this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2024
72 points (97.4% liked)

América Latina & Caribe

8072 readers
174 users here now

[GUARANÍ] Tereg̃uaheporãite / [ES] Bienvenidos / [PT] Bem vindo / [FR] Bienvenue / [NL] Welkom

Everything to do with the USA's own Imperial Backyard. From hispanics to the originary peoples of the americas to the diasporas, South America to Central America, to the Caribbean to North America (yes, we're also there).

Post memes, art, articles, questions, anything you'd like as long as it's about Latin America. Try to tag your posts with the language used, check the tags used above for reference (and don't forget to put some lime and salt to it).

Here's a handy resource to understand some of the many, many colloquialisms we like to use across the region.

"But what about that latin american kid I've met in college who said that all the left has ever done in latin america has been bad?"

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
RNAi@hexbear.net
Quimby@hexbear.net
thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net
72
Communist Party of Brazil - New General Megathread for the 31st of August-1st of September 2024 (hexbear.net)
submitted 4 months ago by thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net to c/latam@hexbear.net
488 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Communist Party – Brazilian Section of the Communist International (Partido Comunista – Seção Brasileira da Internacional Comunista, PC-SBIC) was founded on 25 March 1922, gathering Brazilian Communists under the same label until the international rupture in the movement that occurred after the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in 1956, and the 5th Congress of the PC-SBIC in 1960, when Brazilian Communists found themselves divided into two tendencies. At the 20th Congress of the CPSU, Nikita Khrushchev had delivered the so-called "Secret Speech", which denounced the abuses committed by the Soviet state under Joseph Stalin's rule. Khrushchev was considered a revisionist by supporters of the late Stalin, which led to a rupture in the Communist movement in various countries.

In Brazil, the rupture reached the party leadership, which had rebuilt PC-SBIC after the setbacks it suffered under the Estado Novo regime (1930–1945), which tried to pit workers against the party and violently repressed it. The party leadership prior to the rupture, primarily composed of revisionists, was formed in 1943 by João Amazonas, Maurício Grabois, Pedro Pomar, Diógenes Arruda Câmara, and Secretary General Luís Carlos Prestes, among others.

PC-SBIC (1922–1962)

The PC-SBIC was ideologically grounded in the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and in the actions of Vladimir Lenin in the aftermath of the October Revolution, advocating democratic centralism and Marxism–Leninism. It was launched on 25 March 1922 in Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, when members of the Brazilian working class took their first big step towards arranging themselves under a class organization; nine delegates, representing 50 workers, held a Congress and founded the PC-SBIC. On 4 April 1922, it was recognized as a political party by the federal government, with its manifesto being published in the Official Gazette. Following the international guidance, the party was given the name of Communist Party – Brazilian Section of the Communist International.

A series of influential parties in the Brazilian political scene emerged from the PC-SBIC, such as the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB) and the Revolutionary Communist Party (PCR), in addition to many Trotskyist and Stalinist groups. The international rupture that arose in the Communist movement after 1956 caused the PC-SBIC to split on 18 February 1962, during its 5th National Congress.

Reorganization of the Communist Party of Brazil

The National Party Conference (Conference of Mantiqueira) was held on 11 August 1943. The Conference reviewed the political situation and the tasks of the Party, politics, and tasks of construction and rebuilding to which it must attend. A new Central Committee was elected, for the old leadership and the party organization was almost torn apart due to arrests by the police.

The 2nd Reorganization (18 February 1962)

At the 5th National Conference Meetings, held on 18 February 1962, in São Paulo, with the dissent of Marxist-Leninist tendencies, the party was reorganized. Embracing the acronym and symbol PCdoB, the party was proclaimed the legitimate successor of the Communist Party – Brazilian Section of the Communist International (PC-SBIC). In opposition to the revisionist line of the 5th Congress, the Conference adopted the Manifesto-Program, which draws a revolutionary line, reintroduced the Statute adopted at the Fourth Congress, adopted a resolution on the unity of the Communists, signed the principle that each country can only exist a single Marxist–Leninist party, decided to reissue The Working Class, a former central organ of the Party, approved the break with the USSR, and, finally, elected a new Central Committee.

