Xuan Chuanshu and Yu Ming: Commemoration and Reflection on the Communist International by Foreign Leftists
From March 2 to 6, 1919, 52 representatives from 35 organizations in 21 countries gathered in Moscow for a five-day congress to announce the birth of a unified world party organization—the Communist International (also known as the Third International). From that moment, a new page was turned in the world socialist movement. Today, 100 years later, a unified proletarian international organization no longer exists, and the world socialist movement is in a relative ebb. Simultaneously, the economic crisis of the Western capitalist world is deepening, extremist forces—including fascism—are on the rise, and the global balance of power is seeing the "East rising and West declining" [1]. The great power competition and even open confrontation are intensifying daily; the world seems once again to be on the eve of a great revolution. This has not only stimulated the fighting spirit of global left-wing forces but has also provided them with vast space for imagination. It is within this era and international context that foreign left-wing parties, organizations, and scholars have seized the occasion of the centenary of the founding of the Communist International to hold a series of commemorative activities and publish various articles.
Left-wing parties and organizations such as the European Communist Initiative (ECWP), the International Marxist Tendency (IMT), the Revolutionary Workers’ Party (DIP) of Turkey, and the Russian Communist Workers’ Party (RCWP) held international seminars directly titled as commemorations of the Communist International. The 21st International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP) also included the centenary of the Comintern’s founding as a major agenda item. Furthermore, official websites of institutions such as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF), the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), the Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA), the Workers World Party (WWP) of the United States, the Communist Party of Turkey (TKP), the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI), the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI), the Internationalist Communist Tendency (ICT), and the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (RLS) of Germany—along with European and American left-wing publications like Jacobin, Socialist Worker, Socialist Appeal, and Globalizations—have published a series of commemorative articles by left-wing scholars surrounding the Comintern’s centenary. Based on a review and reflection of the Comintern’s historical origins, impact, and legacy, these meetings and articles focus on analyzing and assessing the current world situation, subsequently issuing visions for the reconstruction of international unity.
I. Why Was the Communist International Established?
What were the origins of the Communist International, and why was it built? This is the first key topic of focus for the foreign Left during the Comintern centenary. In this regard, two primary analytical perspectives currently exist. The first traces the purpose of the Comintern’s founding from the perspective of advancing world revolution, arguing that it was established to respond to the bankruptcy of the Second International and the challenge of social democracy, thereby re-establishing the banner of proletarian internationalism. The second interprets it through the lens of the practical needs of Soviet Russia, arguing that the Comintern was established for the specific interests of the Russian party—to coordinate global progressive forces to defend and consolidate the newborn Soviet regime.
The first analytical perspective is most typically represented by left-wing parties in Germany, Turkey, and Russia. Peter Schwarz, a member of the Socialist Equality Party (PSG) of Germany and Secretary of the International Committee of the Fourth International, wrote on the ICFI official website on March 20, 2019, that the emergence of the Third International was not accidental but had a specific socio-historical background. On the one hand, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, world capitalism entered the stage of imperialism, and the world socialist movement began to differentiate into left, center, and right factions. On the other hand, the outbreak of the First World War marked the true arrival of the era of war and revolution; it simultaneously exposed the reformist and opportunist nature of the Second International, leading to its bankruptcy. The founding of the Comintern was a response to this bankruptcy. Its task was to exercise subjective initiative in the imperialist era, to bridge the gap between a mature revolutionary situation and immature revolutionary leadership, and to re-hoist the banner of proletarian internationalism abandoned by the Second International, allowing the revolutionary situation to develop into a socialist revolution under the conscious guidance of a mature Marxist party. Therefore, the Comintern differed from the Second International in both revolutionary stance and organizational methods: first, the Comintern was not a federation of national communist parties, but a world party pursuing a unified global strategy; second, opportunists were no longer permitted to exist within the Comintern, and socialist revolution was no longer a distant goal but a practical task [1].
Kemal Okuyan, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Turkey, expressed a similar view at an international conference organized by the European Communist Initiative themed “The Fight for Communism: 100 Years of Political Legacy” (February 16–17, 2019). He argued that the Comintern was established less to coordinate the global revolutionary process through a world party than to challenge the influence of social democracy. At that time, the surging workers’ movements in various countries were actually under the influence of Socialist parties that had degenerated into bourgeois parties; the Communists were merely a minority among the working masses. Although the Comintern was forced to take some tactical retreats in subsequent struggles due to practical needs, this does not constitute a reason to doubt its original intent. Its purpose was to declare war on social democracy politically and ideologically [2].
Gennady Zyuganov, Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, argued in a commemorative article for the centenary that after the outbreak of World War I, opportunism gained the upper hand within the Second International. Leading figures of Socialist parties in Britain, France, and Germany abandoned proletarian internationalism and moved to the imperialist camp. The Second International existed in name only, while the only party loyal to Marxism and its ideology of proletarian revolutionary struggle was the Russian Bolshevik Party. Lenin called upon the Left within the national Socialist parties to break completely with the opportunists of the Second International and establish a new unified organization. The formation of the "Zimmerwald Left" in 1915 was a key step toward establishing the Comintern. After the victory of the October Revolution in 1917, the creation of the first state of working people in history provided a powerful impetus for workers and national liberation movements worldwide, preparing the conditions for the establishment of the Comintern in 1919 [3].
