In the fight to restore and uphold the principles of Marxism-Leninism, the first task which faces Communists is the work to bring about real unity within the ranks of the anti-revisionist movement. Within this camp all should know that the fight against all the strands of opportunism cannot go forward, and at best will prove ineffective, without unity.

As long as the anti-revisionist camp within the communist movement remains divided, opportunism will reign supreme, and even under more propitious circumstances the rotten egg of Social-Democracy, hatched by imperialism, will remain the decisive influence and leadership of the working class.

We can therefore see, without expending any effort, that the work to bring about unity in the camp opposed to revisionism is the most serious task Communists will face now and for the foreseeable future.

What are the obstacles to achieving this unity? Certainly, with the collapse of Soviet revisionism it would seem that one huge obstacle has been removed overnight, so to speak. On the face of it, the international communist movement is no longer polarized into a pro-Soviet and anti-Soviet camp.

However, the real meaning of the former polarization has now been drawn into sharper focus. Western revisionists or, for that matter, international revisionism, can no longer rely on a powerful, prestigious Soviet backer. In short, those Communists who opposed Khrushchevite revisionism have been vindicated, and most assuredly, on the revisionist nature of the former post-war CPSU. The collapse of the Soviet Union under the leadership of the revisionists testifies to this.

From this development the only positive outcome is that, unlike when they were in power, the revisionists in Moscow can no longer call on the allegiance of the international communist movement, and thereby use this fealty to subvert revolutionary developments in other countries. Of course, the downfall of communist party rule in the ex-Soviet union and elsewhere raises other issues as well, particularly the nature and social dynamics of the transition from capitalism to socialism. One thing which has clearly been established firmly, is that as a class, the proletariat cannot hold onto its monopoly of state power without a communist and revolutionary party. However, it is not simply a question of retaining state power, but also retaining power in the party itself, in face of the class struggle with bourgeois revisionism. This is why the question of the modus-operandi of the party is of such importance, and should not be treated simply as an academic issue, notwithstanding that the class struggle subordinates all forms to itself.

In class society, revisionism is inevitable. It represents the struggle for the survival of bourgeois society within the ranks of communism itself. This is why bourgeois revisionism is the most serious enemy of the revolution within communism. It is fully developed right-opportunism. Lenin knew this very well; he knew that behind rightist-opportunism was the direct betrayal of the revolution and the working class. This also explains Lenin's unrelenting struggle to expose opportunism within the ranks of the revolutionary movement. It is also the reason that Lenin fought against those who advocated conciliationism between the two main factions in the Russian revolutionary movement, ie Bolshevism and Menshevism. He understood perfectly correctly that a reconciliation with opportunism, in any shape or form, would lead to the betrayal of the revolutionary struggles of the proletariat.

So, in looking forward, we see that there are lessons from the past, which can help throw light on how to conduct the anti-opportunist struggle. In short, to ensure that the revisionist tendencies and circles do not form the leadership of the future communist workers' party in Britain. What all revisionists seek to do is to convert the communist movement to Social-Democracy. It is for this reason that we call them the must dangerous enemies of socialism within the communist movement, as developments in the former Soviet Union demonstrate.

Opportunism and revisionism is first and foremost a bourgeois movement in communism. When revolution becomes a reality, these individuals are used as firemen to put out the revolution and, under the dictatorship of the proletariat, they are used to bring about the restoration of the old bourgeois order.

But what does this mean in practice? What it means is that neither a workers' revolution nor the defence of the proletarian dictatorship is possible with these people in our ranks. Furthermore, if they assume a leading position within the party, then the dictatorship of the proletariat, the party and socialism are doomed.

The first condition for any successful revolution, and for establishing the dictatorship of the working class, is the purging of the communist party of opportunist elements. This break with opportunism is the decisive thing. Furthermore, it is not a question of defeating the opportunist individuals in our ranks, but of purging them altogether and expelling them from the future revolutionary party. But it is not simply a matter of purging the party of opportunists, because it may also be necessary to remove certain Communists who, under other conditions, are able to play a prominent role.

One of the most obvious examples is the case of Trotsky, who, although he had fought against Lenin and the Bolsheviks right up until the outbreak of revolution, belatedly came over to the Bolsheviks, rising to important leading positions, and playing a prominent role in the civil war period. Later, Trotsky went on to develop a defeatist line about the impossibility of building socialism in one country, thereby breaking with Leninism on this matter. He harboured views which, had they been accepted by the party leadership, and then percolated down into the party, and through the party been transmitted into the working class, would have led, most assuredly, as night follows day, to the collapse of the whole revolutionary effort.

At the time Stalin saw clearly the far-reaching consequences of these views, and the Marxist-Leninists, led by him at this stage, had no alternative but to purge the party of those who would not, or could not renounce Trotskyism, regardless of the role they had played at an earlier stage in the revolution. The supreme point now was that the views held by Trotsky. and spread by his followers into the working class, were leading to the collapse of the revolution because of their inherently defeatist nature, from both a political and a psychological standpoint, that is, from the standpoint of morale.

That the success of the proletarian revolution required first the fight against, and then the purging of the opportunist and defeatist elements, was illustrated clearly by Lenin, who understood the need for such a struggle, as the passage below exemplifies:

'with reformists, Mensheviks, in our ranks it is impossible to be victorious in the proletarian revolution, it is impossible to defend it. That is obvious in principle, and it has been strikingly confirmed by the experience of both Russia and Hungary... In Russia difficult situations have arisen many times when the Soviet regime would have most certainly have been overthrown, had Mensheviks, reformists, and petty-bourgeois democrats remained in our Party... In Italy, where, as is generally admitted, decisive battles between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie for the possession of state power are imminent. At such a moment it is not only absolutely necessary to remove the Mensheviks, reformists, the Turatists from the party, but it may even be useful to remove excellent Communists who ate liable to waver, and who reveal a tendency to waver towards "unity" with the reformists, to remove them from all responsible posts... On the eve of a revolution, and at a moment when a most fierce struggle is being waged fr its victory, the slightest wavering in the ranks of the party may wreck everything, frustrate the revolution, wrest the power from the hands of the proletariat; for this power is not consolidated, the attack upon it is still very strong.

