The great october revolution is still sparkling in its 100th year as a pole star for working class and laborers. Lenin has celebrated the 73rd day of

“Unlike temporary ones, we’re picking up where we left off.”
Bomb Action From TKP/ML Militants Against AKP Office

The great october revolution is still sparkling in its 100th year as a pole star for working class and laborers. Lenin has celebrated the 73rd day of the revolution with a great enthusiasm because the Paris Commune was existed only for 72 days. It was really important for comrade Lenin that the second experience of proletariat outlasted than the prior one. Because he was well aware of that the proletarian revolution and its history are made up of a long process with ups and downs and that involves victories and defeats as well.
October Revolution was the first political move of proletariat which was a firm action that was decisive, daring and well-supported with power consciousness. It was not just a revolution that was over and done with a social upheaval. October Revolution was the practical step where the proletariat with a class consciousness comprehended the course of history, intervened and shaped this course and where a new port with all of its solemnity was emerged in the history of societies. It was a unique historical move where a class that is coded to destroy itself hit the target preciesly of destroying all of the class society structure with itself.
October Revolution didn’t remain as it was at the beginning. While it was under the suffocating siege of imperialist capitalist system and any kind of bourgeoisie, it has tried to besiege imperialist-capitalist system and any kind of bourgeoisie power with hopeful and resistant moves, as the liberation reference of international proletariat and the masses of opressed labourers. October Revolution played the role of a leverage as the means of complete liberation, freedom and gaining the future against the capitalist imperialist system’s encircling opressed people and nations with its financial capital and exterminating them with its war machines. October Revolution played the part of Alexander’s sword in solving the contradictions that emerged through an era.
Lenin and Stalin materialized, realized and teorized the historical role of proleteriat through the construction process of socialism. The homeland of socialism was not only besieged ideologically, politically and economically, but also was tried to be destroyed under the attack of war machine of Hitler’s fascism. However, fascism was drowned with the revolutionary spirit of October Revolution in the homeland of socialism.

Despite all those siege and disasters, socialism was builded up slowly under the leadership of Comrade Stalin and the working class. Acquisitions of proletariat were extended and broadened with revolutionary and historical moves forward in decades. However just after the death of Stalin, the bourgeois revisionists that were present in the communist party and that continued their existence also in socialism began to attack at first to Stalin and afterwards to the acquisitions of socialism. The homeland of socialism was besieged through this revisionist attact and capitalist reconstruction line was rebuilt in the course of a process. This process was continued and realized about 50 years. Socialism bears the contradictions between bourgeoisie and proletariat and those contradictions will always be there. In their struggle bourgeoisie came to power again. History is full of bulges and pitches for the oppressed revolutionary classes.
The process of ‘returning from socialism’ and ‘capitalist reconstruction’ within the pace of revolutionary proletariat fell into the clutches of reality that was described as ‘process of natural history’ by Lenin. History and sociology impose us to study and conceive this return and the collapse of socialism as the natural course of history. So, what comrade Mao did with the great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was the analysis of this process and developing a revolutionary intervention against this course. The process of updating the historical consciousness of working class against counter-revolutionary revisionist capitalists, and mobilization of oppressed people to protect socialism and not to lose the power was tried to be met with a social revolution throughout the construction of ‘socialism’. With the great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the revolutionary spirit of October Revolution was almost embodied after 50 years in China. A consciousness of history, power and social progress, which prefers ‘eating harmful fruits of socialism over eating beneficial fruits of capitalism’ get on the stage of history as systematized in the most revolutionary and bold way possible. It can be said that the great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was the regaining of the spirit of October Revolution in order to block turn aways from socialism.
Mao has addressed the necessity of tens of such revolutions and historical devolopments proved him right. The acquisitions of the great Proletarian Cultural Revolution were also converted to capitalist relations by revisionist capitalists after a short while. Thus the returns had a victory in all socialist countries. Any defeat or attack is capable of abolishing a move that is made forward and realized; and also what is right, true and legal. Capitalist-imperialist system tries to present the defeat of ‘socialism’ to proletariat and oppressed people as the justification of their enslavery, to make slavery ‘reasonable’ in a way. They are trying to present ‘imperialist-