The second analytical perspective is represented primarily by Larry Holmes, First Secretary of the Workers World Party (USA), and Loren Balhorn, a contributing editor for the American left-wing publication Jacobin. In a commemorative article published on the WWP official website on February 21, 2019, Holmes emphasized that in Lenin’s vision, the Comintern’s goal was to “strive by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie and the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the state” [4]. In other words, the Comintern hoped to transform the imperialist war into a civil war between the proletariat and the imperialist ruling class, expecting this war to culminate in the victory of world socialism. In Holmes’s view, Lenin was well aware that as the sole socialist regime, the ultimate fate of the Russian Revolution would depend on the occurrence of world revolution. Therefore, the goal of the Comintern founded by Lenin was not to downgrade internationalism to symbolic acts of solidarity, but to coordinate the actual struggle of communism against capitalism and to facilitate its early victory [5].
Balhorn expressed a similar, albeit more blunt, view. In his article "The World Revolution That Failed," he pointed out that the communist movement was actually a product of specific circumstances rather than a reality generated according to a clear plan. The opportunities created by the environment of the Russian Revolution allowed the Bolshevik Party to take power in 1917, but from 1918 onwards, Russian revolutionaries gradually realized that in the face of backward economic conditions and the siege of imperialist countries, Russia could not stand alone. This prompted them to "bet" on the international struggle for socialism: expecting that neighboring Western countries would achieve revolutionary victory, thereby allowing the Russian Soviet regime to survive and develop with the support of industrialized nations like Germany. It was for this vision that Lenin convened the meeting in 1919 to establish the International, uniting the emerging communist parties of various countries into a centralized and powerful organization [6].
II. What Was the Historical Impact of the Communist International?
During its 24 years of existence, what impact did the Communist International have on the international communist movement? This is the second key topic of concern for the foreign Left. Overall, there are two main angles or views: one emphasizes the Comintern’s historical contributions and constructive role in advancing the world socialist movement from a positive perspective, while the other highlights its destructive influence from a negative perspective.
Regarding the historical contributions and constructive role of the Comintern in the world socialist movement, these are primarily reflected in the following three aspects:
First, the Comintern promoted the establishment and growth of national communist parties. The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) issued a statement on February 26, 2019, clearly noting that the predecessor of the KKE, the Socialist Labour Party of Greece (SEKE), only abandoned the opportunist line of the Second International and renamed itself the Communist Party of Greece after joining the Comintern and receiving its guidance and help. Thus, the KKE’s level of political theory and maturity is linked to the development of the Comintern as a “World Communist Party.” Although subsequent shifts in the Comintern’s line had negative effects on the KKE’s policy-making, this cannot negate the Comintern’s historical contributions, nor can it be used to deny the responsibility of national parties and mass movements toward their own and international revolutions. Even now, the KKE continues to follow the spirit of internationalism, building exchange platforms and proposing initiatives to create conditions for communist parties to adopt a common strategy, aiming to form a Marxist-Leninist pole within the international communist movement [7]. Schwarz, Secretary of the ICFI, argued that the Comintern served as an international academy of strategy, helping communist parties worldwide solve problems and complete tasks. The early activities of the Comintern, in particular, achieved rich results politically and theoretically, providing inexhaustible guidance for revolutionary strategy and tactics. It was through the Comintern that workers’ parties strengthened their study of communist theory and practice and improved their ability to handle complex political issues [8]. Rob Sewell, editor-in-chief of the British left-wing publication Socialist Appeal, also contended that the Comintern served as a parliament and school for the proletariat, providing a platform for communist parties to discuss, exchange, and reach consensus. Specifically, the Comintern’s early activities were monumental; its first four congresses played a "landmark role," enriching the theoretical treasury of revolutionary Marxism, including opposition to ultra-leftism and the establishment of the united front.
Second, the Comintern supported the development of national liberation movements. On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Comintern, the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation published a series of commemorative articles on its official website, primarily focusing on the Comintern’s contributions to the anti-imperialist and anti-colonial struggles in the Global South. Matt Swagler, a visiting assistant professor at Williams College in the United States, reviewed the active role played by the Comintern in the African national liberation struggle. He argued that the Comintern consistently called for the complete independence of Africa and advocated for integrating Africa's national liberation struggle with the class struggle within imperialist countries [3]. The 1920 Second Congress of the Comintern stipulated the requirements for membership: "Any party wishing to join the Third International must ruthlessly expose the deeds of 'its own' imperialists in the colonies, supporting every liberation movement in the colonies not in words but in deeds" [4]. This regulation also served as the foundation for the Comintern’s guidance of the Pan-African radical movement. More importantly, the Russian Revolution and the actions of the Comintern attracted the attention of African workers and intellectuals, strengthening the central position of Marxism in national liberation movements. Even the national liberation movements on the African continent after World War II used Marxism and the Soviet Union as a revolutionary frame of reference [5]. David Broder, a contributing editor at Jacobin and an Italian historian, published an article affirming the role the Comintern played in Latin American national liberation activities. The article argues that although Latin America is geographically and politically distant from Russia, the October Revolution led by the Bolshevik Party provided Latin America with inspiration for class struggle and anti-imperialism. Furthermore, the Comintern facilitated exchanges between newly founded Latin American Communist Parties and their European counterparts, while promoting unity between Latin American Communist Parties and other local leftist forces. Although the Comintern failed to successfully spread the revolution to Latin America, it nurtured the region's revolutionary potential, leading to the emergence of "new landmarks" of the international communist movement like the Cuban Revolution during the Cold War [6].
