Gong Yutao: The Basic Connotation, Major Impact, and Multidimensional Evaluation of the Bolshevization of the Communist International
Since its founding, the Communist International (Comintern), driven by both internal and external factors, saw its goals, tasks, and strategic tactics undergo multiple major adjustments and turning points. The introduction and practice of the "Bolshevization" slogan was a concrete reflection of these major shifts. Bolshevization was a task-oriented goal set by the Comintern for its various national sections; it later evolved into a vigorous movement affecting all sections, exerting a significant and far-reaching influence on these branches and the international communist movement as a whole. A scientific evaluation of the Comintern’s Bolshevization slogan and its practical application is of great historical and contemporary significance.
I. The Introduction of the "Bolshevization" Slogan and the Interpretation of its Connotations
The Fifth World Congress of the Communist International officially proposed the "Bolshevization" slogan and provided an initial interpretation of its content. Building upon this, the Fifth Enlarged Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International (ECCI) further elaborated on Bolshevization, allowing it to become theorized and systematized.
(1) The Introduction and Preliminary Interpretation of the "Bolshevization" Slogan
The Fifth World Congress of the Comintern, held from June 17 to July 8, 1924, was the first congress convened after the death of Lenin—the Comintern's primary founder and most profound influence. It was also held at a time when capitalist countries had entered a period of relative stability and the world proletarian revolution had entered a general ebb tide. The main agenda of this congress was to formulate new tactics for the Comintern.
Because the Comintern leadership lacked a sufficiently clear understanding of the new global situation and the new revolutionary landscape, and due to the lingering influence of "Left" thought [1], the congress formulated new tactics characterized by "Left" adventurism. Under the influence of these new tactics, the Comintern held that: "while the crisis of capitalism is increasingly incurable—even if it is long-lasting—the 'subjective factor' of the proletarian ranks and their communist vanguard (the Party), namely the level of organization, is the central issue of the entire historical era." The slogan of "Bolshevization" was the concrete manifestation of the search for a solution to this "central issue," and it received the support of the vast majority of delegates. The Comintern emphasized: "The most important task of the Communist International in the current period of activity is the Bolshevization of the sections of the Communist International." This demonstrates the degree of importance the Comintern attached to Bolshevization, which naturally became the "most important task" for the various sections at that time.
While proposing the slogan, the Comintern also provided a preliminary interpretation, emphasizing that "the Bolshevization of the Party means transplanting everything that was and is international and of universal significance in Russian Bolshevism to our various sections." It specifically pointed out that "this slogan must by no means be understood as the mechanical transfer of the entire experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party to other parties." The "Theses on the Propaganda Activities of the Comintern and its Sections" adopted by the Fifth Congress emphasized that Bolshevization "is not a mechanical copy of the concrete measures of the Russian Communist Party, but the application of Bolshevik methods to the concrete circumstances of the current historical era in each country." This was affirmed by the delegates and various national communist parties. Furthermore, the Comintern proposed the basic requirements for the sections to achieve Bolshevization: first, the party should be a true mass party, skilled at maintaining the closest and most inseparable ties with the working masses and acting as the articulator of their needs and expectations; second, the party should possess maneuverability, meaning it should be skilled in using all strategic means to deal with the enemy; third, the party should be essentially a revolutionary, Marxist party, striving in all circumstances to accelerate the moment of proletarian victory over the bourgeoisie; fourth, the party should be a unified party, a monolithic party that does not allow the existence of factions, currents, or blocs [2]; fifth, the party should carry out persistent propaganda and organizational work within the bourgeois armies. These five requirements were proposed by the Comintern based on historical experience and practical needs, representing the initial conception of the methods and goals for achieving Bolshevization.
(2) The Theorization and Systematization of Bolshevization
The Fifth Enlarged Plenum of the ECCI, held from March 21 to April 6, 1925, adopted the "Resolution on the Bolshevization of the Communist International Parties." Building on the slogan proposed at the Fifth Congress, it further elaborated on the connotations of Bolshevization across theoretical, ideological, organizational, and practical policy dimensions. The content primarily included:
First, it reiterated the necessity of Bolshevization for all parties. When the pace of revolution slows or is delayed, the significance of the "Bolshevization" slogan is even greater, because it is precisely in such a situation that "Communists should work more tenaciously to build a fortress against vacillation, keep the best elements of the proletarian vanguard within our ranks, increase their numbers, hold high the banner of proletarian revolution to unite the core of the proletariat in the most difficult circumstances, and plan and organize the proletarian revolution in any event."