capitalist’ stage as the last stage of history and thus trying to justify exploitation, oppression and persecution.
On the other hand reformist and revisionist movements are busy with releasing the chains of the oppressed within the course of class struggle without power. October Revolution and socialist experiences through its guidance left a non-erasable consciousness, an attached experience and irreplacable acquisitions about the path through historical solution. We especially want to share some basic headlines regarding the ideological, political and historical importance of the October Revolution.
First, when we consider October Revolution, the other revolutions afterwards and socialism experiences of 20th century all together, we can see more clearly the determining importance of seizing the political power by proletariat. Seizing the political power by proletariat is one of the prerequisites of revealing socialist relations of production. It should be known that after seizing the political power forcibly if proletariat doesn’t do the transformations regarding the properties of means of production, to maintain the power is not going to be possible. So the second step must be the expropriation of private properties of means of production. In this sense the October Revolution is a massive historical move which defines the proletarian view on power in a very certain, defined way. October Revolution is the most powerful experience which shows that against exploitatory dominant class taking over the power partially as improvement, austerity or reforms is not possible but this can only be realised as taking over power completely by force. The question of political power doesn’t come to an end by just taking over the power. Attunement of socialist productive powers with socialist relations of production is also related with empowerment, preservation and perpetuation of political power by proletariat. Comrade Mao thus emphasised that revolution cannot prevail without ‘the party of proletariat or dictatorship of proletariat’. In that sense he made a special emphasis on the two most important means of class struggle.
In this certain point the second important point that needs to be underlined reveals itself about October Revolution. The Communist Party as the pioneer stuff of proletariat. October revolution showed us that the Communist Party is of vital importance as a means to organize the revolution and to mobilize masses to the right targets. There is a need for an operation center which will be in use to lead working class and labourers to revolution and protection of socialism, and to show the right solution methods for contradictions.
In this sense party has a determining position as one of the two important means of class struggle. Party does not give credit to class

consociation when it organizes the revolution. The rightness of political line also requires determining those classes demanding the revolution. And this is only possible through the persistance and loyalty for MLM, understanding of its historical and social character and adjusting its revolutinary spirit with concrete conditions. Communist Party will be the determinant means of proletariat’s class struggle all through its transition to communist society with its power consciousness and its approach to dialectical-materialist method. October Revolution and socialist experiences revealed those.
Third is the dictatorship of proletariat. October Revolution set forth unarguably the necessity and the form of class power, the means of maintaining class struggle in its most effective manner and dominating over counter-revolutionary classes. It also proved the fact that proletariat cannot take on its historical responsibilities and it cannot found and maintain socialism without using power on the oppressor classes. The contradiction between proletariat and bourgeoisie is preserved as the foundational contradiction throughout the socialist transitional period. This at the same time means that the socialist society is also a class society and class struggle proceeds continiously through its own methods. Upon this foundational contradiction, two main contradictions of socialist society arises. The contradiction between the productive powers and socialist production relations, and the contradiction between economical foundation and superstructure. The constant effort to make the first ones compatible with the second ones is the driving force of the developmental dynamics of socialist society. Proletarian dictatorship revealed itself as the necessary means to do this in most effective and fastest way possible and to make sure that the revolution will improve towards communism. Lenin has mention that through this process the dictatorship of proletariat can get into tens of different shapes and forms, and can change its form as in accordance with the contradictions emerged. However October Revolution as an experience showed us very clearly that in terms of class struggle, socialist society should protect itself effectively against imperialist attacks and the dictatorship of proletariat is indispensable to prevent the domination of bourgeoisie.
Fourth, is the fact that those new political, ideological and economical contradictions which came to light with October Revolution are the messenger of the new era. The October Revolution introduced a brand new era. Imperialism and the era of Proletarian Revolutions was characterized through this very era. Then, started a new period of time and revolutions for the oppressed people and nations. Bourgeoisie has lost all of its historically progressive role and function in the new World created through October Revolution. From then in this new era it has lost both its

roles as the leading the pack of national freedoms and being the power generator of a historical period with the characteristic of competitive capitalism. It has became the producer of historical bigotry and also the bearer of imperial politics which was surrounded by financial oligarchy. In that sense the political character of liberation and freedom of exploited and oppressed nations were changed. National revolutions and the duty of exact freedom of oppressed nations were became the part and revolutionary responsibility of proletarian revolution. In that sense this situation came out with October Revolution still marks this period that we are going through. Social and historical progress is possible only through comprehension of this fact. This comprehension will provide the right solutions to contradictions.
October Revolution with its achievements and as the pioneer of an era, still preserves proletariat’s and its Communist Parties’ political line, world view and the properties which shapes and directs its aims and targets fundamentally. As 100 years ago October Revolution has burst out that power is the political imperative of proletariat and its comprehension of self- destruction process, today this historical imperative is waiting to attain to a proper comprehension. No defeat can and will ever wreathe of this historical fact. Even though the intensity of class struggle is not that high, proletariat cannot posit itself as well organized for socialism and communism, and communist movements are not advanced today, history shows us that all the relations of production and class struggles are still going on as it used to pave the way to the October Revolution. International proletariat is just going through a phase in which it should progress well-equipped as criticizing severity, responsibility, accumulation and theory of its experience that is realized 100 years ago and survived a while.
Now the resposibility of class struggle is only more heavier, more complicated and more difficult within the ruins of ‘socialism’. However this responsibility as a duty has to be taken over with a more stronger understanding in the 100th year of october Revolution. Our party TKP/ML, will take on the revolutionary tasks of international proletariat in Turkey and Turkey Kurdistan with this consciousness, will correspond with this approach and will devote itself to class struggle to discharge the revolutionary responsibilities.
The great October Revolution is itself the historical consciousness, comprehension, obligation and struggle. And this consciousness still keeps being our guide, navigator and torch. October Revolution is a spirit that is alive, a consciousness that is gird on and world that is needed to be regained. It condemns us to regain which was gained a 100 years ago. International proletariat still has Marksism-Leninism-Maoism as a sound weapon to fulfill

this powerful duty. This duty has to be fulfilled and beyond any doubt it will be fulfilled.