Maoist guideline (1962–1969)

The crisis between the Soviet Union and China reached its peak when the Chinese leader Mao Zedong criticized the ongoing process of de-Stalinization in the USSR, and accused Khrushchev of "opportunistic" and "reformist" deviations. A division of Mao with the rest of the communist movement attracted the sympathy of the PCdoB, who sent emissaries to Beijing to formalize the ideological link with the new ideological guidelines of the Chinese Communist Party.

However, adherence to Maoism included a shift in the strategies of the PCdoB. Following the principle of protracted people's war, PCdoB undertook to transfer ideology to the field, initiating the formation of a peasant army.

The final adoption of Maoism by the PCdoB was in 1966 at its 6th Congress. The following year, the party drew up a declaration in support of the Cultural Revolution underway in China.

The Araguaia Guerrilla (1969–1976)

Forward from 1966, PCdoB sought to form a nucleus guerrilla camp. The area chosen for the irradiation of the future peasant army (along a Maoist line) was a region south of Para, near the border with Tocantins. The most effective guerrilla of the PCdoB column (under the name "Araguaia Guerrilla Force") was composed of high school and college students, organized around the Patriotic Union of Youth (UJP, youth wing of the party), professionals, and workers mainly from São Paulo and Minas Gerais.

In 1971, Army units discovered the location of the guerrilla nucleus and were deployed to cordon off the area, preventing it from spreading its operations to the north of the Amazon. The defeat of the Araguaia would establish the ideal of the PCdoB guerrillas as the most effective and experienced of armed struggle the dictatorship. The Araguaia Guerrilla redefined the dictatorship's plans for the Amazon region, whose repressions in the region were hidden long after the dictatorship's fall.

The abandonment of Maoism (1976–1979)

Shorn of its main cadres, PCdoB began to regroup with staff from the PA leadership and staff of João Amazonas, who, with Diógenes Arruda, were the last remnants of the group that rebuilt the party in 1962. Arruda's death (in 1979) left Amazonas as Secretary of the PCdoB until his death.

Observing the failure of the rural guerrilla and the new policy adopted by China since Mao's death in 1976, PCdoB decided to break with Maoism. In 1978, the party followed Enver Hoxha in his criticism of Chinese leaders, and considered Albania alone as a socialist country, the last bulwark of Marxism-Leninism.

The path to legalization (1979–1987)

In 1978, the party had begun participating in institutional action through the MDB, the moderate opposition to the military government. PCdoB resumed its parliamentary activity and secretly elected its first MPs from within the MDB.

In 1979, with the granting of Amnesty, PCdoB found a favorable environment for their penetration of the unions and student organizations. The party was opposed to the CUT (trade union arm of the PT). The rebuilding of UNE (1979) with Aldo Rebelo marked the beginning of the hegemony of the party in university entity. In 1984, PCdoB founded the Union of Socialist Youth (UJS), its youth wing. In elections to the Constituent Assembly of 1986, PCdoB elected six deputies, including Haroldo Lima, and Aldo Arantes

A socialist program (1987–1995)

The social and economic crisis that followed the Cruzado Plan (1987) led PCdoB to break the PMDB. In its place, the party sought a broader alliance with the PT and the PSB. In 1988, trade unionists PCdoB broke with the General Workers Central and formed the current Class Union, which then became part of the CUT, currently connected to the CTB.

In 1989, along with the PSB, PCdoB supported the candidacy of PT's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for the presidency. Also with the PT, PCdoB also was in opposition to the government of Fernando Collor. PCdoB argued for his removal, which occurred in September 1992 with large student demonstrations, participated in by the UJS along with the UBEs and UNE.

Lula administration and opposition to neoliberalism

In the late 1980s, PCdoB supported the formation of a popular front to launch Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's candidacy for President. Since then, it has been a member of all electoral coalitions led by the Workers' Party (PT) at the federal level. It has also allied itself with the PT in most states and capitals.

The PCdoB has registered a generally steady increase in its number of seats in the National Congress since the 1986 elections, the first parliamentary elections which the party contested. With the victory of Lula in 2002, PCdoB became part of the federal government, occupying the Ministry of Sports; first with Agnelo Queiroz, and later with Orlando Silva. This was the first time that a Communist occupied a Ministry of the Brazilian state.