Second, the danger of Right-wing deviation and Ultra-Left tendencies must be overcome. The Bolshevization slogan arose in the struggle against the Right. It was necessary to recognize the various dangers posed by Right-wing distortions of Comintern tactics: "The Bolshevization of the Party should first and foremost be directed against these Right-wing distortions, which would directly destroy the historical mission of the Communist International." At the same time, one must guard against and oppose Ultra-Left tendencies, as they are often merely opportunism in disguise and objectively aid the bourgeoisie and the Social Democrats.
Third, the specific conditions of Bolshevization must be considered. There is no universal panacea for the Bolshevization of the Comintern’s sections; "true Bolshevization first requires an exact consideration of all concrete details of time and place." While the experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party must be valued and applied, it cannot be mechanically copied to other countries; the specific conditions of each nation must be considered. "Bolshevization is the doctrine of applying the universal principles of Leninism to the specific, concrete situation of a given country. Bolshevization is the doctrine of grasping the essential 'link' that can pull the entire 'chain.' And this 'link' cannot be the same in every country, because the socio-political situations we observe are vastly different."
Fourth, theoretical armament with Marxism and Leninism must be maintained. One must be familiar with the theory and practice of Marxism and Leninism, while not rejecting the legacy of previous generations of revolutionaries. "The contempt for theory emerging in many parties is a great obstacle to the movement of Comintern parties toward true Bolshevization"; "mastering Leninist theory is the prerequisite for the successful realization of Bolshevization in each party."
Fifth, every effort must be made to win the support of the broad masses, especially the working-class masses. The slogan "to the masses" [3] must be upheld and implemented, "organizing the mass proletarian revolutionary movement under the banner of Marx and Lenin's thought"—this is "defining Bolshevization in its most universal form." The correct united front strategy must be maintained: "the united front strategy has been and remains a method of revolutionary agitation and mass organization." Importance must be placed on actively leading and participating in trade union work, even taking the initiative to work within "hostile trade unions" to win over the majority of the working class. Attention must also be paid to work with youth and women: "One of the tasks of Bolshevization is to win over all young workers throughout the world"; "attracting millions of working-class women into the struggle is also one of the vital prerequisites of Bolshevization."
Sixth, the question of the proletariat's allies must be correctly resolved. Correct and skillful alliance strategies must be adopted for the specific environment of the struggle; in particular, the peasantry must be actively recruited as an ally, truly uniting them around the Communist Party. A correct national policy must be formulated and executed: "Without a correct policy on the national question, there can be no Bolshevization."
Seventh, the construction of the Party's organization, cadre force, internal democracy, and discipline must be strengthened. "If the Party does not have a tightly structured, well-ordered, and flexible organization, even the most brilliant communist policy cannot become the collective wealth of the party membership, let alone the wealth of the proletarian masses through those members." The primary and fundamental organizational form of the Bolshevik party should be the production cell. By establishing party cells in factories and actively working within trade unions and factory committees, their political functions and roles can be fully realized. A strong cadre force must be forged, the backbone of the party must be formed through practical work, and leadership cadres should be selected from advanced workers who excel in energy, knowledge, ability, and loyalty to the party. The issue of intra-party democracy must be viewed concretely, but in all cases, a spirit of equality among members and a certain freedom of internal criticism should be maintained. The Party's iron discipline must be upheld: "The iron discipline of the proletariat is one of the very important prerequisites for Bolshevization."
Eighth, the leadership of the Communist International over its sections must be maintained. All sections must maintain unity of will and action with the Comintern, opposing separatist and federalist tendencies, and eliminating the influence of erroneous ideas such as isolationism and sectarianism. This is necessary for building a "unified world Communist Party" and for the ultimate victory of the proletarian revolution.