After the October Revolution, the socialist relations of production were immediately started to build. Under the leadership of the Comrades Lenin and Stalin, despite all of the obstacles of a backward social structure, the Soviet people accomplished to develop an advanced socialist system thanks to a great altruistic effort, miraculous developments, and well- disciplined struggle. However, following the death of the Comrade Stalin, the Revisionist approach reversed back all the achievements of the socialism by re-constructing the capitalist production relations. Doubtlessly, return to capitalism from socialism and the triumph of bourgeoisie through a counter- revolution are indeed very critical issues on which the Communist movement should pay particular attention, and leap into class struggle by taking lessons from this experience. In fact, today the imperialist-capitalist system is making use of this return and ruin as a means of weakening/disorganizing the working-class and oppressed people/nations against its reactionary barbarian system. The U-turns have ideological and political impacts, leading the Proletariat to retreat from the class struggle. Therefore, clarifying/informing the revolutionary and communist attitude towards it would ideologically affect by leading them to cling to the class struggle in a strong and efficient manner.
Well then, how this historical progression based on the conditions in which the Proletariat seized the power, put an end to the private property of means of production and communized them thanks to a long-term struggle, and the socialist production relations superseded the capitalist ones was turned over. This complicated issue is directly related to an accurate determination of the characteristics of the contradictions embodied within the socialist system and our position against them. In this regard, the answer allowing us to explain these returns was actually given by the Comrade Mao Zedong. Mao Zedong ascertained the existence of the classes and the class struggle in the socialist system by analyzing the contradictions between the socialist production relations and the forces of production, along with the economical base and the superstructure. He formulated the general political line which should be followed over the course of socialist period as follows: “Socialist society covers a very long historical period. Throughout this historical stage, there exist classes, class contradictions, and class struggles along with the struggle between the road of socialism and the road of

capitalism. There is also the existence of capitalist restoration and the threat of invasion and subversion by imperialism and social imperialism. These contradictions can only be resolved based on the continual revolution theory under the leadership of proletariat dictatorship and the practical guidance of this theory.” This clear and as far as apparent expression of the Comrade Mao and his general political approach in line with it ease our comprehension on “return to capitalism” issue and make it possible for us to take more drastic lessons.
The perspective presented by the Comrade Mao is certainly nurtured by the lessons taken from the socialist experiences and the philosophical views of his predecessors on socialist process. Indeed, Karl Marx emphasized that socialist society is just the beginning of communist society and gave critical clues regarding the characteristics of a socialist society and its contradictions by saying “… a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges”.
In addition, the Comrade Mao stated concerning the foundations of bourgeoisie’s life-style as this; “Lenin said that ’small production engenders capitalism and the bourgeoisie continually, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on a mass scale’. They are also engendered among a part of the working class and of the party membership. Both with the ranks of the proletariat and amongst the personnel of state and other organs there are people who take the bourgeois style of life.”
Also, V. I. Lenin’s emphasis on the characteristics of the contradiction that was experienced throughout the socialist period is particularly important in terms of the essence of the issue; “This transition period cannot but be a period of struggle between moribund capitalism and nascent communism.”
Mao Zedong’s approach on class struggle in socialism was quite new. Lenin and J. Stalin too stressed out the class struggle and partly the impacts of superstructure on economical base. However, it was limited with the “transition period” for both of them. They had presupposition that after an entire socialist transition of agricultural, industry and commerce, the economical reasons of the class struggle would vanish. They associated the class struggle rather ongoing cultural effect of the bourgeoisie who lost its power, the imperialist siege and the intrigues of its agents. The class struggle was considered in the context of death throes of exploitive classes that became relatively less significant and subjected to the superstructure within the ideological-cultural sphere. Besides to acknowledge this aspect, Mao Zedong made a tremendous contribution to theoretical and historical richness

