Site map






English  >  Analysis  >













Central Committee of the Party of Labour of Albania

The theory and practice of the revolution




Editorial of the Zëri i Popullit, organ of the Central Committee of the PLA, 7 July 1977.

Reproduced in form of booklet:

"8 Nëntori" Publishing, Tirana, 1977.








Printable version
Texts by the PLA - Contents







Analysing the present international situation and the revolutionary processes developing in it, comrade Enver Hoxha declared at the 7th Congress of the PLA: "The world is at a stage when the cause of the revolution and national liberation of the peoples is not just an aspiration and a future prospect, but a problem taken up for solution." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of the PLA, p. 159.)

This important principled thesis is based on the Leninist analysis of imperialism, on the definition given by Lenin of the essence of the present historical epoch, and is inspired by the historic mission of the proletariat to liberate itself and all mankind from any exploitation of man by man, from the capitalist system. It proceeds from a concrete Marxist-Leninist analysis of the major contradictions of our time. The thesis of the 7th Congress of the Party is a reconfirmation of the Marxist-Leninist strategy of the revolution in the present conditions.


In his brilliant works on imperialism, V. I. Lenin arrived at the conclusion that imperialism is capitalism in decline and decay, the final phase of capitalism and the eve of the social revolution of the proletariat. Analysing the phenomena which characterise imperialism, he wrote: "... all these factors transform the present stage of capitalist development into an era of proletarian socialist revolution.

That era has dawned.

Objective conditions make it the urgent task of the day to prepare the proletariat in every way for the conquest of political power in order to carry out the economic and political measures which are the sum and substance of the socialist revolution." (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 24, p. 506, Alb. ed.)

In defining the present epoch, Lenin proceeded from the class criterion. He said that it is important to keep well in mind "which class stands at the hub of one epoch or another, determining its main content, the main direction of its development, the main characteristics of the historical situation in that epoch, etc.". (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 21, p. 147, Alb. ed.) Defining the fundamental content of the new historic epoch, as epoch of imperialism and the proletarian revolutions, he remained consistently loyal to the teachings of Marx about the historic mission of the proletariat as the new social force which will carry out the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist society of oppression and exploitation and build the new society, the classless communist society.

"The Communist Manifesto" of Marx and Engels and their call "Workers of all countries, unite!" came out to announce that the fundamental contradiction of human society was now that between labour and capital, and the proletariat was called on to resolve it by revolution. With his analysis of imperialism, Lenin showed that the contradictions of capitalist society have reached their culmination and that the world has entered the period of proletarian revolutions and the triumph of socialism.

The great October Socialist Revolution confirmed the brilliant conclusions of Marx and Lenin in practice. After the death of Lenin, too, the international communist movement resolutely adhered to his revolutionary strategy. The triumph of the socialist revolution in a number of other countries confirmed that the Leninist thesis on the present epoch, as the epoch of the transition from capitalism to socialism reflects the fundamental law of the development of present day human society. The collapse of the colonial system, the winning of political independence by the overwhelming majority of the countries of Asia, Africa, etc., is another confirmation of the Leninist theory on the epoch and the revolution. The fact that the teachings of Marxism-Leninism and the revolution were betrayed in the Soviet Union and a number of former socialist countries does not alter the Leninist thesis on the character of the present epoch in the least, because this is nothing but a zigzag in the course of the inevitable victory of socialism over capitalism on a world scale.

The Party of Labour of Albania has always consistently upheld these Marxist-Leninist conclusions. Comrade Enver Hoxha has said: "The fundamental features of our epoch, as the epoch of the transition from capitalism to socialism, of the struggle of two opposing social systems, as the epoch of the proletarian and national-liberation revolutions, of the collapse of imperialism and the liquidation of the colonial system, as the epoch of the triumph of socialism and communism on a world scale, are becoming more pronounced and more clearly obvious each day." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 5th Congress of the PLA, p. 5.)