It can be said that the Comintern established a very broad set of parameters for Bolshevization, with unified and specific requirements ranging from the political and ideological to the organizational levels. Overall, through the further elaboration in the "Resolution on the Bolshevization of the Communist International Parties," Bolshevization was essentially theorized and systematized, becoming more targeted in its practice and thus pointing the way for the sections to achieve it. Additionally, the twelve conditions for the Bolshevization of parties proposed by Stalin were repeatedly mentioned and studied by the Comintern and its sections as Stalin's political status rose, effectively becoming an important supplement to the movement. Once the slogan was raised and its tasks refined, the practice of Bolshevization commenced under the Comintern's promotion.
II. The Impact of Bolshevization
The "Bolshevization" slogan and its related requirements became the code of conduct for the various sections. After the close of the Fifth World Congress, communist parties in various countries successively launched Bolshevization efforts, a movement that produced significant and far-reaching effects.
(1) The Impact of Bolshevization on Communist Parties in European and American Countries
The Comintern attached great importance to the Bolshevization of communist parties in the West. Both the "Theses on Tactics" adopted by the Fifth Congress and the ECCI resolution on Bolshevization directly prescribed the tasks for parties in countries such as Germany, Britain, and France. These parties were the first to initiate the process. The ECCI directly intervened in the process of Bolshevizing these Western parties with the goal of guiding them to quickly become Bolshevik parties that met the Comintern's standards.
1. The Bolshevization of the Communist Party of Germany
Germany, the homeland of Marx and Engels, had long been at the forefront of the communist movement. The Communist Party of Germany (KPD) was not only a significant political force in Germany and Europe but also an active participant and major influence within the Comintern. The Comintern placed high importance on and actively intervened in the KPD’s Bolshevization. Initially, this was primarily reflected in the restructuring of the party's leadership, a process accompanied by relatively intense debate and struggle.
In April 1924, the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) convened its Ninth National Congress in Frankfurt and formed a new Central Committee. The Left faction, primarily represented by Arkadi Maslow, seized leadership of the Party Center. This election result did not actually align with the wishes of the Comintern, as Maslow and others possessed a strong inclination toward "independence and autonomy," making it difficult for the Comintern to "feel at ease." However, faced with a fait accompli, the Comintern could only recognize the leadership while attempting to constrain and guide it.
In early 1925, disputes and arguments broke out between the KPD leadership under Maslow and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) regarding issues such as the transfer of party membership for former KPD leaders like Heinrich Brandler and Stalin’s talk "On the Prospects of the Communist Party of Germany and Bolshevization." This underscored the "boldness" and independence of the KPD under Maslow, further fueling dissatisfaction among the Comintern leadership toward the new KPD leadership. During the subsequent German presidential election, Maslow and others again diverged significantly from the Comintern—particularly regarding Maslow's proposal to form a coalition with the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and support their presidential candidate. This was met with strenuous opposition from the Comintern, which viewed the SPD as a "dangerous enemy" [4]. Following the election, Maslow and his associates, growing increasingly resentful and disillusioned with Comintern intervention, displayed an even more pronounced trend toward "independence and autonomy," leading to intensifying friction between the KPD and the Comintern.
Subsequently, Maslow’s public distribution of books criticizing policies proposed by Lenin, along with the KPD’s "private" dispatch of delegations to contact other European Communist Parties without going through the Comintern, caused the Comintern to lose all trust in Maslow. Despite Comintern intervention, the Tenth National Congress of the KPD in July 1925 still exhibited a strong streak of "independence and autonomy," leaving the Comintern leadership deeply embarrassed and unsettled. Dmitry Zakharovich Manuilsky, who was sent to attend the meeting, returned to Moscow and wrote a report full of anxiety, suggesting there was a danger of the KPD splitting from the Comintern. In August of the same year, the Executive Committee of the Communist International (ECCI) held a special meeting to study the "German Question," denouncing the KPD for its "anti-Moscow" and anti-Comintern tendencies. It held leaders like Maslow directly responsible and accused Maslow of attempting to establish a "dictatorship" within the Party. After the meeting, the ECCI issued an "Open Letter to the Communist Party of Germany," publicly expressing dissatisfaction and criticizing the leadership for failing to adopt Comintern advice and implement its tactics. Under multi-faceted pressure from the Comintern, the KPD ultimately compromised, replaced its leadership, and expressed acceptance of the ECCI's criticism, pledging to review past policies and unreservedly execute Comintern tactics in the future. In October, a KPD party conference passed a resolution condemning Maslow and other former leaders for serious errors, including sectarianism and clandestine anti-Comintern activities. The KPD thus gradually moved onto the "track" of Bolshevization desired by the Comintern.