of scientific socialism by showing that class-foundations of the class struggle indeed exists within the socialist society and socialism is actually a class- society.
We will briefly mention to the basic objective-foundations of reversing socialism within the allowed time. One of the basic grounds for the existence and re-production of the classes within socialism is to necessarily protect the ‘Rights’ concept of bourgeoisie. In the first stage/first step, communism cannot be completely mature yet and cannot be free from capitalist traditions and traits. In a socialist society, bourgeois rights are eliminated in terms of private property. Moreover, these bourgeois rights are significantly effective among interrelations of people depending on existing basic differences between workers and peasants, urban and rural, mental and physical work, and along with distribution based on commodity production and the work subjected to exchange with money. In the dictatorship of proletariat, “bourgeois right” are only limited and at the same time, the relevant conditions are prepared in order to abolish this right. Socialist property of whole people depends on commodity system, exchange with money and distribution based on work; and in the process of exchange with money and distribution based on work, equal rights of commodity system are still bourgeois rights. Only when socialist property of whole people flourishes more and more, transforming into a communist property of people, the society would free itself from class characteristics and traditions/marks of capitalism. That is to say, “bourgeois right” concept would have material grounds until all classes are abolished throughout transformation from socialism to communism. In the meantime, this “right” would constitute a problem which the proletariat should struggle against and overcome by being aware of it. For the very reason, dictatorship and power apparatus are the things that the Proletariat cannot abandon. In fact, limiting and abolishing this ‘right’ and eliminating the classes are contingent upon political power of the proletariat.
Another economical ground for the existence of new bourgeoisie in socialism is money. Money still has to be used. In his discussion with Dühring, F. Engels addressed the relationship with money as a universal equivalent and commodity. Lenin highlighted money-related problems within a socialist society by saying; “until abolishing money….we should tolerate equality in the Constitution; we should endure practically having the right of exploitation for all who owns money”. Engels and Lenin also warned communists about exploitation ability of money turning into capital at any moment, and its mystification since it does not disclose accumulation process as being objectified dead labor. However, we should not overlook the fact that money obtains this character as being means of exchange and

universal equivalent of commodities. This function of money is realized thanks to bourgeois modus operandi of labor-value theory and the bourgeois right established on it.
Therefore, use of money functions as a derivative of bourgeois equality of right and a catalyst. It is determined by existence of bourgeois right. It is not the origin of new bourgeoisie on its own. On the other hand, its ongoing existence shows that commodity exchange and dual nature of value theory still persist. This fact can remind communists that socialism is indeed a class-society and the ultimate winner is not certain yet.
Another aspect which determines time span for establishment of socialism and allows expand/deepen class contradictions in socialism is Imperialism. Highlighting the characteristics of the era in 1963 polemics by saying “we are still in an era of imperialism and proletarian revolutions”, Chinese communists were trying to draw attention imperialist siege and continuous attacks to socialism in the international arena. It should be remember that this reality is like a knife put on throat of socialism, an opportunity whetting the appetite of reactionary bourgeoisie and a support for its power will. One of the most important factors for a quick and effective step into communism is to prepare conditions in order to make free international proletariat in all fronts of the world. It shouldn’t be forget; otherwise, socialism would be more oppressed, experience more difficulties and its construction period would take longer. Doubtlessly, even though imperialism is not the basic factor leading u-turns, it is a significant parameter.
By referring these major grounds, Mao Zedong emphasized the class struggle in socialism. He pointed out that the most consolidated and intensified platform of it is the Communist Party. In this context, he concentrated on class struggle within the Communist Party, acknowledging class character of revisionism which feeds capitalist roaders and originates from this fountain. Indeed, the driver of political power is the Party. Capitalist roaders mostly proliferate and find a ground within the party.
Lenin says “…in order to abolish classes completely, it is not enough to overthrow the exploiters, the landowners and capitalists, not enough to abolish their rights of ownership; it is necessary also to abolish all private ownership of the means of production, it is necessary to abolish the distinction between town and country, as well as the distinction between manual workers and brain workers. This requires a very long period of time.” Actually, all dichotomies such as revolutionary and conservative, true and wrong, or progressive and backward have class characteristics. These are directed, regulated and affected by the main contradiction in the society; bourgeoisie and proletariat. Also, contradictions among people would