Third, the Comintern strengthened the international solidarity of the proletariat. In February 2019, the Revolutionary Workers' Party (DIP) of Turkey held a seminar in Istanbul titled "The Centenary of the Comintern: From the Comintern to the Future World Party." At this seminar, Jorge Altamira, leader of the Worker's Party (PO) of Argentina, stated that the founding of the Comintern was a leap forward in the history of the international workers' movement, moving toward the convergence of the European revolutionary movement with the revolutions in oppressed countries and colonies. Darya Mitina, a member of the Central Committee of the United Communist Party (OKP) of Russia, emphasized that the Comintern gradually developed into a massive organization with millions of members and made outstanding contributions to establishing a revolutionary network across the globe. In this sense, the Comintern was the largest and most powerful international proletarian organization in history, representing the "pinnacle of world proletarian organization" [7]. Gennady Zyuganov also gave high praise to the Comintern's historical contributions in this regard in his commemorative article. In his view, the Comintern combined Marxism-Leninism with the workers' movement on a global scale, which not only promoted the establishment of proletarian political parties and mobilized the working people to defend their interests in the struggle against imperialism and fascism, but also strengthened the international solidarity of the working class and pushed national liberation movements in colonies and dependencies to a new level. It was the work carried out by the Comintern that laid the foundation for the revolutionary victory in many countries and the subsequent formation of the socialist camp. Therefore, the Comintern is a well-deserved "banner of the first great victories" [8].
Regarding the "destructive" influence of the Comintern on the world socialist movement, it is mainly reflected in the negative effects brought about by its overly centralized organizational principles and rigid modes of operation.
First, placing Russian interests above the revolutionary interests of member states made the Comintern a political tool for maintaining the interests of Soviet Russia alone. Simon Basketter, deputy editor of the British Socialist Worker, argues that after Lenin's death, Stalin lost interest in proletarian internationalism and took action to consolidate his own power. His theory of "Socialism in One Country" caused the degeneration of the Comintern. To this end, Basketter cited the view of American revolutionary James P. Cannon: Communist parties "degenerated from revolutionary groups into the frontier police of the Soviet Union and pressure groups serving its foreign policy" [9]. David Broder, contributing editor of the American leftist publication Jacobin, pointed out that as efforts to export revolution failed repeatedly, Soviet Russia became increasingly conservative and autocratic. In particular, the failure of the 1923 German Revolution directly caused long-term disputes within the Bolshevik leadership; Stalin marginalized all competitors and adopted a strategy of strategic retreat and "defending socialism in one country," thus making the Comintern completely subservient to Moscow's political direction. At the request of Western allies, the Comintern announced its dissolution in 1943, marking the institutional end of the revolutionary internationalism that had inspired the early communist movement; from then on, communism no longer possessed any true world-political significance [10].
Second, imposing unrealistic political instructions on member parties affected the independent decision-making of national Communist Parties, leading to revolutionary setbacks in many countries. Mímir Kristjánsson, a member of the Norwegian Red Party (Rødt), reviewed the history of how the Norwegian workers' movement split because the Norwegian Labour Party rejected the "21 Conditions" proposed by the Second Congress of the Comintern in his article "To and From Moscow," published on March 2, 2019. In 1920, the "21 Conditions" required member parties to follow the resolutions of the Russian party, implement the principle of democratic centralism, rename themselves the Communist Party, and sever ties with unions that did not obey Moscow. This requirement directly led to the split of the Norwegian workers' movement: the right wing of the Labour Party turned toward reformism and eventually degenerated into a conservative social-democratic party; the left wing left the party and established a separate Communist Party, but it became marginalized as it increasingly disconnected from the struggles of the working class. This split in the workers' movement was not a phenomenon unique to Norway, but a general lesson of the destruction brought to the international communist movement by the Soviet Union's rigid mode of operation between the two world wars [11].
A representative of the Communist Workers' Party of Finland (KTP) also reviewed the negative impact of the Comintern’s unrealistic leadership on the development of the Communist Party of Finland (SKP) at the international seminar "The Centenary of the Founding of the Comintern and the Tasks of Today's Communist Movement" (June 1–2, 2019), hosted by the Russian Communist Workers' Party. Following the Comintern’s instructions, after the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, the SKP began to cooperate with labor unions and the Social Democratic Party, supporting candidates from the anti-war Social Democratic Party and the Agrarian League. As a result, the Social Democratic Party won the 1939 election and became the largest party in parliament. However, that party later became the main supporter of Finland's alliance with Nazi Germany. Thus, it can be seen that under the unrealistic intervention of the Comintern, the actions of the SKP during this period essentially served to support fascist forces [12].
III. What Historical Legacy Has the Comintern Left Us?
What historical legacy has the Comintern left for today’s world socialist movement, or what experiences and lessons does its history provide us? This is the third key topic discussed by the foreign left on the occasion of the Comintern’s centenary. In summary, they generally believe there are two aspects of experiences and lessons worth absorbing.
First, in the struggle for socialism, one must adhere to internationalism and oppose the trends of opportunism and nationalism. The "Internationalist Communist Tendency" published an article titled "The Foundation of the Comintern—Then and Now" on its official website on March 3, 2019, pointing out that the brilliant historical experience of the Comintern, especially many original ideas from the First Congress, is still worth serious study and absorption by communists today. First, the proletarian revolution is an international revolution. The final section of the Platform of the Communist International adopted by the First Congress clearly stated that the future "victory" is the victory of the communist world and the victory of the "International Proletarian Soviet Republic" [13]. Second, the absurd political distortions of the bourgeois left must be opposed. They always cheer for the nation-state, which has nothing in common with the proletarian internationalist position displayed at the First Congress of the Comintern. To this end, the article cites the words of American politician Boris Reinstein, who attended the First Congress: "In the present era, the root of all wars lies in capitalist competition... the proletariat not only has no obligation but also has no right to support its own government, even if it is a 'war for the defense of the fatherland.' There is only one kind of war that the proletariat must support, and that is social war, namely, social revolution" [14]. Third, the ultimate goal of communists is by no means a "proletarian state." In his report at the founding congress of the Comintern, "Theses on Bourgeois Democracy and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat," Lenin expressed his vision for the future: "Soviet democracy, i.e., proletarian democracy... by constantly involving and necessarily involving the mass organizations of the laborers in the administration of the state, has immediately begun the work of preparing for the complete withering away of every state" [15]. This view was also expressed in later works such as The ABC of Communism [16].