2. Bolshevization of Communist Parties in Other European and American Countries
The process of Bolshevization in the French Communist Party (PCF) was also far from smooth. In January 1925, the PCF held its Fourth National Congress, where fierce debates and struggles erupted around Bolshevization. Comintern representatives demanded in their speeches that the PCF must achieve Bolshevization. Although the congress passed relevant resolutions, opinions within the party were not unified, and some individuals even explicitly voiced their opposition. After the congress, these figures spoke out publicly or wrote directly to the ECCI to express opposition to Bolshevization and certain Comintern tactics, causing intense concern within the Comintern. In January 1926, the Presidium of the ECCI characterized these individuals as Rightists and instructed the PCF to watch for internal Rightist activity, identifying it as the primary danger facing the party at the time. Under pressure from the Comintern, the Plenary Session of the PCF Central Committee in January accepted the Comintern’s instructions, condemned the words and deeds of the internal Rightists, and even expelled some members. The forces opposing Bolshevization within the PCF were severely weakened, opposition voices gradually faded, and achieving Bolshevization gradually became the "consensus" of the PCF.
During the Bolshevization of the Communist Party of Italy (PCI), a struggle emerged between Antonio Francesco Gramsci and others against the Ultra-Left faction represented primarily by Amadeo Bordiga. As the then-leader of the PCI, Bordiga frequently proposed views that did not align with Comintern positions, meeting opposition from the Comintern and pro-Comintern figures like Gramsci. With Comintern support, Gramsci replaced Bordiga as the new leader of the PCI. However, because Bordiga still held significant influence and a following within the party, he and his supporters did not fall silent after losing power; instead, they continued to propose views that differed from or even contradicted Comintern instructions and resolutions. Consequently, the debate and struggle did not cease but became more intense. Therefore, reducing and neutralizing the influence of Bordiga and his followers, maintaining the party’s centralized unity, and executing Comintern tactics became the primary tasks of the PCI’s Bolshevization. Under the guidance and assistance of the Comintern, Gramsci and others waged a determined struggle, pushing the PCI steadily toward the goal of Bolshevization.
The focus of Bolshevization for the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) lay in launching a full-scale trade union movement. Although some success was achieved, there remained a persistent gap between their efforts and the union movement influenced by the British Labour Party. Additionally, Communist Parties in other Western countries, such as Czechoslovakia and the United States, also initiated Bolshevization relatively early.
Generally speaking, although the Bolshevization of Communist Parties in Europe and America faced twists and turns—with some internal struggles being quite fierce—under the guidance and pressure of the Comintern, their Bolshevization was, at least on the surface, largely completed. Of course, this was a dynamic process; the Bolshevization of each party was continuously adjusted in line with changes in Comintern tactics and requirements, as well as shifts in national and regional situations. The result of Bolshevization in these Western parties was the general formation of leadership collectives that accepted Comintern leadership and executed its instructions and resolutions. They were able to maintain consistency with the Comintern in both will and action, significantly enhancing the Comintern’s power of intervention and control over these parties. This had multiple effects on these parties and the revolutionary struggles they led.
(II) The Impact of Bolshevization on the Communist Party of China
After the Comintern raised the slogan of "Bolshevization," it initially focused on and guided its European and American sections. However, driven by internal and external factors, Bolshevization extended to sections outside the West in a short period. As the Chinese section of the Communist International, the Communist Party of China (CPC) also began its journey of Bolshevization within this broader context.
Because several CPC members attended the Fifth World Congress of the Comintern, the CPC received the "Bolshevization" slogan and its requirements almost simultaneously with the Western parties. Subsequently, amid the high tide of the Great Revolution [5], the Bolshevization of the CPC began its slow start. The Fourth National Congress of the CPC, held in January 1925, provided an initial response to the "Bolshevization" slogan, proposing that Comintern resolutions should be implemented as much as possible. It specifically noted that the Bolshevization of the Party "is even more worthy of our special attention and should become the theoretical basis for educational work within the Party." In a sense, this raised the curtain on the CPC's realization of Bolshevization.