influence the contradictions between socialist way and capitalist way to a certain extend. Hence, in the last instance relationship among working people is class-relations. In this sense, Socialism is a class-society structure in which class struggle with proletariat as determinant and bourgeoisie as determined, goes on without interruption.
Thus, it is very vital for proletariat to have political power against reversing socialism. Therefore, Comrade Mao organized the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution against these u-turns. The GPCR became a political, ideological, cultural revolution and a class struggle which comprised the party and the society. The primary aim of the GPCR was to transform superstructure and one of its basic elements; the communist party. Loosing the party means, loosing the state, and the power accordingly. Once the political power is loosen, it means that all achievements of socialism would melt away one by one due to bourgeoisified party, and because the bourgeoisie re-seized the State, namely with Lenin’s words the “proletarian State as a bourgeois State, without bourgeoisie”.
At this point, we can ask whether it is possible get rid of this threat by wiping off the capitalist roaders from the party and state organizations. Of course, purging and rectifying movement leaded by communists may take the possibility of loosing political power off the agenda for a while. However, the GPCR is much more than this. Mao Zedong pointed out this reality with his words; ““…struggles against the capitalist roaders in the Party is the principal task, but not the object. The object is to solve the problem of world outlook and eradicate revisionism… If world outlook is not reformed, then although 2,000 capitalist roaders are removed in the current great Cultural Revolution, 4000 others may appear next time.” In this regard, the GPCR cannot be considered as a rectifying movement or a campaign. It is a social and political revolution which carries out a class struggle within socialism in order to seize or strengthen the power on behalf of proletariat.
The GPCR is a product of class character of socialism, thus the class- struggle and it is a power struggle in itself. In other words, socialist forces of production and socialist relations of production are far from perfectly reflecting communal property of means of production for economical base and superstructure and distribution principles originating from it, and various forms of property in socialism does not constitute a complete communal property. Within the conditions in which commodity production and applying theory of value are necessary, bourgeois right exists and the contradictions between mental and physical labor, and the ruler and the ruled are just about to resolve, not only relations of production should be revolutionized but also the superstructure should be kept consistently

revolutionary. The GPCR showed how we can do this. It revealed how class struggle would be shaped under socialism, and provided the method and the tool that should be followed and used by proletariat respectively. Therefore, Mao Zedong particularly overstressed that the GPCR is just the beginning.
We would like to mention another important point. While the Soviet experience and other socialism experiences are analyzed, several approaches define bureaucracy as a class by referring its reactionary role. They claim that the returns occurred due to this layer by becoming as a class. In reality, it was not about the bureaucracy which seized the power. The socialist experiences of 20th century, especially Soviet and China instances transform to socialism from state capitalism. In Soviets it was based on NEP, whereas in China the transition from New Democracy to socialism took place. Although these two have several differences pertain to their conditions, both of them made use of state capitalism in order to establish socialist property of means of production and socialist relations of production. Modern revisionists and capitalist roaders actualized the return by walking back the same path. Since they had no power to overtly act against ideological and cultural transformations that were induced by revolutions and socialist transformations on conscious of proletariat and working people, they had to cover up their walk to capitalism by flying red flag for a long time. Explaining the return issue with bureaucratization (an administrative corruption) means to content it with just the surface of the things. Of course, the appearance of the returns is in the form of bureaucratic state capitalism. However, the bureaucratic power was established by the bourgeoisie. The State turned into a bourgeois state. It was no more an apparatus of the Proletarian dictatorship. Indeed, this claim is suffered from not seeing the leadership role of the party.
All one-sided perspectives that criticize bourgeoisie by considering proletariat as an opposite side of bureaucracy oppose the centralism aspect of the democratic centralism objectively. Indeed, by condemning this crucial feature of the proletarian dictatorship the proletarian dictatorship would be ignored.
Likewise socialism requires revolutionizing the relations of production and the institutions of superstructure starting with seizing power, establishing proletarian dictatorship and communizing property of means of production; the capitalist restoration is also required to seize political power, transforming communal property of means of production to private property gradually, and aligning relations of production and superstructure with capitalism as well. Transition into state capitalism/being in need of it is not observed only during the Capitalist Restoration in Revisionist governments. It is also valid for many reactionary states that were not socialist. In this

sense, defining “bureaucracy” as a class and explaining the returns with this layer lead to overlook the class-character of the issue and its material reason.
Consequently, from the grave diggers of socialism and the architects of the return Khrushchev and Brezhnev to Liu Shaoqi and Lin Biao, all revisionists and their collaborators promote this doctrine; when socialist public property becomes the only economical base, all exploitive classes would vanish. According to this view, all relations of production containing relations of people would lose its class character in the end, and inter- relations among people allegedly turn into relations between “comrades, fellows, sisters and brothers”. This nonsense is totally what Marxism is not, and does not have a ground within the reality of socialist society. This approach covers the reality of class struggle in socialism, weakens the proletariat, discourages them and impairs their power perspective. During the last century, for the proletariat the most important lesson which should be learnt from socialism experiences is to comprehend socialism as an area of class struggle. And with this awareness, again for the proletariat the need to make continuous revolution under socialism in order to not lose power is just a matter of understanding that class struggle goes on without interruption.

Also eventually, outcomes of the returns had destructive effects on class struggle. We would like to end up our presentation by listing these outcomes and important points briefly.

1- It is seen that power perspective of the proletariat falls beyond that of bourgeoisie. The one who denied and destroyed socialism is not large masses. In fact, it is the bourgeoisie that builds capitalism by surrounding it and continues its existence under socialism. This class brought political power under control by seizing power within the Communist Party and allowed to return gradually. The most significant conclusion that should be drawn is the importance and determining role of Political power. Today, it is tried to make working class and oppressed masses lose its power perspective through “impotence” fantasies and “democracy” discourse in the name of progressivism.