The desertion of wavering leaders at such a time does not weaken but strengthens the party, the working class movement' (See Vol 25, pp. 462-464.)

For Lenin the victory of the proletarian revolution is impossible if the party has opportunists in its ranks. And, as we see, Lenin even goes further and argues that '.. it may even be useful to remove excellent Communists who reveal a tendency to waver toward "unity" with the reformists'.

Clearly, the fight against opportunism, the necessity for the party to break with the opportunist and semi-opportunist elements, individuals and groupings, is the essence of preparing for the proletarian revolution. How, then, can anyone claim affinity with Marxism-Leninism, if they are, at the same time, unable to recognize its most important essentials, those of cleansing the party of opportunists before the revolution, and removing the defeatists in the process of making and consolidating the revolution.

Stalin, too, spoke in the same vein as Lenin, when he argued that, 'The theory of "defeating" opportunist elements by ideological struggle within the Party, the theory of "overcoming" these elements within the confines of a single party, is a rotten and dangerous theory, which threatens to condemn the Party to paralysis and chronic infirmity, threatens to make the Party a prey to opportunism, threatens to leave the proletariat without a revolutionary party, threatens to deprive the proletariat of its main weapon in the fight against imperialism...' (J V Stalin, The Foundations of Leninism)

There must not and cannot be any reconciliation with opportunism and revisionism, that is with the right-wing, and the right-deviation in the working class movement. It is not a matter of overcoming these elements within our ranks, but of removing them altogether. Those who talk about reconciliation with opportunists, or waver towards unity with the opportunists, transform themselves into the enemy of Marxism-Leninism, the grave diggers of the revolution. On this, we stand absolutely with Lenin and also Stalin, that there can be no successful revolution with opportunist individuals in our ranks.

Since Marxism-Leninism teaches that a successful revolution is impossible without purging the revolutionary party of the political opportunists, revisionists and defeatists, it ought to follow that the fight against these elements on the one hand, and consolidating unity in the camp opposed to these elements on the other, is the key to the success of the revolution. "Proletarian parties develop and become strong by purging themselves of opportunist and reformist social imperialists and social-pacifists... The party becomes strong by purging itself of opportunist elements". (J. V. Stalin)

The completion of the counterrevolution in the former Soviet Union illustrated this point clearly. The Soviet regime could not be defended with opportunists and revisionists in the party, who only knew how to capitulate to bourgeois liberal ideologists. Once these people have gained leading positions in the party and the state and deepen their corrosive attacks on Marxism-Leninism, the party and its supporters in the state machine are doomed to be overthrown, if the revisionists are not defeated and purged from the ranks of the Communists.

It was pathetic to watch these revisionists trying to slow down the pace of the bourgeois counterrevolution in Russia, and then the bourgeois camp making a meal of them, seizing the initiative at every stage, even though the turn to the capitalist "free market" was inexorably leading to the collapse of support for Yeltsin.

Turning to this country, we face the question of the way forward for Communists in Britain. It is our view that the first step forward is to achieve unity in the anti-revisionist camp. The various groupings which claim adherence to Marxism-Leninism, and also individual Communists, should now employ the policy, as a first step towards unity, of action in common. If we achieve this, a major hurdle, that of left-sectarianism, will have been overcome. At the same time it is clear that certain ideological differences have to be resolved. This obviously involves a discussion process around crucial areas of ideological demarcations. It is for this reason we have supported the editorial board of Open Polemic which is encouraging polemics in the revolutionary movement at the present time, although it seems to us that both right and left opportunists seem to be fearful of this development

By upholding Marxism-Leninism, we do not simply mean only the fight to defend its principles, but also the firmest opposition to both right opportunism and left-deviationism which for a long time has usually, although not exclusively, rallied under the banner of Trotskyism, at least in the imperialist countries.

However, right-opportunist revisionism is the most dangerous enemy of the revolution and socialism within the communist movement. The modern revisionists follow in the same footstep as the political opportunists of Social-Democracy who have long betrayed socialism and who oppose the workers' revolution. We cannot tire of emphas1sing that no successful workers revolution is possible until these opportunists are excluded from the future communist party.

The historical betrayal of socialism by the old Social-Democracy and the new modern revisionism, and the transformation of the latter into a wing of the former, is rooted in the economic and political developments of the post-second world war period. Post-war revisionism now serves the same class interest, and has the same goal as the old Social Democracy. That aim is counterrevolution. However, the favourable conditions in which the bourgeoisie could use Social-Democracy as a diversion in the working-class from revolutionary struggles is fading away fast. It is these developing new conditions which demand communist unity, i.e. unity in the anti-revisionist camp.

Open polemics and joint work will not automatically lead to communist unity, by which we mean the formation of a single communist workers' party. The strategy, however, does contribute immensely to creating more favourable ideological conditions, which can be used to facilitate the process of increasing unity. In any event, one thing is certain, and it is that Communist unity will not be brought about by any one of the left-sectarian groupings. When these groups claim to be the vanguard, this is simply rhetoric. None can claim the role of vanguard party at present, since none is able to pass the basic Marxist-Leninist test of what actually constitutes the vanguard, this being firstly the ability to rally a significant section of the oppressed class to the banner of the revolution. When a revolutionary party is in this position it becomes de facto the vanguard of the revolutionary forces.