About revisionism (1)

When you look close to the conceptions, the way of analyzing, the conclusions that are been made, it becomes very clear that the revisionism that developed in the CCP (or that could “freely” develop after the dead of Mao Zedong in 1976), is identical to the revisionism that developed in the CPUSSR under Chroutstjof, Bresnjev and Gorbatsjov.
You can for example apply the critic (of course in an adapted way, not in an ANALOGUE way) that the CCP wrote in 1964 on the rising revisionism in the CP-USSR “The pseudo-communism of Chroustsjov an the historic lessons for the world”, on the revisionism that has seen the light after the dead of Mao in the CCP and that is made concrete in her economic policy after 1978. And “Perestroika” and “Glasnost” of Gorbatsjov is similar (even in the meaning of the words!) to the “Reform” and “Opening” of Deng Xiaoping.

To prove revisionism with the teacher of the negative example
In fact there is a strong development of revisionism in the International Communist Movement. I think that it is important to uncover the general and common way of working, way of using Marxist phraseology to mask idealism and metaphysics and the way to use existing and non refuted forms of opportunism in different communist organizations.
It is of course difficult to judge if a certain communist party is developing revisionism, when you are not a member of that party and when that party is operating in a ante-revolutionary situation whereby intern contradictions are not discussed openly.
I want to make my analysis of the development of revisionism based on the concrete example of the Workers Party of Belgium in such a way that communists not member of the WPB, but member of communist parties of other regions in the world can make their own opinion about my analysis.
That is the reason that I began with the revisionism in the analysis that cadres of the WPB made of the socialism in China. That is a subject where about each communist or communist organization can get information and mostly have their own analysis.
I will start now with an analysis of a text that Boudewijn Deckers wrote. Boudewijn Deckers was after Ludo Martens the highest cadre in the WPB and before that in AMADA (Alle Macht Aan De Arbeiders -All Power to the Workers)
I see Ludo Martens as the protagonist of the revolutionary and real Marxist line in the WPB.
For me Boudewijn Decker has become the protagonist of the revisionist line that developed inside the WPB.
On this very moment, in 2008, I say that by the work of the revisionist fraction (mostly leading cadres of the WPB) the WPB is a REFORMIST party, a party that is working in the bourgeoisie legality and with a reformist program. It has been possible because of the lack of vigilance of the majority of the members. (I will indicate why and how, later – as I will explain that I for myself lacked also enough vigilance, roughly before 2000)

Revisionism in the analyze of socialism in China
I will now analyze the revisionism developed in the WPB (because I know that best, because I was member myself) and compare it with the development of revisionism in the CCP.
The development of revisionism in the CCP is connected with the development of it in the CPUSSR after the dead of Stalin, as I also will prove.
Revisionism became the leading factor in the CCP, after the dead of Mao Zedong, with a weak reaction of members and cadres defending the revolutionary line, with a lack of real countering the conceptions and with the covering of idealism and metaphysics under Marxist phraseology of the revisionists.
The development of revisionism in the WPB and the installing of revisionism in the leading organs of the WPB became more significant with the increasing physical and psychic problems of Ludo Martens that made it impossible for him, since 1995, to really lead the WPB.
There are general characteristics of the revisionism that has developed in the international communist movement.
I will deduct general characteristics out of the analysis of revisionism specific in the WPB.
Though I have made already a lot of analysis, they are more difficult to understand for people who were not once member of the WPB or are not familiar with the historical evolution of the WPB in the specific political situation in Belgium. (… and also because they are in Dutch)
Therefore I will know analyze the evolution of the point of view that the WPB (or National leading cadres of the WPB) had on the socialism in China. (… and I will try this to do it in English)
That is easier for others to evaluate MY analysis on his correctness. And it is also easier to connect it with the analysis of the development of revisionism in the CCP itself. (I already tried some analyzing in English, you can start here to read it)
In number 64 of Marxist Studies, October-December 2003, Boudewijn Deckers wrote an article about socialism in China, « Questions about the development of socialism in the Peoples Republic of China ». (You can read it in French here or read it on marx.be) Boudewijn Deckers is one of the leading cadres of the WPB who had once started the predecessor-organization AMADA (in 1970) out of which the WPB is born (in 1979). He led several delegations to China. His point of view can be seen as the official point of view of the WPB. And as we will see, all articles in Solidair, all analyses that other cadres or members of the WPB made AFTER Boudewijns analysis in 2004, are based on the same conceptions of Boudewijn Deckers.
I will prove that those conceptions are in opposition with earlier conceptions and analysis from the WPB, mostly formulated by Ludo Martens.
In Solidair (the weekly of the WPB, see Solidair.org, PVDA.be, PTB.be and WPB.be) of 10 February 2004 appeared an article of Boudewijn Deckers, that treated some issues of his bigger article in Marxist Studies. (You can read this article, in French here or on Solidair.org)
Because it was an openly published article, I react not with an INTERN rapport but as a concerned reader of the weekly Solidair with an e-mail to Solidair, normally published as letter in Solidair and eventually commented.
You can read about my « discussion » with Boudewijn Deckers in this next article. At that moment my conceptions about increasing revisionism in the WPB were not so elaborated.