The Marxist-Leninists have always based their definition of the present epoch and their revolutionary strategy on the analysis of the major social contradictions which characterise this epoch. What are these contradictions? Following the triumph of the Socialist Revolution in Russia, Lenin and Stalin spoke about 4 such contradictions: the contradiction between two opposing systems ‑ socialist and capitalist, the contradiction between labour and capital in the capitalist countries, the contradiction between the oppressed peoples and nations and imperialism, the contradictions between imperialist powers. These are the contradictions which constitute the objective basis of the development of the present-day revolutionary movements, which in their entirety, constitute the great process of the world revolution in our epoch. All present-day world development confirms that since the time of Lenin these contradictions have not waned and disappeared but have become more acute and are more clearly obvious than ever before. Therefore, the recognition and admission of the existence of these contradictions constitute the basis for defining a correct revolutionary strategy.

On the contrary, to deny the existence of these contradictions, to hide them, to ignore one or the other contradiction, to distort their real content, as various revisionists and opportunists are doing, causes confusion and disorientation in the revolutionary movement, serves as a basis for building up and advocating distorted, pseudo-revolutionary strategy and tactics.


At present, there is a great deal of talk about the division of the world into the socalled the "first", "second" and "third" worlds, about the "non-aligned world", the world of the "developing countries", the "North" and "South" world, etc. Each of the supporters of these divisions presents his own "theory" as the most correct strategy, which allegedly responds to the real conditions of the present international situation. But as comrade Enver Hoxna stressed at the 7th Congress, "All these terms, which refer to various political forces acting in the world today, cover up and do not bring out the class character of these political forces, the fundamental contradictions of our epoch, the key problem which is predominant today on a national and international scale, the ruthless struggle between the bourgeois-imperialist world on the one hand, and socialism, the world proletariat and its natural allies, on the other." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of the PLA, p. 173.)

When Marxist-Leninists speak about the world and various countries and classify them, their judgement is according to the principles of dialectical and historical materialism. They judge, first and foremost, from the social-economic order existing in various countries, they judge according to the proletarian class criterion. Precisely from this angle V. I. Lenin in 1921, that is, when only one socialist country existed in the world. Soviet Russia, wrote: "In the world today there exist two worlds: the old world of capitalism that is in a state of confusion but which will never surrender voluntarily, and the rising new world, which is still very weak, but which will grow, for it is invincible." (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 33, pp. 153‑154, Alb. ed.) On his part, J. V. Stalin, in his well-known article "The Two Camps" published in 1919, also stressed: "The world has been divided definitely and finally into two camps: the camp of imperialism and the camp of socialism... The struggle between these two camps constitutes the pivot of all life in our time, it characterises all the present internal and external policies of advocates of the old and new world." (J. V. Stalin, Works, vol. 4, p. 226, Alb. ed.)

The view of our Party is that today, too, we should speak about the socialist world, as Lenin and Stalin did, that the Leninist criterion is always correct, as Leninism itself is vital and correct. The argument of the theoreticians of the "three worlds", the "non- aligned world" etc., who have eliminated the existence of socialism from their schemes, referring to the fact of the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and some other former socialist countries, hence the disintegration of the socialist camp, is without foundation. It is in complete opposition to the Leninist teachings and the class criterion.

The revisionist betrayal, the return of the Soviet Union and a number of former socialist countries to capitalism, the spreading of modern revisionism widely in the international communist and workers' movement and the splitting of this movement were a heavy blow to the cause of the revolution and socialism. But this by no means implies that socialism was liquidated as a system and that the criterion of the division of the world in two opposing systems must be changed, that the contradiction between socialism and capitalism no longer exists today. Socialism exists and is advancing in the true socialist countries which stand loyal to Marxism-Leninism such as the People's Socialist Republic of Albania. Hence the socialist system, as a system which is opposed to the capitalist system, exists objectively, just as the contradiction and the life-and-death struggle between it and capitalism exists.

By ignoring socialism as a social system, the socalled "theory of three worlds" ignores the greatest historic victory of the international proletariat, ignores the fundamental contradiction of the time, that between socialism and capitalism. It is clear that such a "theory", which ignores socialism, is anti-Leninist; it leads to the weakening of the dictatorship of the proletariat in the countries where socialism is being built, while calling on the world proletariat not to fight, not to rise in socialist revolution, and this is not to be wondered at: departure from the proletarian class criteria in assessing the situation can lead only to conclusions in opposition to the interests of the revolution and the proletariat.