The enlarged meeting of the CPC Executive Committee in July 1926 for the first time proposed Bolshevization as a objective for party building. The meeting emphasized that one of the greatest characteristics of a Bolshevik party is organizational work, stating: "If a naive party is to achieve Bolshevization, to transform from a small group into a mass party, from an ideological group into a group of action, and from work based in branches to large-scale mass action, it must rely on good organizational work." The meeting systematically expounded the significance, methods, and future direction of organizational work, reflecting the spiritual principles of Bolshevization. The subsequent actions taken by the CPC to purge corrupt elements and opportunists to address internal impurity were practical manifestations of Bolshevization. The Fifth National Congress of the CPC in April 1927 once again emphasized the goals and tasks of Bolshevization, stressing that the party should become a Bolshevik party ideologically, organizationally, and in practice.
After the failure of the Great Revolution, the CPC further recognized the importance and necessity of Bolshevization. For instance, "Central Circular No. 16," issued in November 1927, emphasized: "The primary task of the Party at present is to create a truly Bolshevik party. Without such a party, no matter how great the objective revolutionary tide is, victory cannot be achieved; even if victory is won, it cannot be truly consolidated or self-sustaining." "Central Circular No. 17," issued in December of the same year, explicitly stated that the Bolshevization of the Party organization was the most urgent and important issue at hand. If the Communist Party did not have a correct Bolshevik organization, it would not become a force of the masses, nor could it fulfill its historical mission as the head and leader in the worker-peasant revolution. This demonstrates that the CPC had realized it could only shoulder its historical mission by achieving Bolshevization and becoming a true Bolshevik party. This was a realization bought with lessons of blood, reflecting a higher level of cognitive awareness and a more urgent need for Bolshevization after the baptism of the Great Revolution.
Under the influence and intervention of the Comintern—marked by the convening of the Sixth National Congress of the CPC in Moscow—Bolshevization became the central goal of Party building, developing toward acceleration and comprehensiveness. In his "Opening Address to the Sixth National Congress of the Communist Party of China," Qu Qiubai proposed the goal of "making the Party completely Bolshevized." The "Letter from the CPC Central Committee to All Comrades" published in November 1928 further raised the slogan and task of all comrades struggling together to complete the Party’s Bolshevization. In this process of accelerated and comprehensive Bolshevization, the CPC gradually became a party that completely accepted Comintern leadership and resolutely executed its instructions and resolutions. This had a dual impact on the CPC and the Chinese revolution; in particular, the trends of "Leftist" deviation, dogmatism, and the "sacralization" [6] of Comintern directives brought a series of setbacks and serious disasters. However, the Comintern was satisfied with the CPC’s Bolshevization during this period, even praising the CPC as one of the finest and strongest sections of the Communist International.
After the Zunyi Conference [7], the development of the CPC and the revolutionary cause it led reached a great turning point; Bolshevization returned to the right track and entered a new stage of development. Particularly with the introduction of the proposition of the "Sinicization of Marxism," Bolshevization was endowed with new connotations. In fact, during different periods of the CPC's push for Bolshevization, Communists such as Li Dazhao and Mao Zedong worked to integrate Bolshevization with Chinese reality, promoting the Sinicization of Bolshevization and achieving positive results in practice. For instance, as early as 1925, Ren Bishi proposed that Bolshevization did not mean imitating the experience of the Russian party regardless of the actual situation; rather, the spirit of true Bolshevization is to be able to apply experience and theory according to actual conditions. This shows that even in the initial stages of the CPC's Bolshevization, some Party leaders recognized the importance and necessity of its Sinicization and strove to push it in that direction. Generally speaking, however, the Sinicization of Bolshevization only gradually became a party-wide consensus and was promoted across the whole Party after the Zunyi Conference. This was also related to the shift in the Comintern’s leadership and working methods following its Seventh World Congress.
Against the broad background of the Communist Party of China (CPC) actively advocating and vigorously promoting the Sinicization of Marxism, Bolshevization acquired new vitality, and the possibility of building a Bolshevik party consistent with China's national conditions and revolutionary needs became a reality.
In 1939, in the "Introducing The Communist" [8], Mao Zedong proposed the objective and mission of "building a nationwide, broad mass-based Chinese Communist Party that is fully consolidated ideologically, politically, and organizationally, and is Bolshevized." To win victory in the New Democratic Revolution, the CPC urgently needed to become such a party. At that time, both the subjective and objective conditions for building such a party were in place, and the Bolshevization of the CPC had, for the first time, a relatively complete and systematic set of goals and tasks. During the Yan'an Rectification Movement [9], building the CPC into a brand-new Bolshevik party became a core task.