Second, while emphasizing international union, the equal status and independence of each party must also be respected. The Communist Party of Turkey submitted a report at the international seminar "The Centenary of the Founding of the Comintern and the Tasks of Today's Communist Movement," stating: as part of our historical legacy, the Comintern is full of valuable historical experience; we need to evaluate this to let the experience of the past guide our revolutionary struggle today, while also understanding the shortcomings in its work and learning lessons. For example, the Comintern was the center of the international communist movement, yet this center was based on the defense of "socialism in one country." This led to a dilemma for Communist Parties in various countries: adhering to the "central agenda" of the international communist movement—namely, defending "socialism in one country" in Russia—risked losing their own revolutionary opportunities; yet once they deviated from the spirit of the Comintern, they risked falling into opportunism or a certain naive ultra-leftism. In reality, the vanguard in each country and region should consider the unique class conditions of their own nation. Only by linking the vanguard's revolutionary goals with the ultimate goals of their national class struggle, and with the interests of the international communist movement and world revolution, is it possible to overcome this problem. Past experience also shows that in handling the relationship between a Communist Party and the international communist movement, the party should focus more on building its own capacity, the independence of its organizational work, and the right and responsibility to independently solve the unique needs of the national class struggle. Only in this way can inter-party relations be truly coordinated and united, and can they truly contribute to the overall cause of the international communist movement. Therefore, an atmosphere of openness, fraternity, and permission for criticism should be formed within the international communist movement, and parties in various countries should independently make strategic and tactical decisions in the class struggle. Of course,
When various national parties made decisions, they had to consider the opinions of fraternal parties [17]; however, an authority towering over all member parties was unacceptable.
Carlos S. Ferreira, a professor of political science at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, summarized the lessons of the Comintern and proposed six suggestions for the international unification of socialist forces in an article published in the British leftist magazine Global: (1) Extensively organize all exploited and oppressed peoples, establish a united front against chauvinism, racism, fascism, and all other forms of exploitation and oppression, and resolutely defend the people's right to self-determination; (2) Adhere to theoretical inclusion and pluralism, allowing for criticism where necessary; (3) Engage in long-term ideological struggle against opportunism and "ultra-left" currents; (4) Although the "International" is organizationally superior to each member party, it should respect the autonomy of member parties in their internal affairs; its primary role should be education rather than intervening in or replacing the member parties; (5) Avoid the existence of "patriarchal parties" [18], ensure equal relations between all parties, and establish check-and-balance mechanisms among major parties to prevent the international organization from becoming a mouthpiece for any single large party; (6) The international organization must be materially and politically independent of any proletarian state and unconditionally assist member countries in opposing imperialism from a position of equality.
IV. What is the Global Situation Facing Us Today, One Hundred Years After the Founding of the Comintern?
What kind of world situation do we face today, 100 years after the founding of the Comintern? This is the fourth key topic of concern for the foreign left on the occasion of the Comintern’s centenary. Regarding the current situation, they generally believe that there are great similarities between the present and 1919 when the Comintern was founded. This similarity is manifested in two main aspects: on the one hand, the capitalist world is facing a global systemic economic and political crisis; on the other hand, mass movements striving for social justice are in the ascendant, and socialist countries, particularly represented by China, are striding forward. The sharp contrast between "Western chaos" and "Eastern governance" [19], along with the shifting global power structure characterized by the "East rising and the West declining" [20], has provided great encouragement and confidence to the world socialist movement.
Regarding the systemic political and economic crisis facing world capitalism, at a seminar hosted by the "International Marxist Tendency" in Pittsburgh, USA, in June 2019, titled "The Revolutionary Legacy of the Comintern," John Peterson, editor-in-chief of the American leftist publication Socialist Revolution, clearly pointed out that the crises and contradictions of capitalism we face today are fundamentally similar to those at the time of the Comintern's founding. These crises and contradictions can be glimpsed through Brexit, the Yellow Vest movement in France, and the political crises facing Sudan and Algeria. The capitalist crisis is prominently manifested in the ruling class's loss of control over the political situation; the capitalist system is facing a pincer attack from both anti-establishment forces and the working class. At another international seminar commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Comintern, also hosted by the "International Marxist Tendency" in Bardonecchia, Italy, in July 2019, Alan Woods, a British leftist political theorist, noted in his speech that 2019 was a particularly bad year for world capitalism. One of the most significant global characteristics was the loss of control by the ruling classes in countries such as the UK, the US, and Brazil, leading to state power falling into the hands of unreliable demagogues like Boris Johnson, Donald Trump, and Jair Bolsonaro. This has brought a profound political crisis to the establishment and signifies a split within the ruling class. Furthermore, the capitalist crisis means that the bourgeoisie no longer recognizes the reforms of the past; therefore, the current crisis of capitalism is simultaneously a crisis of reformism. The current large-scale, radical social movements against climate change foreshadow the direction of developments, demanding fundamental, systemic change. Capitalism is destroying the planet we depend on for survival and threatening human existence; the only way to solve this problem is through socialist revolution.