In his works, Lenin, as the great and consistent Marxist that he was, often analysed the capitalist world and the relationship of forces within it. This he did, always to serve the revolution, to define the tasks facing the proletariat, the tasks of the communist parties, the tasks of the first socialist state towards the world proletarian revolution, to show who were the genuine allies of the revolution and who were its enemies.

Lenin gives us a brilliant example in this direction in his theses and reports at the 2nd Congress of the Communist International in 1920: "The revolutionary parties must now “prove” in practice that they have sufficient understanding and organisation, contact with the exploited masses, and determination and skill to utilise this crisis for a successful, a victorious revolution.

It is mainly to prepare this “proof” that we have gathered at this Congress of the Communist International." (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 31, p. 280, Alb. ed.)

However, the socalled theory of "three worlds" does not lay down any tasks for the revolution, on the contrary it "forgets" this. In the scheme of the "three worlds", the fundamental contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie does not exist. Apart from this, another thing that strikes the eye, in this division of the world, is its non-class view of what is called the "third world", its ignoring of classes and the class struggle, its treatment of countries which this theory includes in this world, the regimes which dominate there and various political forces which operate within it as a single entity. It ignores the contradiction between the oppressed peoples and the reactionary and pro-imperialist forces of their own countries.

It is well-known that in the countries exploited by imperialism, in the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, the freedom-loving peoples are waging a stern struggle for freedom, independence and national sovereignty, against old and new colonialism. This is a just, revolutionary and liberation struggle, which enjoys the unreserved support of the Marxist-Leninists in the true socialist countries, of the world proletariat, of all progressive forces. This struggle is directed ‑ and cannot fail to be directed, against a number of enemies: against the imperialist oppressors, and first and foremost against the two superpowers, as the biggest exploiters and international gendarmes, the most dangerous enemies of all peoples of the world; against the local reactionary bourgeoisie, linked by one thousand and one threads with the foreign imperialists, with this or that superpower, with the international monopolies, which is an enemy of the national freedom and independence; against the still pronounced remnants of feudalism, which rely on the foreign imperialists and are united with the reactionary bourgeoisie against the people's revolution; against the reactionary and fascist regimes, representatives and defenders of the domination of these three enemies.

Therefore it is absurd to pretend that one must fight only against the external imperialist enemies without, at the same time, fighting and attacking the internal enemies, the allies and collaborators of imperialism, and all those factors which hinder this struggle. To this day there has never been any liberation struggle, no national-democratic and anti-imperialist revolution has taken place, without having internal enemies, reactionaries and traitors, sold-out anti-national elements. All strata of the bourgeoisie without exception, including the compradore bourgeoisie, cannot be identified as anti-imperialist forces, as a basis and factors which carry forward the struggle against imperialism, as the socalled theory of the "three worlds" does. To follow this -"theory" means to divert the revolutionary movement from the right road, to abandon the revolution halfway, to separate it from the proletarian revolution in the other countries, to set the struggle of the peoples and the proletariat of those countries on an anti-Marxist and revisionist course.

Marxism-Leninism teaches us that the national question must always be seen as subsidiary to the cause of the revolution. From this standpoint, the Marxist-Leninists support every movement which is effectively directed against imperialism and serves the general cause of the world proletarian revolution. Lenin stressed: "The significance of this change is that we, as Communists, should and will support bourgeois -liberation movements in the colonies only when they are genuinely revolutionary, and when their exponents do not hinder our work of educating and organising in a revolutionary spirit the peasantry and the masses of the exploited. If these conditions do not exist, the Communists in these countries must combat the reformist bourgeoisie, to whom the heroes of the Second International also belong." (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 31. pp. 266‑267, Alb. ed.)

Meanwhile, the advocates of the thesis of the "third world" call liberation movement, moreover even "main force in the struggle against imperialism", even the bargaining of the King of Saudi Arabia or the Shah of Iran with US oil monopolies, and their arms transactions with the Pentagon, involving billions upon billions of dollars. According to this logic, the oil sheiks, who deposit their oil money in the banks of Wallstreet and the City, are allegedly fighters against imperialism and supporters of the people's struggle which is directed against imperialist domination, while the US imperialists, who sell weapons to the reactionary oppressive regimes of these Sheiks, are allegedly supplying them to the "patriotic forces" which are fighting to oust the imperialists from the "golden sands" of Arabia and Persia!

The facts prove that today, the democratic and anti-imperialist liberation revolution can also be waged consistently and carried through to the end only if it is led by the proletariat, with its party at the head, and in alliance with the broad masses of the peasantry and the other anti-imperialist and patriotic forces. As early as 1905, in his book "Two Tactics" Lenin proved with profound arguments that in the conditions of imperialism the characteristic of the democratic-bourgeois revolutions is that the force most interested in carrying these revolutions forward is not the bourgeoisie, which vacillates and has the tendency to unite with the reactionary feudal forces against the revolutionary drive of the masses, but the proletariat, which considers the democratic-bourgeois revolution as an intermediary stage for the transition to the socialist revolution. And the same thing must be said about the national liberation movements of our time. J. V. Stalin stressed that following the October Revolution, "the epoch of the liberation revolutions in the colonies and dependent countries, the epoch of the awakening of the proletariat of those countries, the epoch of its hegemony in the revolution began". (J. V. Stalin, Works, vol. 10, pp. 237‑238, Alb. ed.)

These Leninist teachings assume a special value and importance in the present conditions. Today two tendencies have developed in the world and are acting with a great force, tendencies to which Lenin has drawn our attention: on the one hand, the tendency to the breaking of the national boundaries and the internationalisation of economic and political life on the part of the capitalist monopolies; on the other, the tendency to the strengthening of the struggle for national independence on the part, of various countries. Thus, in connection with the first tendency, in many countries liberated from colonialism, the ties of the local bourgeoisie with foreign imperialist capital have not only been preserved, but are being strengthened and extended in many neo-colonialist forms, such as the multinational companies, various economic and financial mergers, and so on and so forth. This bourgeoisie, which occupies key positions in the economic and political life of these countries, and which is growing, is a pro-imperialist force and enemy of the revolutionary and liberation movement.

As for the other tendency, that to the strengthening of the national independence against imperialism in the former colonial countries, it is linked, first of all and mainly, with the increase of the proletariat in those countries. Thus, ever more favourable conditions are being created for the broad and consistent development of the anti-imperialist and democratic revolutions, for the proletariat to lead them, and as a result, for their transition to a higher stage, to the struggle for socialism.

The Marxist-Leninists do not confuse the fervent liberation, revolutionary and socialist aspirations and desires of the peoples and the proletariat of the countries of the socalled "third world" with the aims and policy of the oppressive compradore bourgeoisie of those countries. They know that in the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, there are sound progressive currents in the ranks of the peoples, which will certainly carry their revolutionary struggle for- ward to the victory.

But to speak in general terms about the socalled "third world" as the main force of the struggle against imperialism and the revolution, as the supporters of the theory of the "three worlds" are doing, without making any distinction between the genuine anti-imperialist and revolutionary forces and the pro-imperialist, reactionary and fascist forces in power in a number of the developing countries, means a flagrant departure from the teachings of Marxism-Leninism and to preach typically opportunist views, causing confusion and disorganisation among the revolutionary forces. In essence, according to the theory of the "three worlds", the peoples of those countries must, not fight, for instance, against the bloody fascist dictatorships of Geisel in Brazil and Pinochet in Chile, Suharto in Indonesia, the Shah of Iran or the King of Jordan, etc., because they, allegedly, are part of the "revolutionary motive force which is driving the wheel of world history forward". On the contrary, according to this theory, the peoples and revolutionaries ought to unite with the reactionary forces and regimes of the "third world" and support them, in other words, give up the revolution.

US imperialism, the other capitalist states and Soviet social imperialism have bound the classes which are ruling in the countries of the socalled "third word" to them with a thousand threads. Being dependent on the foreign monopolies and wanting to prolong their domination over the broad masses of their own peoples, these classes are, of course, trying to give the impression as if they allegedly form a democratic bloc of independent states, which aims to exert pressure on US imperialism and Soviet social imperialism and to stop their interference in their internal affairs.

Lenin stressed for the communist parties "the need constantly to explain and expose among the broadest working masses of all countries, and particularly of the backward countries, the deception systematically practised by the imperialist powers, which under the guise of politically independent states, set up states that are wholly dependent upon them economically, financially and militarily". (V. I. Lenin, Works, vol. 31, p. 159, Alb. ed.)

The Party of Labour of Albania has always stood loyal to these immortal teachings of Lenin.

"Regarding the assessment of the policy pursued by various states and governments," stressed comrade Enver Hoxha at the 7th Congress of the PLA, "the Marxists proceed from the class criterion, from the stands these governments and countries maintain towards imperialism and socialism, towards their own people and reaction. On the basis of these teachings the revolutionary movements and the proletariat build their strategy and tactics, find and unite with their true allies in the struggle against imperialism, the bourgeoisie and reaction. The terms “third world”, “non-aligned states” or “developing countries” create the illusion among the broad masses fighting for national and social liberation that a roof has allegedly been found under which to shelter from the threat of the superpowers. These terms conceal the real situation in the majority of these countries, which, in this or that manner, politically, ideologically and economically, are bound to, and depend on, the two superpowers and the former colonial metropolises." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of PLA, p. 174.)

The present theories about the socalled "third world", "non-aligned countries", etc., are intended to curb the revolution and defend capitalism, which must not be hindered in the exercise of its hegemony, but should practice some forms of domination a little more acceptable to the peoples. Despite the difference in labels, the socalled "third world" and "world of the non-aligned" are as alike one another as two drops of water. They are guided by the same policy and ideology, one group is so entangled with the other that it is difficult to distinguish which countries are of the "third world" and what distinguishes them from the "non-aligned", and which countries are included in the "non-aligned" and what distinguishes them from those of the "third world".

Efforts are being made to create even another grouping of the socalled "developing countries", in which both the countries of the "third world" and the "non-aligned" are all lumped together. The authors of this theory, too, are covering up the class contradictions, advocating the existing status quo, that nothing must be done to annoy imperialism, social imperialism and the other imperialist powers, on the condition that they provide some "hand-outs" for building up the economies of the "developing countries". According to the authors of this theory, the big powers ought to make some "sacrifices", give something to the hungry, so that they will be able to pick up some sort of livelihood and not raise their heads. In this way, they say, a middle road will be found, "a new international order" will be established, in which all, rich and poor, exploiters and the exploited, will live "without wars", "without armaments", "in unity", "in class peace", in a la Khrushchevite coexistence.

Precisely because of the fact that these three "inventions" have the same content and aims, it is noticed that the "leaderships" of the "non-aligned countries", the "third world" and the "world of the developing countries" are in complete harmony. In unison, they are deceiving the masses, the proletariat, the peoples with their theories and sermons in order to divert them from the revolutionary struggle.

Not only does the theory of the "three worlds" not take account of the contradiction between the two opposing social systems, ‑ socialism and capitalism, or the great contradiction between labour and capital; but neither does it analyse the other major contradiction, that between the oppressed peoples and world imperialism, which it reduces to the contradiction with the two superpowers only, and indeed mainly with one of them. This "theory" totally ignores the contradiction between the oppressed peoples and nations and the other imperialist powers. What is more, the partisans of the theory of the "three worlds" call for alliance of the "third world" with those imperialist countries and with US imperialism against Soviet social imperialism.

One of the arguments used to justify the division of the world into three worlds is that at the present juncture, the imperialist camp which existed after the Second World War, in which US imperialism had undivided domination, has allegedly disintegrated and ceased to exist, as a result of the unequal development of various imperialisms. The supporters of this "theory" claim that today there can be no talk of a single imperialist world, because on the one hand the Western imperialists have risen against the US rulers, and on the other hand, a fierce and ever increasing rivalry exists between the two imperialist superpowers ‑ the USA and the Soviet Union.

In the stage of imperialism, as a result of the unequal development of various capitalist countries, the inter-imperialist contradictions exist and become constantly deeper, inter-imperialist alliances, blocs and groupings are created and broken up according to the circumstances and conjunctures. This is the abc of Marxism-Leninism. Lenin has provided ample proof that this typical phenomenon of imperialism, which snows that imperialism, as the final stage of capitalism, is heading irretrievably towards decay, is an objective law. But does this mean that as a result of these contradictions, the imperialist world as a social system has ceased to exist and is divided into several worlds, that the social-economic nature of this or that imperialism has changed? Not at all. The present day facts speak not of disintegration of the imperialist world, but of a single world imperialist system, which is characterised today by the existence of two big imperialist blocs; on the one hand, by the Western imperialist bloc, headed by US imperialism, the instruments of which are such inter-imperialist organisms such as NATO, the European Common Market etc., and on the other hand, by the bloc of the East, dominated by Soviet social imperialism, which has as the instruments of its expansionist, hegemonistic and warmongering policy the Warsaw Treaty and COMECON.

In the scheme of "three worlds", the socalled "second world" includes capitalist and revisionist imperialist countries, which, from the point of view of their social order, have no essential difference either from the two superpowers or from various countries included in the "third world". It is true that the countries of this "world" have definite contradictions with the two superpowers, but they are contradictions of an inter-imperialist character, as are also the contradictions between the two superpowers themselves. In the first place, they are contradictions over markets, spheres of influence, zones for the export of capital and the exploitation of the riches of others, of such imperialism as the West German, Japanese, British, French, Canadian one, etc., with one or the other superpower, as well as with one another.

Certainly, these contradictions weaken the world imperialist system and are in the interest of the struggle of the proletariat and of the peoples. But it is anti-Marxist to identify the contradictions between various imperialist powers and the two superpowers with the struggle of the working masses and peoples against imperialism, for its destruction.

It can never happen that the socalled countries of the "second world", in other words the big monopoly bourgeoisie ruling there, become allies of the oppressed peoples and nations in the struggle against the two superpowers and world imperialism. History since the Second World War shows clearly that these countries have supported and still support the aggressive policy and acts of US imperialism such as in Korea and Vietnam, the Middle East, Africa, etc. They are ardent defenders of neo-colonialism and of the old order of inequality in international economic relations. The allies of Soviet social imperialism in the "second world" took part, jointly with it, in the occupation of Czechoslovakia and are zealous supporters of its predatory expansionist policy in various zones of the world. The countries of the socalled "second world" are the main economic and military support of the aggressive and expansionist alliances of the two superpowers.

The supporters of the theory of "three worlds" claim that it gives great possibilities for exploitation of inter-imperialist contradictions. The contradictions in the enemy camp should be exploited, but in what way and for what aim? The principle is that they should always be exploited in favour of the revolution, in favour of the peoples and their freedom, in favour of the cause of socialism. The principle is that the exploitation of the contradictions in the ranks of enemies must lead to the intensification and strengthening of the revolutionary and liberation movement, and not to its weakening and dying out, to an ever more active mobilisation of the revolutionary forces in the struggle against the enemies, and especially the main ones, without permitting the creation of any kind of illusion about them among the peoples.

The absolutisation of inter-imperialist contradictions and the underestimation of the basic contradiction, that between the revolution and the counter-revolution, the placing of the exploitation of the contradictions in the enemy camp alone in the centre of the strategy and forgetting the main thing ‑ the increase of the revolutionary spirit and the development of the revolutionary movement of the working people and the peoples, neglecting the preparation of the revolution, are in total opposition to the teachings of Marxism-Leninism, to side with the bourgeoisie of the country to oppose that of another country, under the pretext of exploiting contradictions. Lenin stressed that the tactic of the exploitation of contradictions in the ranks of the enemies should be used to raise and not to reduce the general level of proletarian consciousness, the revolutionary spirit, the capacity of the masses to fight and win. (V. I. Lenin, vol. 31, pp. 69‑70.)

The Party of Labour of Albania has always consistently upheld and upholds these immortal Leninist teachings. "At these moments of the great crisis of imperialism and modern revisionism," says comrade Enver Hoxha, "we should intensify the struggle against them, should exploit the great contradictions among the enemies properly and correctly in our favour, in favour of the socialist states and peoples who rise in revolution, must expose them incessantly, and not be satisfied with those socalled concessions which the imperialists and revisionists reluctantly make in order to escape the danger, and take revenge later. