July 1, 2021 marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China. All progressive mankind looks with great hope to modern China, the bulwark of peace and the main anti-imperialist force.

Congratulations to the 95 million-strong CPC army, its leadership, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Party Xi Jinping, and all 1.5 billion Chinese people!

Without the Communist Party and the creative development of communist theory, there would be no new China!

The victory of the Chinese revolution under the leadership of the CPC and the formation of the PRC are two of the largest events in world history, along with the October Revolution and the victory of the Soviet Union in the Great Patriotic War. In the modern world, after the fall of the USSR, the Chinese factor plays no less a role than the Stalinist USSR in its time.

We are deeply convinced that none of our Marxists have the scientific or moral right to criticize the policies of the CPC and the PRC. Our leftists often pass verdicts on the leadership of the CPC and the entire PRC, determining the degree of their conformity with Marxist theory as if they themselves had already mastered Marxism exhaustively. Moreover, their tone is so pugnacious, and their peremptory low ratings are so severe, as if the CPC is imposing its policies on our communist movement.

The conclusions of many of our leftists about the CPC and the PRC have no practical significance for the immediate fate of the PRC. The gains and results of the communist movement in the countries of the former USSR are so insignificant in comparison with the growth and challenges of China that it is appropriate to say that they are looking at a speck in another’s eye. The fact is that our leftist theorists, in principle, cannot offer any useful advice to the Chinese leadership.

Another point is that it is extremely useful to study the experience of the CPC, but also necessary to understand that, being surrounded by anti-communist countries including the Russian Federation, Chinese leaders cannot and should not be completely open. No one today will fraternally share information with just anyone, especially with flattering opportunists and anti-communists, of whom we have a dime a dozen.

Only socio-historical practice is the criterion of truth. The high stability of the CPC shows that Mao Zedong’s conclusions about Khrushchev turned out to be correct, and that organizational principles and a strict attitude towards cadres fully correspond to the objective internal and external conditions of the class struggle in China.

The post-Stalinist CPSU presented the policy of the CPC under the leadership of Mao Zedong as absolutely anti-Marxist and adventurist. However, the policy of Khrushchev and the Khrushchevites turned out to be absolutely anti-Marxist and adventurist, especially in the matter of rejecting Stalinist theoretical and practical heritage, and in the practice of discrediting Stalinism. In the conditions of the CPSU’s loss of Marxist authority and betrayal of the world communist movement, the CPC remained, relying only on its own forces and fighting against the corrupting influence of revisionism.

For 70 years, the CPC has been building communism in China. And all these decades, China has remained a monolithic, dynamically growing country, in which Marxism is being developed at the academic level, taught in schools and universities, and the entire experience of building communism is still exclusively considered positive in the leadership of the CPC, in the party, in the Chinese working class, in the army, and in the media.

It is not difficult to imagine what kind of anti-scientific and anti-Soviet nonsense social scientists in the Russian Federation present to schoolchildren and students, while in China they continue to study and develop Marxism at the state level.

Starting with Andropovshchina, the struggle against everything bourgeois and petty-bourgeois in the USSR practically ceased. That is why in 1991 the collapse of the USSR took place. At the same time, China in 1989 survived a similar situation largely because the pro-bourgeois intelligentsia was significantly discredited and disorganized during the Cultural Revolution, while in the USSR, 2/3rds of the members of the CPSU, a large number of editorial offices, and university professors, in fact, held petty-bourgeois, anti-scientific, nationalistic, and clerical views.

Soviet «Marxists» made fun of how fiercely Chinese teenagers, workers, villagers and soldiers read the «Red Book,» while political, Marxist education in the USSR was completely swamped, and political studies and the study of Marxist-Leninist theory, with Stalinism artificially cut out, were formalized to the level modern USE system. Practice has shown that communism in China only gained from the events of the Cultural Revolution.

The collapse of the USSR proved the complete helplessness of the Soviet teaching masses, and not only at school, but also at university. The already weak Marxist training of Soviet pedagogical staff was exacerbated during the Khrushchev era by an increased emphasis on the polytechnic education of schoolchildren and students.

In China, they considered it necessary to throw everything that was brought into textbooks by religious, feudal and bourgeois paid historiography out of teaching and make Mao Zedong’s idea, his vision of the applicability of the provisions of Marxism to the specific conditions of China the main subject. Therefore, even Deng Xiaoping, without hesitation, sternly dispersed the supporters of democracy and the multi-party system in Beijing in 1989.

The current predominance of leadership cadres in the CPC who do not intend to stray from the path of building communism in China is also a consequence of the fact that Mao Zedong demonstrated victorious practice during his lifetime, and schoolchildren and students repeatedly memorized and listened to Mao Zedong’s ideas. The “Red Book,” of course, is inferior to comedy clubs and TikTok videos in terms of fascination, but its impact on the minds of young people turned out to be quite deep and stable. This allows China today to dynamically become world leaders, taking advantage of both the workaholism of Chinese entrepreneurs and workers, who, as Marx wrote, are ready to break their necks while they can receive permitted profits and piecework wages, and the greed of Western investors who are ready to build the material base of communism in China, if only to exploit cheap labor for a while. However, the main thing is that for three decades now the influence of the CPC on the country’s development trends, on the implementation of large-scale space and earthly projects has only been growing, and there are no practical signs that during this time the so-called Chinese billionaires have turned into oligarchs. At the same time, the planned, crisis-free development of China’s social productive forces and their socialization are only growing.

Good luck to the CPC and the Chinese working class!

EDITORIAL OFFICE