Faced with the deepening systemic crisis of capitalism, [Dudley] Holmes pointed out clearly that this portends the demise of capitalism, but a terminally ill capitalist system will not go to its total death on its own. If the working class and the world's oppressed cannot bury it, it will revive itself at an inestimable cost. Trump's exclusion of migrant workers and his promotion of racism are realistic manifestations of the ruling class's efforts to thwart the world working class's awareness of solidarity when their economy and politics are on shaky ground. The "Trump phenomenon" is actually a warning: if the crisis reaches an uncontrollable level, parts of the ruling class will turn to fascism and use war as a means to alleviate the crisis. The best way to deal with the danger of fascism—and in fact the only effective way—is the extensive mobilization of the working class to launch class struggle leading to socialist revolution. Therefore, it is time for truly progressive revolutionary forces to declare the international solidarity of the proletariat.
Regarding the rationality and superiority of socialism as demonstrated by "Eastern governance," especially the great achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics, many Communist Party leaders attending the 21st International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP) spoke highly of it and expressed a willingness to learn from China's development experience. Among them, Bishnu Rijal, a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Nepal, stated that New China faced many challenges in its early days, but China successfully overcame these difficulties and gradually achieved prosperity. Mauro Alboresi, National Secretary of the Communist Party of Italy, also affirmed the achievements made by the Communist Party of China through active exploration over the past decades. Gyula Thürmer, President of the Hungarian Workers' Party, believed that under the leadership of the CPC, China's achievements have very important theoretical and political significance, reflecting the superiority of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Carmelo Versaci, Secretary of International Relations of the Communist Party of Argentina, stated that the Argentine Communist Party pays close attention to the development achieved by China in various fields under the leadership of the CPC; China's development experience is a useful reference for Argentina, and he looks forward to strengthening relations with China in the future.
In view of the sharp contrast between East and West, Gennady Zyuganov, Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, clearly pointed out in a commemorative article that the collapse of the Soviet Union did not mean the bankruptcy of communism, because socialism still exists in Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, and North Korea, and China, following the socialist path, has achieved great success and become a world power. World capitalism is becoming more aggressive and brazen, completely throwing off the hypocritical masks of "democracy" and "human rights." Therefore, millions of working people throughout the world see a way out in the creative development of Marx's and Lenin's thoughts; they refuse to accept the neoliberal order that breeds poverty, inequality, and decay. Under such conditions, there is an urgent need to strengthen ties between communist forces and to place the solidarity of the world's working people on the agenda—a task that can only be completed by communists who stand firmly on a program of struggle for socialism.
Wadi'h Halabi, a member of the Economics Commission of the Communist Party USA, also emphasized in an article on the CPUSA's official website that China's high economic growth is a significant and positive factor. China's manufacturing labor productivity currently ranks among the highest in the world, enabling China to "set the rules," a goal the Soviet Union never approached. The reason China has been able to achieve such great success is inseparable from its adherence to the leadership of the Communist Party and the guidance of Marxism.
In short, while the Comintern did indeed have various problems and deficiencies, the correct attitude should be to recognize and solve these problems rather than discard this weapon. Since the dissolution of the Comintern, facts have continuously proven that without a unified international organization of the proletariat, things have deteriorated. Facts have shown time and again that the solidarity of world workers first requires the conscious unity of the world's Communist Parties, especially the socialist countries' Communist Parties playing a larger role.
V. What Kind of Union Do the World’s Socialist Forces Need in the Future?
Where is the future world socialist movement headed? This is the fifth key topic of concern for the foreign left on the centenary of the Comintern. To some extent, responding to this question is their fundamental purpose for commemorating the Comintern. Generally speaking, they commonly believe that to achieve the revival of the world socialist movement, one should adhere to internationalism and reconstruct the international union of socialist forces, just as in the Comintern era. However, there is no consensus on how to reconstruct this international union. Broadly speaking, there are three different viewpoints.
The first is the advocacy for reconstructing the union in the form of an international proletarian organization. This view is mainly held by Turkish leftist scholar Fikret Başkaya and Sungur Savran, leader of the Revolutionary Workers' Party of Turkey. However, they differ significantly in their understanding of the organizational principles such an international organization should adopt. Speaking at the "Centenary of the Comintern: From the Comintern to the Future World Party" seminar, Başkaya pointed out that to achieve human liberation, capitalism must be eliminated, which cannot be done within the scope of the nation-state. Therefore, discussing whether an international proletarian organization should be established is meaningless; the problem to be solved is what kind of international organization we need. He believes that a Comintern-style world Communist Party and its regulations requiring every member party to act in lockstep are long outdated; a federalist form is a more practical choice at present. The future new international organization should be similar to the First International, capable of accommodating different types of parties and ideologies. While Savran agreed with reconstructing international unity in the form of an international organization, he expressed a different opinion on the organizational principles of a "New International." He argued that the new international proletarian organization, as a world party, should follow the principle of democratic centralism rather than federalism. The Comintern was the manifestation of Leninist party organizational principles on the international stage; the new international organization should combine the struggle objectives of the "Fourth International" with the organizational principles of the Third International.
The second view explicitly states that conditions for reconstructing an international proletarian organization are not yet ripe. The Russian Communist Workers' Party, in the final statement of the aforementioned international seminar it hosted, pointed out that there is currently a lack of a large-scale, powerful proletarian party—like the Bolshevik Party—willing to take on the responsibility of forming a new revolutionary center. However, to advance the development of the world socialist movement, it remains necessary to coordinate the forces of various parties in theoretical fields and practical work for common action. In the theoretical field, opposing opportunism should be seen as an indispensable part of the struggle against imperialism and should be implemented in various international settings. In terms of practical work, the current primary task is to build on the basis of the class struggle against capitalism and all forms of exploitation and oppression...