2- While organizing revolution and after the revolution; it is required to determine class compositions correctly and properly. Indeed, it is very important to distinguish the bourgeois classes and the proletariat within production relations based on their own objectivity and to continue the struggle between these two

without any interruption. Mapping classes on wrong base would blunt the essence of class struggle and its progression ability, thus provide a basis for revisionism. Under the socialist systems and today as well, the “working class” definition is made ambiguous as far as possible, and by defining petit bourgeois classes within the working class, a ground for “class compradors” are created. In this regard, it is very crucial for proletariat to adhere strictly to the science of society and history Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, comprehend and adopt it as a compass.

3- The returns are mainly a political defeat. This defeat created unfavorable conditions which negatively affect commitments to the struggle of working class and oppressed social layers, and raise doubts on world-view in favor of them. This issue should be also considered as a matter which cannot be coped with by communists and revolutionary parties. Actually, the working class and oppressed fractions of society are aware of exploitation, but they are far from recognizing the need for power. In that vein, this ambiguity towards the proletariat dictatorship, one of the most important apparatus of working class for class struggle is strengthened with reformism. The proletariat dictatorship undergoes an ideological attack against itself. There is a propaganda claiming that socialism was defeated due to this power apparatus. The communists are responsible for enabling working class to understand the need and importance of proletarian dictatorship, and telling that it allows their real emancipation.

4- Communism and the communist parties are exposed to an extensive isolation within large masses. Along with ideological and political oppressions, it is tried to convince masses of people that it is possible to make the “class struggle” without any need for communist leading force and the party. Indeed this claim is promoted to masses by offering that all social uprisings and changes can be as a revolution without a leadership. With an amorphous perspective, wide masses are besieged by a petit- bourgeois understanding limited in terms of building and gaining emancipation. Concordantly, it is tried to make working class and oppressed classes leaderless by devaluing the leadership role and the historical mission of the communist party. Indeed, the need for communist party and its important role for revolution become

more apparent both during reversing period of socialism and while organizing the revolution. A position with an ideological clarity has a vital importance for communists.

5- Accelerating returns to capitalism, imperialist aggression and national liberation movements lead to discussions claiming that our time is not the age of “proletarian revolutions” anymore.
One of the most important tasks for the communists is to reveal that we are still in the “age of imperialism and proletarian revolution”, by analyzing in the light of recent developments and experienced defeats. At this point, we have to put an end to this ambiguity through an accurate and strict principal attitude.


October Revolution is not a revolution that happened as taking advantage of a negligence of bourgeoisie. It has tackled and solved the conditions that it was in, the class struggles, the political conditions, and quality and war politics of imperialist-capitalism through a historical- dialectical materialist method. It was a revolution that is realized under the leadership of Communist party by dominating laws of motion and convincing masses of people. That’s why it was successful at founding a system as coming to power consciously, coherently with the process of historical development and as working class taking over its historical role as the revolutionary class. In a very short time in respect to social history and with all those unique financial, political and cultural developments, it has proved that socialist system is applicable and that it is better than the capitalist system. Within this short period of time in which exploitation of humans by humans was stopped it was practically proved that capitalism is not a ‘law of nature’ but a result of backwardness of human development.
The most important objectivity that leads to the October Revolution was imperialism and the war for sharing markets of those imperialist powers. Based on the laws of dialectical-historical materialism Lenin identified that developing capitalism was evolving to imperialism as it was becoming monopolized. He comprehended that this development was severely changed

the rules of struggle, politics and the contradictions created by the era of free competitive capitalism.
This comprehension paves the way for organizing socialist revolution as making use of destruction, hunger, misery and sharp contradictions that war induced. October Revolution and its earlier period conduced toward a new era; it gave us a perspective and made us have certain attitudes and theoretical paradigms about lots of issues such as the characteristic of capitalism, attitude towards war and alliance issues.
October revolution beyond any doubt is the result of new contradictions and problems that imperialism brought into being. At the same time, as a result of comprehending imperialism completely, October Revolution is the right attitude and scientific approach towards those contradictions.
Comrade Lenin defined imperialism and he explained how historical part of capitalism changed with that situation unequivocally as follows: Capitalism only became capitalist imperialism at a definite and very high stage of its development in 20th century. Capitalism now regards nation states without which it was impossible to surpass feudalism as a burden to itself. Concentration of capitalism is so high that all branches of industry and unions are captured by trusts and associations of millionaires, and almost the entire world is shared by ‘lords of finance. He says that capitalism was the liberating through its struggle against feudalism, but now it transformed into imperialist capitalism and became the biggest oppressor of nations. Capitalism as once progressive turned into conservative and he thus brought a new definition for the historical part of bourgeoisie.
As the imperialist financial oligarchy was surrounding the world all over, also the horrible and destructive competition between them escalated. Nationalist wars turned into imperialist wars. The financial and political competition obtained the ground to evolve into a dense struggle that focuses on organizing the present markets and to have new ones. And the meaning of the ground was war.
If the financial character of imperialism is monopoly, then its political character is war and destruction. Lenin has achieved to organise the revolution with certain and clear strikes against revisionist movement which was blunt to the changes regarding the character of bourgeoisie in free competition period and which cannot comprehend the financial and political character of imperialism.
Especially, within the leadership of Kautsky, German Social Democrats’ views on war in the first war of imperialist sharing were in the target of Lenin. Those Marxists who were leaning on the prior character of