On November 21 and 23, 1942, at a meeting of senior cadres of the Northwest Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, Mao Zedong explained Stalin’s "Twelve Conditions for Bolshevization" point by point in light of the CPC's specific circumstances. He put forward further targeted requirements for the CPC's Bolshevization and argued that "these twenty points [10] are well worth our careful study." However, he particularly emphasized that they "are not dogma and are subject to change." This fully embodied the spirit of the Sinicization of Bolshevization, raising the CPC's understanding of Bolshevization to a new height.
Through these efforts, the CPC truly became a Sinicized Bolshevik party, which held great significance for the development of the CPC, the Chinese Revolution, and even the international communist movement.
In summary, the Comintern's slogan of "Bolshevization" and its associated requirements possessed a degree of universality and exerted a broad influence on all branches. Bolshevization was, in fact, a party-building movement led and guided by the Comintern for communist parties in various countries; it also became the primary objective for Comintern branches for a period of time. Naturally, there were differences in the timing of Bolshevization across different branches, as well as differences in the degree of Comintern intervention. Although the Comintern was dissolved in 1943, the influence of Bolshevization was long-lasting. After the end of World War II, the fact that communist parties in various countries were able to maintain close ties and even cooperate—and that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) was able to form the Cominform (Communist Information Bureau) with several parties and exert significant influence over many of them—was more or less related to the Bolshevization carried out by the Comintern. Ultimately, Bolshevization shaped many commonalities among communist parties. It can be said that the Bolshevization of the Comintern and its branches directly or indirectly propelled the international communist movement through a magnificent and turbulent period of history.
The Comintern's proposal of the "Bolshevization" slogan was not a momentary whim but the result of the combined effect of multiple factors. This slogan and its requirements possessed both rationality and certain biases. The practice of Bolshevization had a massive impact; taken as a whole, its positive effects were the mainstream. We must affirm its positive role while also seriously reflecting on its negative effects.
(1) The proposal of the "Bolshevization" slogan possessed historical inevitability and practical necessity
The Comintern defined itself as a "revolutionary international," born from the concept of world revolution and flourishing for the goal of world revolution. In its early period, the Comintern clearly defined its historical mission: "To unite the forces of all truly revolutionary parties of the proletariat throughout the world, thereby facilitating and accelerating the victory of the communist revolution across the globe." Promoting world revolution naturally became the core strategy that the Comintern long persisted in and implemented, never abandoning it even when facing various difficulties. To realize this historical mission, it was necessary not only to establish communist parties worldwide—especially in major countries—and for these parties to be capable and firm in leading their domestic revolutions to victory, but also for these parties to maintain consistency with the Comintern in will and action, carrying out revolutionary activities under the Comintern's unified leadership.
The reality at the time was that many communist parties were clearly insufficient in their ability to lead domestic revolutions. Moreover, even becoming a Comintern branch did not mean they would naturally remain consistent with the Comintern. The failure of revolutionary actions by communist parties in countries like Bulgaria and Germany, combined with internal struggles, chaos, and varying attitudes toward the Comintern within these parties, further exacerbated the Comintern's suspicions and anxieties. Based on these circumstances, the Comintern hoped to resolve these problems as much as possible through the Bolshevization of each party. When the revolution was at an ebb, a Bolshevized communist party could carry out struggles under Comintern guidance and lead the revolution toward a high tide; when favorable revolutionary conditions emerged, these parties could seized the opportunity under Comintern guidance to lead the revolution to victory. In particular, the Comintern was at one point influenced by "Leftist" thought, leading to misjudgments of the era's situation and the revolutionary landscape, which resulted in an urgent desire for communist parties—especially those in Europe and America—to actively carry out revolutionary actions and seize state power under its guidance. To some extent, this was the direct incentive for the Comintern to propose the "Bolshevization" slogan and the direct reason why it regarded "Bolshevization" as its most important task. Objectively speaking, Bolshevization did help the parties of various countries resolve many problems and played a positive role in their internal and revolutionary struggles.
The Comintern also defined itself as an "international Bolshevik organization," but if only the Comintern was Bolshevized without the Bolshevization of its national branches, the title "international Bolshevik organization" would be a misnomer and inevitably face questioning. As emphasized at the Fifth Congress of the Comintern: "Only when the main branches of the Comintern truly become Bolshevik parties can the Communist International become a unified, worldwide Bolshevik party filled with Leninist thought, not in words, but in deed." Furthermore, the Comintern defined itself as a "unified worldwide communist party." Undoubtedly, a "unified worldwide communist party" has much higher requirements for its branch members than a mere alliance of parties has for its members. Proposing the "Bolshevization" slogan to ensure branch members achieved Bolshevization and became true Bolshevik parties could maximize the guarantee that the Comintern would become a "unified worldwide communist party." From its founding, the Comintern emphasized authority, centralization, and unity. However, challenges to the Comintern's authority and opposition to centralization and unity by some national leaders made the Comintern realize the importance and urgency of further strengthening these principles. The Comintern hoped to strengthen its own authority through Bolshevization, while simultaneously strengthening the internal centralization and unity of each branch and the Comintern's unified leadership. As the Bolshevization of the branches progressed, the Comintern achieved its goals to a certain extent.
The proposal of the "Bolshevization" slogan had its historical inevitability and practical necessity; it was a requirement for the Comintern’s own construction and the realization of solidarity and unity, as well as a need for the development of the revolution at that time. For the communist parties of various countries then, Bolshevization also carried major practical significance, satisfying to a degree the needs of their own party-building and the revolutionary actions they led.
(2) The positive effects of Bolshevization were the mainstream
The "Bolshevization" slogan and its related requirements were, on the whole, rational and appropriate. As the name suggests, the Bolshevization of the various parties meant actively learning from and drawing on the experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party. However, the Comintern simultaneously emphasized that "this slogan should by no means be understood as the mechanical transplantation of the entire experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party to other parties." Bolshevization had to consider the specific conditions of each party; there was no universal panacea. This reflected respect for the victory and experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party while also encouraging branches to apply that experience in light of their own realities. This was correct in principle and was approved and welcomed by meeting delegates and the various branches. In the "Theses on Tactics," the Comintern's requirements for building "mass parties," "revolutionary Marxist parties," and "unified parties" during the process of Bolshevization, as well as its regulations against dogmatism and sectarianism, were consistent with the actual conditions of the various national communist parties. These helped improve their cohesion and combat effectiveness, gaining the affirmation and support of the branches. The detailed requirements for Bolshevization in "On the Bolshevization of the Parties of the Communist International" were also generally correct and positive in spirit—such as emphasizing the need to overcome the danger of Right-wing deviations [11] and Ultra-Leftist tendencies, persisting in the theoretical armament of Marxism and Leninism, striving for the support of the broad masses (especially the working class), and strengthening organizational construction. These were all appropriate requirements at the time.
The positive role of the practice of Bolshevization by various communist parties should be fully affirmed. By the mid-1920s, the communist parties that had joined the Comintern could be roughly divided into three categories: first, those that "had just gone through a primarily propaganda-oriented period and had only taken the first steps on the road to uniting the broad masses around the banner of communism"; second, those that "were already in a stage of more or less intense struggle and led a considerable number of worker masses (sometimes the majority)"; and third, those that "had already seized power and were in a period of consolidating it." The first category mainly consisted of parties in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, such as the CPC; the second category mainly consisted of parties in Europe and America, such as the Communist Party of Germany; and the third category consisted only of the CPSU. Different types of communist parties had different conditions and methods for achieving Bolshevization, and the practical effects varied significantly. For the first category of parties, which were still in their infancy and generally lacked theoretical sophistication and struggle experience with incomplete organizational systems, Bolshevization promoted the development of the party, making it more mature politically, ideologically, and organizationally, and turning it into an important political force on the national stage. For the second category of parties, Bolshevization suppressed factional activities, strengthened party centralism, maintained party unity, and reinforced the party's leadership over work related to labor unions, youth, and women. The goals of Bolshevization practices across all parties were consistent: namely, to become a true Bolshevik party.
Looking back at the construction, development, and achievements of the Comintern and various communist parties, the positive role played by the Comintern's practice of Bolshevization should not be forgotten. Overall, the positive effects of Bolshevization were the mainstream. Its positive effects are even more visible when viewed from the perspective of the Comintern’s 24-year history and the collective history of the construction and struggle of the various communist parties.