...promote the development of mass resistance movements in various countries and the internationalization of trade union struggles, as well as foster the consolidation of proletarian parties and the expansion of their influence. In short, close exchange and mutual assistance among parties are necessary conditions for strengthening communist forces on an international scale [52]. Barhorn expressed a similar view, arguing that the timing for rebuilding a proletarian international organization is not yet ripe. His reasoning is that while the socialist movement has somewhat recovered from a long period of political dormancy, the workers' movements around the world have not yet posed a direct threat to the capitalist system. Currently, it is the social democratic parties engaged in reformist activities that are igniting public enthusiasm for socialism, rather than the direct heirs of the Comintern’s political thought. Therefore, he believes that today, a century after the founding of the Comintern, rather than directly emulating its policies, it is better to draw lessons from the experiences generated during its revolutionary movements: regarding internationalism as an essential component of the socialist project; respecting and emulating the seriousness and spirit of dedication of predecessor socialists in pursuit of their ideals; and driving the movement forward through concrete victories in daily struggles to expand the influence of socialism and lay the foundation for greater progress in future endeavors. At the same time, historical lessons must be drawn from the Comintern: when socialist forces unite internationally, they must emphasize the importance of solidarity and discipline while maintaining sufficient patience, open-mindedness, and humility to avoid repeating the Comintern's past mistakes [53].
Third is the view that the forms of rebuilding unity should currently be more diverse. The Communist Workers' Party of Finland advocates for rebuilding unity through internal communication and international conferences. The party noted in its report that to confront and thoroughly resolve the crises brought about by the capitalist mode of production, it is necessary for the working class to engage in organized class struggle; however, compared to the time of the Comintern's founding, the current global proletariat and national communist parties have richer experience in struggling against capitalism. Therefore, the central issue of cooperation between parties today should be the sharing of the reality and historical experience of class struggle in various countries. The form of cooperation should primarily consist of internal communication and international conferences, rather than returning to the old "World Communist Party" model of the Comintern. Each national party must respect the strategic and tactical choices made by other parties in their own national struggles; they must support the struggles led by fraternal parties without interfering in their internal affairs [54].
VI. Conclusion
Clearly, the parties, organizations, and scholars currently interested in and enthusiastic about the centenary of the Comintern mainly come from three groups: first, current communist parties or successors to former communist parties, most of which were established with the assistance of or under the influence of the Comintern; second, Trotskyist parties and organizations, which consider themselves closer to the original source of Marxism-Leninism and the "orthodox" heirs of the Comintern spirit; and third, some left-wing scholars who support the socialist cause and maintain a critical stance toward capitalism.
Superficially, the reason these three groups hold a unique enthusiasm for the Comintern centenary is that their origins are more or less related to the history of the Comintern, and their values and political positions share a degree of similarity with the Comintern's own radical political tendencies, leading them to harbor extraordinary sentiments toward the organization. However, if viewed against the background of the New Era, it is not difficult to see their true intentions and deep-seated reasons. Since the Socialist International degenerated into a neoliberal club in the 1990s, internationalism in any meaningful sense has ceased to exist, making the Comintern a natural object of research and remembrance for today's socialists [55]. Moreover, since the 2008 global financial crisis, the capitalist world has been plagued by chaos, while socialist forces represented by China have made steady progress. This seems to have brought an opportunity for the revival of the world socialist movement. In this context, the Comintern—as the "pinnacle of the organization of the world proletariat" and the "banner of the first great victories"—should naturally serve as a model for today's socialists to learn from as they seek the revival of their cause. As Zyuganov said, for the success of the socialist cause, it is crucial to remember and study the experience of the Comintern on the 100th anniversary of its founding [56]. Overall, rather than saying they are looking back at or mourning history, it is more accurate to say they are questioning reality and looking toward the future. They hope to summarize lessons through reflection, and to respond to the combined offensive of capitalist forces by strengthening solidarity, thereby opening a new chapter and driving the world socialist movement toward revival.
However, serious differences exist within foreign left-wing forces regarding how to strengthen international solidarity and unity to promote the revival of the world socialist movement. These differences are influenced both by historical memory and practical considerations. From the perspective of historical memory, those who believe the founding of the Comintern manifested the principles of proletarian internationalism tend to have a relatively positive evaluation of its historical impact and are more active in promoting international unity. Conversely, those who believe the Comintern was established for the selfish interests of a single Russian party generally place more emphasis on the negative effects of the "Great Party-ism" [21] style of the Russian party, and thus emphasize the importance of the principles of equality and autonomy when rebuilding international unity. Parties like the Communist Workers' Party of Finland, which remain wary of the Comintern’s past over-centralized organizational principles and the Russian party's dictatorial style of conduct, not only emphasize the diversity of forms and flexibility of principles in international unity but also explicitly oppose a return to the "World Communist Party" model. From the perspective of reality, with the exception of the real-existing socialist countries represented by China, left-wing parties and organizations in other countries are currently generally small in scale, decentralized in organization, and very limited in influence. Even a relatively large and unified communist party like the Communist Party of the Russian Federation has only some hundred thousand members. This is not to mention other communist parties and Trotskyist organizations, which are small groups of only a few thousand or even a few hundred people and lack organizational unity. In the process of international cooperation or joint action, they hope to receive support from "large parties" and "large countries," including material and moral aid, yet they also fear being influenced or manipulated by them and losing their autonomy. Thus, they often hold both expectations and misgivings regarding international unity.
Faced with the commemorative activities of foreign left-wing forces and the key issues they discuss or dispute, we should have a clear judgment and a defined position.