bourgeoisie for the sake of ‘defence of the fatherland’ made no bones about aligning behind their own bourgeoisie.
Even though the fact that this war was an imperialist one, some approaches appeared that implicitly or openly see imperialism unilateral and that tried to define its nation’s bourgeoisie as ‘progressive’ and ‘nation saviour’. Lenin has given a fight against those approaches; he condemned them as social- chauvinism and evaluated as a treachery to socialism. The reason that paved way to collapse of second international was those conservative attitudes regarding the war.
Lenin handled the problem with the slogan ‘turn imperialist war into civil war’ and met the conservative imperialist aims of his own national bourgeoisie to raise revolutionary war against them. Lenin defined all those other approaches as ‘class compradors’.
Through their position, Lenin and October Revolution had the principal attitude towards the notion of imperialism and war as its result. The reason that we are evaluating wars today from a perspective as not ruling imperialism out is due to this certain attitude. However it can be seen that some movements call themselves, as ‘Leninist’ are still seriously confused. Especially on certain topics such as justified/-unjustified war, national liberation and defence of the fatherland some class comprador approaches are revealed themselves in certain ways. While a justified warfare arose from the notion of imperialism condemned with social-chauvinist approaches, a warfare and contradictions that are going on between a dependent dominant class and an imperial power (like Saddam, Esad and Kaddafi, etc.) dominant classes can be supported due to the notion of imperialism. We think that being against both of them are compatible with Lenin’s approach and with the true class attitude.
Lenin advises doing the historical examination of each war with dialectic materialistic point of view. But he recognizes every war of oppressed against the oppressor as just and right, and he identifies it as progressive. He condemns those pacifist and peaceful attitudes, which defends peace in any circumstances. He says that although war means dread, misery and cruelty, those wars, which have a progressive side, serve for development of societies and humanity. Lenin’s attitude about this issue is pretty clear. He explains his attitude accurately when he says about wars declared by oppressed to oppressors ‘These would be just, and defensive wars, irrespective of who would lie the first to attack; any socialist would wish the oppressed, dependent and unequal states victory over the oppressor, slave-holding and predatory ‘Great’ Powers’. Lenin put forth proletariat with class-conscious point of view on war with its theoretical and practical

foundations. Proletariat doesn’t demand war and has a precise stance against imperialist wars.
However proletariat with a class conscious embraces Comrade Mao’s approach as he says: we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun. In that respect it doesn’t refrain from wars, it supports just and legitimates wars as a party and an element.
We said that imperialist system means war and cruelty at the same time. The main reason of a series of regional wars today is essentially imperialism.
Imperialists design wars in direct or indirect ways and they want to manage national-religious-denominational and political contradictions to organise markets and dominate over them. Today the problems of oppressed nations and sectarian tensions are also external problems beyond being inner ones. In that sense the solution to this social contradiction has to include struggle against imperialism also. In our times, for any movement or struggle that does not defend opposition to imperialism, to adjust a democratic program or target is possible. With October Revolution, the fuel of national bourgeoisie in imperialist system to play the role as the liberator of the nation and as the progressive leadership is over. In that sense it is not possible also to play the role of dominating the market. That’s why there are two options; semi- dependence to imperialism or a complete resistance to imperialism and financial oligarchy as a part of proletarian revolutions.
Revolutionary struggle is the necessary and irreplaceable means of proletariat against bourgeoisie. For proletariat running away from this means and from necessity mean to surrender to pacifism and to postpone power to an indefinite time. In the age of imperialism and proletarian revolutions, revolution strategy of international proletariat in semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries is reshaped according to characteristics of this era. New conditions and contradictions that were created by October Revolution paved the way for the conditions to lead the national fight and democratic revolution. At this point Mao Zedong determined the revolution strategy that can be applied in China and all around the globe in all semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries. And this is the People’s War. People’s War is a revolution strategy that will solve the problems and contradictions of peasants, small bourgeoisie and national bourgeoisie within the leadership of proletariat. In other words this revolution has the character of an alliance of peasant and workers within the leadership of proletariat. The aim of this revolutionary struggle is to realize New Democratic Revolution (Democratic People’s Revolution). What we want to emphasize here is the fact that this struggle and the organization of

revolution from the beginning till the end was grounded upon arms and force.
And the allied classes expanded accordingly to the era and revolution was realized in practice. The sediments from feudality were accepted as the democratic content of the revolution and as a necessity arose from dependency to imperialism. In that sense Mao made an important contribution to Marxism-Leninism in scientific socialism aspect and he added a new dimension to the liberation struggle of proletariat and the oppressed people, as he comprehends the new conditions and contradictions after the October Revolution.