(3) A rational understanding of the negative effects of Bolshevization
It is undeniable that the "Bolshevization" slogan and its requirements also contained biases. The Fifth Congress of the Comintern was held under the significant influence of "Leftist" ideology. A strong "Leftist" sentiment and atmosphere were fully reflected in the discussion process and the resolutions passed; the "Bolshevization" slogan could not remain unaffected. At that time, the Comintern believed that many communist parties had split off from social democratic parties and would inevitably carry remnants of social democratic traditions, and that the problem of Right-wing deviation within the international communist movement was already very serious. The failure of the "October Action" by the Communist Party of Germany was also judged by the Comintern to be the result of poor leadership by a Right-opportunist leadership group. Under these circumstances, the Comintern required each branch to internally purge the influence of Right-opportunism politically and organizationally, and externally to maintain consistency with the Comintern regarding attitudes toward the Second International and relationships with social democratic parties. This became a core component of Bolshevization for the branches. As emphasized in the "Theses on the Propaganda Activities of the Comintern and its Branches," the current internal struggles in some communist parties "are the ideological influence of old social democratic remnants within the Communist Party. The way to overcome these remnants is the Bolshevization of the Communist Party."
While Right-wing problems did indeed exist within some parties and the international communist movement at the time, whether the problem was as serious as the Comintern estimated is open to debate. Furthermore, it was an error for the Comintern to attribute its own mistakes or those of certain parties solely to Right-wing problems. It was even more inappropriate to oppose the Second International and social democratic parties indiscriminately or to reject cooperation or the formation of a united front with them. This practice of expanding the identification of "Right-wing targets" and "Right-wing behavior" did not conform to the reality of the struggle at the time and deviated from the actual needs of the struggle.
The negative effects during the process of achieving Bolshevization also cannot be overlooked. For a period of time, the practice of Bolshevization in many Communist Parties was impure, and the Bolshevik parties constructed were also impure; they were not Bolshevik parties that truly met the needs of the revolutionary struggles in various countries. The primary manifestation was that many Communist Parties experienced a weakening of their independence and autonomy [12] alongside the process of Bolshevization. When the Comintern proposed the slogan of "Bolshevization," it explicitly required all branches to oppose separatist and federalist tendencies and to eliminate the influence of erroneous ideas such as isolationism and sectarianism. This was necessary to maintain the centralized unity of the Comintern and its branches. However, for a period, the Comintern absolutized and universalized this requirement—namely, by restricting the independence and autonomy of various branches, requiring these parties to accept the leadership of the Comintern and execute its directives. To achieve this goal, the Comintern started by tackling the organizational building of various branches; by promoting the adjustment of leadership in various parties, it formed leadership groups within them that could "remain consistent" with the Comintern. Consequently, many individuals within Communist Parties who exhibited an independent spirit or tendency were either excluded from or marginalized within the leadership groups. For example, between the late 1920s and early 1930s alone, the primary leaders of 50 Communist Parties were replaced during the process of achieving Bolshevization. Simultaneously, the experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party was sanctified. Driven by the Comintern, many Communist Parties ignored actual conditions and indiscriminately copied all aspects of the Russian Bolshevik Party’s experience. This not only violated the spirit emphasized by the Comintern that "the entire experience of the Russian Bolshevik Party cannot be mechanically copied to other political parties," but also exerted a negative impact on these Communist Parties and the revolutionary causes they led. This also brought an important consequence to the international communist movement: the various branches of the Comintern gradually became "singularized" [13], and the diverse worldwide communist movement gradually evolved into a "singular" communist movement.
Objectively speaking, whether it is the issue of biases within the slogan and requirements of "Bolshevization" or the negative effects during the process of its realization, both were produced under the combined influence of the complex internal and external environments and various factors of that time. They should be viewed rationally; they should neither be ignored nor exaggerated. Ultimately, these are merely fragments in the history of Bolshevization, and their influence was limited by time and space.
(Author: Gong Yutao, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of Marxism, Minzu University of China; Director of the Teaching and Research Center for the Sinicization of Marxism.)
Web Editor: Jin Qiu Source: Contemporary World and Socialism, Issue 4, 2024.