ukraine, or with USA or China. Nevertheless we are aware that in all the above cases these are not different politics, but here we deal with the single politic of Imperialism and the only difference lies in the methods of achieving its goals. In about THE SAME WAY imperialists can perform their politics towards the population of their own countries as opposed to the politics performed by them towards the population of another country. For example the politics of imperialists in their own countries can be carried out in the form of bourgeois democracy, whereas it can take the form of open Fascism in respect of other countries when the imperialists don’t believe it necessary to mask their intentions and come over to an open terroristic dictatorship, i.e. to the practice of ordinary Fascism. This occurrence cannot be viewed as a separation of internal politics from the international ones. These are two different forms of essentially the same politics of Imperialism. Exactly such case can be observed nowadays in the Ukraine. There we can see an open terroristic dictatorship of the financial capital of USA, Western Europe and of the Ukrainian one itself. This is a dictatorship of bourgeoisie that has taken a clearly defined form of fascist dictatorship. There are a considerable number of similar cases in the modern world. The third. We are sometimes criticized for the use of the expression “exported Fascism” that we applied for the description of the above occurrence, this expression being considered by the critics nonscientific. In this respect we’d like to mention that we are not going to insist on translating this expression into all languages. We understand that the linguistic differences may lead to misinterpretation of the same expression.
Nevertheless, we insist that the occurrence described with the use of this expression does exist, whereas in accordance with the Marxist science the only criterion to determine if our approach to the occurrence can be recognized as scientific or nonscientific, is the socio-historical practice. In case an occurrence has been recognized as existing whereas it has never manifested itself practice, we have any right to consider such recognition as nonscientific. In the opposite case when an occurrence can be observed in real life, when the practice confirms its existence, its existence’s denial would be correctly regarded as nonscientific. The occurrence in question is not only widespread, but we’ve been able to observe it more and more frequently. This makes it essential for us communists to pay this occurrence a special attention and to attract to it the attention of proletariat both in the country that imposes the dictatorship as well as in the country that suffers from the terroristic dictatorship. We should urge the workers both in our countries and all over the world to fight Fascism. It was so in the severe years of WWII it should be so now.
Let us all have success in our common struggle!