One of the strategically important issues of the revolution is the alliance politics. It is important that with which groups the proletariat will organize the revolution and to whom it will be aggressive. Although proletariat and bourgeoisie are two opposite classes, in between there are some other classes and layers as well. The attitude of proletariat towards those classes is important considerably as either enhancing or restricting the possibilities of revolution.
In October Revolution Proletariat appropriated poor peasant as its trustworthy and solid allies but this is not an intention problem. Peasants were the most strong and powerful class socially and at the same time in Russia they had a history of struggle that can be considered as very long. It was the revolutionary class that was oppressed under the strong pressure of feudalism, thus had some demands and struggled for those demands for a long time. Lenin determined this fact accurately without ignoring the political character and quality of revolution. Through a right embrace to adduct peasants to proletariat, he succeeded to make peasantry a trustworthy ally to the revolution. In addition, small bourgeoisie of the city and oppressed classes are the other classes and layers that the October Revolutions depended upon. He convinced those classes to socialist revolution and he organized revolutionary process without coming to terms with class collaboration about the leadership role of proletariat. Proletariat was consisting of those different social groups from proletarian to semi- proletarian, from semi-proletarian to small peasants and small bourgeoisie of the city and others. To do the analysis of this reality correctly as the reason of capitalism, of those classes and layers who have some interests from the revolution; and to subject them to the general political line of proletariat are crucial for the sake of social revolution. October Revolution was the masterful practice of all those. To break ties of those classes off their relations of property and include them into socialist mode of production are

worked through as a long process and it has been realized through a series of financial-political programme.
October Revolution forced proletariat to establish larger alliances as a result of the political and social climate that it created. Financial oligarchy and bourgeois monopolies needed the most barbaric attacks and political regimes against oppressed people and nations. In imperialist age, bourgeois conservativeness brought out fascist political regime in addition to bourgeois democracy. Their greed for profit, their hostility for different political views and their aggressive imperialist politics of fascist political regimes forced proletariat to rearrange its alliances according to this historical fact. The dominant classes of semi-colonial countries (feudal elements and comprador bourgeoisie) began to collaborate with fascist regimes and with their power. This situation turned the political property of countries to the contents of democratic revolution. At this certain point proletariat acted through a denominational alliance policy appropriate with ‘democratic revolutions’, and it posited the process of transition to socialist regimes to the axis of the regimes of people’s democracy.
As a result October Revolution created an impact as it shaked imperialism and systems of conservative bourgeoisie at their core. October Revolution made bourgeoisie class more conservative in order to protect itself, to continue its existence and exploitation, to get higher profits and also to pursue new ideological and political ways for its new conservative character in history. At the same time, October Revolution brought forth the political change that made those classes in between closer to revolution and also made them more prone to be subjected to proletarian leadership.
Even though socialism was defeated, it is a fact that it is scraped forever to the memory of history as a prescription of liberation for working classes and oppressed people. We will keep in mind that every defeat of socialism is worse than the prior, but thus its success in each time is greater than the prior one. Also, we will not forget that each success of capitalist imperialism is headed for its own fall. We will draw attention to the developmental difference of capitalist productive powers between a hundred years ago and today by excluding revisionist and class comprador approaches like productive power theory; and we will emphasize that today objective conditions of socialism are stronger than they used to be. In addition we will draw a thick line with the theory that the defeat of socialism is inevitable in 20th century. What we observe is the fact that through historical progress while some old problems are off the agenda, new problems are emerged and will be emerged that we have overcome in socialism. It is a fact that imperialism smooth’s the way for socialism as it is centralizing and intensifying the social production every other day.

The foundational properties of imperialism didn’t change since the October Revolution. However, there are some serious changes such as multinational monopolies, transition from exploitation politics to semi- exploitation politics, the dispossession of the classes in between etc. When all of those conditions are preparing new and solid material grounds for socialism, they also create a ground that conditions socialism as having more interest for allied classes.
In this respect, through the leadership of proletariat we have to analyse and produce solutions for developments and new conditions without giving up but embracing Marxist-Leninist-Maoist principles. We have to take firm steps forward for socialism-communism; and we have to spend our revolutionary energy for stronger prospective OCTOBERs.