First, there must be an objective evaluation of the merits and demerits of the Comintern itself. The evaluation must be historical and dialectical. During its 24-year existence, the Comintern both vigorously defended the first socialist regime and effectively advanced the world socialist revolutionary movement; these two goals are not contradictory. The world socialist revolution always occurs sequentially, and the final victory of world socialism must always be completed through the revolutions of specific nation-states. Moreover, the establishment, consolidation, and development of the first socialist regime indeed set an example and pointed the way for the world socialist movement, while providing tangible moral and material support. Therefore, although the Comintern had some shortcomings in its organizational principles and operational methods, which caused some losses to the revolutionary movements of various countries, its positive role in the international communist movement is evident. Its role in promoting the establishment and growth of communist parties, supporting national liberation movements, and uniting the world proletariat is even more obvious to all. Consequently, Premier Zhou Enlai’s judgment on the Comintern—that "it was good at both ends but had some problems; the middle was poor, but not without merit" [57]—should still be our basic position on this issue today.
Second, there must be a sober judgment of the current development trend of world socialism. Currently, world socialism is no longer a "specter" wandering only in Europe as it was at the birth of scientific socialism in the 19th century; it is no longer surging ahead as it did during the period of war and revolution in the first half of the 20th century; nor is it in the temporary low ebb and total defense that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe at the end of the 20th century. However, we must not overestimate the situation because of this. We should soberly see that the "rise of the East and decline of the West" in the global balance of power does not equate to a "rise of socialism and decline of capitalism" in terms of the comparison between the two systems. Furthermore, the visions and imaginations of left-wing forces regarding the world socialist movement do not equate to a reality of its upsurge. Although current world left-wing forces are active and issuing consistent calls to uphold socialist and internationalist principles, their proposals for rebuilding international unity often remain at the level of generalities or empty slogans. The working-class parties, as the "vanguard," should and can act at the front line of struggle, but these parties have failed to achieve true unity either domestically or internationally, let alone seize the opportunity to conduct powerful and influential substantive social movements. Therefore, viewed rationally, we can only say that world socialism "has begun to enter a period of gradually emerging from its low ebb and seeking revitalization amidst development and change" [58].
Third, there must be a clear attitude and firm stance toward contemporary international unity. The 170-plus-year history of the world socialist movement has repeatedly proven that there have always been centers in its development (for instance, Britain and France during the First International, Germany during the Second International, and Russia during the Third International). This history also proves that only the international unity and solidarity of the world working class and the international victory of socialism can serve as a powerful guarantee for stopping war and maintaining peace. Currently, China has gradually moved closer to the center of the world stage, and the developmental achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics have boosted confidence in the world socialist movement. However, this "center" is not the same as previous centers. The current center does not mean rebuilding an "International," nor does it mean that "China takes the lead" as some foreign left-wing parties or scholars constantly call for, and certainly not the extension of democratic centralism—applicable to intra-Party organizational principles—to inter-party relations. Of course, "not taking the lead" does not mean inaction. "Enormous size entails enormous responsibility" [22]; as the world's largest communist party and largest socialist country today, we will assume greater responsibility. This responsibility, on the one hand, is naturally and primarily to manage our own affairs well, continue to promote reform and seek development, and demonstrate the superiority of the socialist system through the achievements of our own construction. This will revitalize scientific socialism and enhance the confidence and morale of world socialist forces. On the other hand, based on upholding the four principles of "independence, complete equality, mutual respect, and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs," we should strengthen exchanges, dialogue, and cooperation with world left-wing parties. Through institutionalized or non-institutionalized, bilateral or multilateral international seminars and thematic conferences, we should work with world left-wing and progressive forces to analyze the situation, discuss countermeasures, and build consensus, while continuously advancing theoretical and practical innovation. We must not only tell the China story well, share China's experience, and contribute Chinese wisdom to the world, but also unite the world's progressive forces and provide clear-cut moral and practical support to the just struggles of people around the world. Such a responsibility is both necessary and proper, whether for advancing the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics itself or for promoting the revival of the world socialist movement and maintaining world peace.
Beijing: Qiushi Publishing House, 1984. [26] Gao Fang et al., History of the Three Internationals (三个国际的历史), Beijing: China Youth Press, 1999. [27] Jiang Hui, "World Socialism in the 21st Century: New Landscape, New Characteristics, and New Trends" (21世纪的世界社会主义：新格局、新特征、新趋势), World Socialism Studies (世界社会主义研究), No. 1, 2016. [28] Lin Jianhua, "The Practical Logic of the Communist International from the Perspective of World Revolution" (世界革命视域下共产国际的实践逻辑), Social Sciences in China (中国社会科学), No. 8, 2014. [29] Li Jingzhi, "Evaluating the Historical Status and Contributions of the Communist International by Seeking Truth from Facts" (实事求是评价共产国际历史地位和贡献), Theoretical Horizon (理论视野), No. 6, 2019. [30] Chai Shangjin, "Changes Unseen in a Century and the Reconstruction of the Relationship between Capitalism and Socialism" (世界大变局与资本主义、社会主义两种制度关系重构), Studies on Marxism (马克思主义研究), No. 10, 2019. [31] Liu Xingang and Cheng Enfu, "The Historical Value of the Communist International and the Contemporary Value of its Spirit—Written on the Occasion of the 100th Anniversary of the Founding of the Communist International" (共产国际的历史价值及其精神的时代价值——写在共产国际成立100周年之际), World Socialism Studies (世界社会主义研究), No. 12, 2019.