Although critical of the economic policy of the Lula administration, PCdoB maintained its support to PT. In 2006, when Lula sought his re-election, the party formalized its participation in his alliance.

At the end of 2007, its divergences with PT began to increase, and PCdoB abandoned the Central Única dos Trabalhadores (CUT) trade union organization, and, along with the Brazilian Socialist Party and other independent sections of the union movement, it founded the Central of Male and Female Workers of Brazil (CTB).

The PCdoB suffered a major decline during the 2020 municipal elections, from 86 elected in 2016 to 46 mayors elected in 2020. The region that elected the most PCdoB candidates was the Northeast region , in the states of Bahia and Maranhão.

The 15th National Congress of the PCdoB took place in October 2021 and re-elected Luciana Santos as the party's president for the next four years. The event was named “ Haroldo Lima ” in honor of the historic communist leader who died this year due to Covid-19 and marked the preparations for the party's centenary. At the event, a political resolution was also approved focusing on strengthening the party and the fight to build a broad front to isolate and defeat the Bolsonaro government.

Megathreads and spaces to hang out:

reminders:

  • 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
  • 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
  • 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
  • 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
  • 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog

Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):

Aid:

Theory:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] miz@hexbear.net 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Why did the Chinese abandon this model?

Initially, when Mao came to power, he adopted market economic policies, and in fact criticized the USSR for not using the markets enough.

However, the USSR’s rapid collectivization seemed to be having initial positive impact on their growth, which was partially true but also partially exaggerated as the USSR tried to hide some of the problems that came with it.

Ultimately, this led Mao to change his mind and adopt Soviet policies towards rapid collectivization, embracing a sort of “communist wind” that communism could be fully completed in a short amount of time.

When this led to economic hardship, this caused communists in China to split into two camps.

The first camp is Mao’s camp. He argued the problem was a “cultural” one. The political system, the shared social ideology, the culture, etc, all these things he viewed as having been corrupted by capitalist elements. Hence, he believed China’s adoption of the Stalin Model from the USSR could be made to work if they had a “cultural revolution,” a radical transformation of the country’s culture.

The second camp, Deng’s camp, instead did not believe the Stalin Model could work at all. China was even less developed and more poor than the USSR, in fact when Mao took power initially they were basically the poorest country on earth. The idea they had developed enough to achieve the full abolition of private property was just an absurdity beyond words.

The first camp initially had an advantage because all the moralistic rhetoric was on their side. They could condemn anyone who talked about China having to maintain some private economy as “betraying the revolution,” of “supporting exploitation of the workers,” of being a “capitalist roader,” etc. The second camp was seen initially as the killjoys.

However, the first camp gradually fell out of favor when their Cultural Revolution failed to make the Stalin Model work, and the Cultural Revolution itself was a disaster, leading to a lot of chaos, which caused mass death, and ultimately towards the end and caused the economy to start to decline.

This culminated in the Gang of Four declaring that they didn’t even care about development, they it was “better to be poor under socialism than to be rich under capitalism”! This really shows the moralistic bent to Mao’s factions, they were more interested in the morality of abolishing all aspects of capitalism rather than just building a system that actually works.

Eventually, people got tired of the chaos and instability and this lead to Deng Xiaoping’s faction gaining power, and they implemented the policy of “grasping the large, letting go of the small.” In other words, to privatize all the small-to-medium sized enterprises that Mao had nationalized, but to maintain public control over the large enterprises.

This does create a conundrum, though, because most of China’s enterprises are small enterprises. If they privatized them, they’d privatize most their economy. Some would conclude that means socialism is impossible for China, which is actually a position some Marxists even to this day hold, some Marxists think China is just too poor to have socialism and that only western countries are developed enough for socialism.

However, the argument against this actually goes back to Rudolf Hilferding’s writings back in 1910. Hilferding argued that enterprises are not equal. If you nationalize, let’s say, a bouncy ball factory, this will give you less influence in the economy than if you nationalize, let’s say, a rubber factory. Why? Because the bouncy ball factory, as well as millions of other factories, depend on the rubber factory, but almost nothing depends on the bouncy ball factory.

