/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Why was the KKE able to retain its mass base and its revolutionary character after the counter-revolution? Why is the communist party of a small, albeit typical, lesser NATO country the leading force of a current for the reconstitution of a leninist pole in the international communist movement, against the main current of social-chauvinism, prompted by imperialist centers?
Unlike for example the -up until the 1990s politically and organizationally similar- Portuguese communist party which ended up supporting bourgeois coalitions the KKE had an internal split with the eurocommunist 'renewalist' tendencies, that were even inside the political bureau. The full organizational split from opportunism proved to be vital for the direction of the party. This allowed the KKE to stay true to revolutionary principles while also retaining firm roots in the working people, while the Portuguese communist party slowly deteriorated through contact with 'leftist' bourgeois forces. The theoretical developments on the KKE's strategy is owed to this direction that refuses to submit to the new negative power dynamic between capital and the international proletariat, and recognises that despite the subversions at the end of the last century our era is still that of socialist revolution.The KKE's contemporary revolutionary strategy is based on the creative assimilation of the experience of the communist movement.
In my opinion, this is a relative development of communist theory because it make it more concrete. I think its driving force are not just the local conditions of Greece but, mostly, its unique history. The KKE today, while of course honouring the communist heroes which where on the first line in the fight against fascism everywhere, criticizes the strategy adopted by the 7th Congress of the Communist International. In its opinion, the strategic theory of two-stage revolution and of the united national, anti-fascist, anti-colonial etc. front mostly succeeded due the onslaught of the Red Army in Europe that objectively destroyed the bourgeois states.
In cases like France the collaboration with bourgeois forces in the antifascist front led to the disconnection of national and social struggles and eventually to eurocommunism.
In Greece the two-stage strategy failed, not only because the Red Army never reached it, but also despite the fact that the KKE did not have to, or rather could not, collaborate with the greek bourgeoisie because it either fled during the Occupation or collaborated with the nazis. This meant that it was objectively the main force of the national resistance movement. But because it fought for the unclear goal of intermediate peoples-republic stage, it hesitated in crucial moments and lost the revolutionary chance.
Today, the assimilation of that experience can reveal -to use a hegelian term- an objective illusion (Schein) arising from the mid-war conditions of capitalist development and the objective position of the communist parties for the correct analysis of power relations between the classes. The utter complexity of the October Revolution, can be easily missed from the point of view of its stabilisation in a completely hostile world, with the rise of fascism and a possible coalition of imperialist powers against the country of the workers, under a constant sense of urgency. However, we can tell a hundred years later: it was a historical rupture with (not a continuation of) February. It might seem like that the bourgeois revolution sas organically transformed into socialist-proletarian but that was not the case: the only thing that mediated was dual power and revolutionary war. Lenin abandoned the staged tactic of the Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution with the April Thesis, and this new quick redirection in accordance with the changed analysis of changed conditions led to the success of the Bolsheviks.
After the 7th Congress the Communist International pushed a line that was a regression from that bolshevik revolutionary leap. Missing the dialectical totality of the leninist conception of revolutionary theory in the era of imperialism, it tried to mechanically reproduce the Two Tactics. In Greece and in other countries, this translated to a coalition with bourgeois government post liberation, crucial hesitations during the revolutionary situation, all in the name of the incompleteness of bourgeois democracy, and ultimately defeat. The parties that took part in bourgeois governments deteriorated into reformism and/or were dissolved within the united front of their own creation. In Greece, however the uniqueness lay in that because post-liberation there were all the preconditions of a genuine peoples victory for socialism, hadn't the KKE hesitated to start the civil war, the failure of stageist strategy and its immediate consequences lay bare. The historical and political conclusions of the turn that led to the October Revolution return with vengeance. The reason that the Bolsheviks wom and the greek Democratic People's Army lost in their class civil wars is the same: the strategy of immediate seizure of power for the construction of socialism in the imperialist era on the basis of the understanding that "between capitalism and communism can only the period of the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat".
The KKE faced another historical uniqueness: while mostly in exile after its loss, the crucial opportunist turning point in the communist movement, the direction set by the 20th Congress of the CPSU had to be enforced. It was not easy to adopt the strategy of "peaceful transition to socialism' when the lessons of the civil war were so fresh. The KKE's General Secretary during the war had to be purged by the Soviets. This led to many internal struggles that led to the split of 1968. But due to the struggle of the Democratic People's Army the KKE managed to survive and still influence a large portion of greek society. It objectively remained the main force of the greek proletariat in the class struggles to come.
And so, having reaffirmed its revolutionary character during the crisis of the 90s, in conditions post the dissolution of the old colonial system but also the reach of capital in every corner of the earth post the counter-revolution, having studied the history of the communist movement and of its self, the KKE is able to form a strategy and apply it to the mass movement it in the direction of socialist revolution.
That is why if we assume that a revolutionary crisis is likely to spark in multiple similar countries at once due to the interconnectedness of contemporary global capitalist production, I think it is most likely to result in a successful revolution in Greece. Of course that does not mean that if a greek revolution does initially succeed it won't be crashed by global imperialism if it doesn't spread.
We need to note that the rejection of stageism does not at all justify the greek trotskyites. Indeed when the KKE adopted the strategy of a bourgois-democratic stage to the revolution they were calling for socialist revolution in Greece, but that was not at all due to a correct analysis. It was an obsession with their theory of permanent revolution, put the dustbin of history by the success of socialism in one country. Their dogmatism led them to call for 'working class unity with the german soldiers' and completely erasing the national struggle. No talk of their terrible position on the peasant question and outright racist rejection of the possibility of socialist construction in the countries that it was most likely to happen. Besides, almost all trotskyists today have in one way or another adopted the stageist strategy, they are just calling it transitional measures.
We also need to note that the partisan tactic upheld by communist-revolutionaries of the 20th century arm-in-hand, has nothing to do with the invocation of stageism by modern opportunists to justify their reformism. The communists of the 20th century genuinely did what they only could think was the best and fastest way to communism. Todays supporters of stageist strategy mostly want to justify their allegiance with bourgeois forces in a leftist government on the ground capitalist-imperialism.