Notes 1 Peter Schwarz, “One Hundred Years Since the Formation of the Communist International”, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/03/20/comm-m20.html. 2 Kemal Okuyan, “Struggle for Communism: 100 years of Political Heritage”, https://www.tkp.org.tr/en/haberler/struggle-communism-100-years-political-heritage. 3 See [Russia] Gennady Zyuganov, "The Precious Experience of the Communist International" (共产国际的宝贵经验), translated/abridged by Liu Shuchun, World Socialism Studies (世界社会主义研究), No. 5, 2019. 4 Historical Documents of the International Communist Movement (国际共产主义运动历史文献), Vol. 30, Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2012, p. 679. 5 Larry Holmes, “A Return to Leninism: The Centennial Anniversary of the Comintern”, https://www.workers.org/2019/02/21/a-return-to-leninism-the-centennial-anniversary-of-the-comintern/. 6 Loren Balhorn, “The World Revolution That Wasn't”, https://jacobinmag.com/2019/03/comintern-lenin-german-revolution-ussr-revolution. 7 KKE, “100 Years of the Communist International - Statement of the Central Committee of the KKE”, https://inter.kke.gr/en/articles/100-years-of-the-communist-international/. 8 Peter Schwarz, “One Hundred Years Since the Formation of the Communist International”, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/03/20/comm-m20.html. 9 Rob Sewell, “100 Years on the Founding of the Communist International”, Socialist Appeal, Mar 4, 2019. 10 Historical Documents of the International Communist Movement (国际共产主义运动历史文献), Vol. 30, Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2012, p. 648. 11 Matt Swagler, “When Communism Became Black”, https://www.rosalux.de/en/publication/id/40161/when-communism-became-black/. 12 David Broder, “Machete and Sickle”, https://jacobinmag.com/2019/03/latin-american-communism-comintern-third-international. 13 DIP, “Conference on the Centenary of the Comintern: Anti-imperialist Fury! Internationalist Enthusiasm! Working Class Determination!”, http://redmed.org/article/conference-centenary-comintern-anti-imperialist-fury-internationalist-enthusiasm-working. 14 [Russia] Gennady Zyuganov, "The Precious Experience of the Communist International" (共产国际的宝贵经验), translated/abridged by Liu Shuchun, World Socialism Studies (世界社会主义研究), No. 5, 2019. 15 Simon Basketter, “The Comintern - Organising to Fight for a Global Revolution”, Socialist Worker, Issue 2644, March 5, 2019. 16 Loren Balhorn, “The World Revolution That Wasn't”, https://jacobinmag.com/2019/03/comintern-lenin-german-revolution-ussr-revolution. 17 Mímir Kristjánsson, “To Moscow and Back”, https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/03/communist-international-founding-norwegian-labor-party. 18 KTP, “Report at the International Conference Dedicated to the 100th Anniversary of the Founding of the Communist International”, https://inter.rkrp.ru/articles/communist-party-of-finland-report-at-the-international-conference-dedicated-to-the-100th-anniversary-of-the-founding-of-the-communist-international/. 19 Historical Documents of the International Communist Movement (国际共产主义运动历史文献), Vol. 29, Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2012, pp. 247-248. 20 Historical Documents of the International Communist Movement (国际共产主义运动历史文献), Vol. 29, Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2012, p. 118. 21 Historical Documents of the International Communist Movement (国际共产主义运动历史文献), Vol. 29, Beijing: Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2012, p. 257. 22 Internationalist Communist Tendency, “Founding of the Comintern - Then and Now”, https://libcom.org/blog/founding-comintern-then-now-03032019. 23 Communist Party of Turkey, “Legacy of Comintern and the Contemporary Priorities of the Relations between Communist Parties”, https://inter.rkrp.ru/articles/communist-party-of-turkey-legacy-of-comintern-and-the-contemporary-priorities-of-the-relations-between-communist-parties/. 24 Carlos Serrano Ferreira, “Building a New International Is Necessary and Urgent”, Globalizations, Vol. 16, No. 7, 2019. 25 David Spenger, “American Marxists Strategize for Socialism in Our Lifetime”, https://socialistrevolution.org/american-marxists-strategize-for-socialism-in-our-lifetime. 26 “IMT World School 2019 Celebrates 100 Years of the Communist International”, Socialist Appeal, Aug 2, 2019. 27 Larry Holmes, “
In summary, the reflection and commemoration of the centenary of the Communist International by the international Left demonstrate that while the Comintern is a thing of the past, its spirit of internationalism remains evergreen. Under the current historical conditions of the New Era, the exploration of "Chinese-path modernization" and the proposal of a "community with a shared future for humanity" are precisely the creative developments of the Comintern’s pursuit of human liberation within the contemporary context. This not only responds to the historical mission of the international communist movement but also provides a "Chinese program" for solving the common problems facing the world today.
The historical experience of the Communist International tells us that the international communist movement must constantly uphold the fundamentals and break new ground [27]. On one hand, we must persist in the guidance of Marxist-Leninist theories and the goal of human liberation; on the other hand, we must proceed from the actual conditions of each country, seek truth from facts, and promote the Sinicization and localization of Marxism. Only by achieving "solidarity in diversity" can the cause of world socialism move from the "low ebb" toward a "period of revitalization" [28].
As Xi Jinping emphasized at the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-Level Meeting, no country can handle the various challenges facing mankind alone, and no country can retreat into a self-contained island. The world’s political parties should follow the trend of the times, grasp the pulse of human progress, and contribute to the building of a community with a shared future for humanity. This is the best way to commemorate the spirit of the Communist International today. We must persist over the long term to achieve high-quality development in the international communist movement and contribute more to the progress of human civilization.
(Author Bios: Xuan Chuanshu, Deputy Director of the Institute of Chinese Marxism Studies at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, Director of the Foreign Socialism Research Center at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, Researcher and Doctoral Supervisor; Yu Ming, Graduate Student in Scientific Socialism and International Communist Movement at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences.)
Online Editor: Zhang Jian Source: Marxist Studies (Mǎkèsīzhǔyì Yánjiū), Issue 3, 2020.