Hilferding thus argued that nationalizing large enterprises at the “heights” of the economy like a rubber factory gives you far more authority and influence in the economy than nationalizing the small bouncy ball factory, and hence, he did not think you actually need to even have the majority of enterprises nationalized to control the economy, only the overwhelmingly majority of large enterprises, because everything else depends on those enterprises and thus would be “indirectly socialized.”

That’s how China still is to this day. People will often point out the fact that 60% of China’s GDP output is from the private sector and conclude that means China “abandoned Marxism.” What they don’t also realize that is 60% of China’s GDP output also comes from small-to-medium sized enterprises, meaning that the overwhelming majority of large enterprises are public.

[–] miz@hexbear.net 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Why Do Some Communists Love China in Mao’s time But Attack Everything Else?

The Stalin Model even in the USSR was showing cracks pretty early on, leading to the Soviets to try and reform it and change it after Stalin’s death. Mao was still alive at this time, and he saw how the Soviets were gradually moving away from the model that he had come to believe in, and so that’s why he started to formulate the idea about the Cultural Revolution to prevent that from happening in China.

Mao did more than this, though, he also accused the USSR of having abandoned socialism, of being overtaken in a bourgeois counter-revolution. In fact, under Crosscheck[Khrushchev], Mao described the USSR as a “Hiterlite dictatorship” of “the big bourgeoisie” and said it had become a “socialist imperialist” and “capitalist state.”

If the USSR had become a capitalist state equivalent to Nazi Germany, then what did that make its allies? It made its allies aligned with Nazism, it made them horrible and worthy of condemnation. Vietnam and Cuba both sided with the USSR, which made them fall other this very same condemnation.

This also meant the USSR was something worth combating, and this led China under Mao to begin supporting Pol Pot’s regime in Cambodia because they were opposed to the USSR.

After Mao died and his faction lost control, the PRC gradually adopted a non-interventionist approach in order to focus on economic construction rather than ideological dissemination. While they still even supported the Cambodia guerrillas for a short period of time, this too gradually died down, eventually causing the Cambodian guerrillas movement to wither.

Some communist guerrilla groups in various countries, such as Peru, India, and the Philippines, did not like this idea that China stopped supporting guerrilla movements, because they are guerrilla movements and want support from China. So they started to argue that China had undergone the same transition Mao said the USSR underwent, that China today must be an imperialist capitalist regime, and that’s why it’s not lending support to them.

This makes these guerrilla groups, the modern day “Maoists,” view themselves a direct continuation of Mao Zedong and the Sino- side of the Sino-Soviet Split. They see the USSR as having been overthrown in a bourgeois counter-revolution, and that Mao tried to stop it in China but China was overthrown in a bourgeois counter-revolution as well.

Since the USSR was supposed equivalent to Nazi Germany back then, they also condemn its allied, they claim Cuba isn’t a socialist country, and they claim Vietnam isn’t a socialist country, still to this day. But they will then turn around and defend the Khmer Rouge as “genuine” communist revolution.

So, in their mind, the only “true” communist revolution was USSR until Stalin died, and China until Mao died, and then everything else has been a bourgeoisie Hitlerite dictatorship. (To my knowledge, there is no group that says they like Mao’s China but not the USSR at any point in time, they usually say they like the USSR up until the death of Stalin.)

They don’t actually acknowledge that the reason every socialist country abandoned the Stalin Model was because they couldn’t actually get it to be long-term sustainable, and instead insist that Mao’s Cultural Revolution could’ve “saved” it if only they “had done it early enough.” They think Mao’s only flaw was that he “discovered” the Cultural Revolution too late, and if it was implemented for a much longer time, then at some point, the Stalin Model would actually start to work… somehow.

There was a Maoist revolution in Nepal but just like China, they ended up abandoning that model very quickly. I would presume if the “Maoists” in the Philippines or in India ever take state power, they would abandon it fairly quickly as well. They refuse to acknowledge why it was abandoned and delude themselves into thinking it was just a cultural failure.

[–] miz@hexbear.net 4 points 4 months ago

Crosscheck

I think this is autocorrect for Khrushchev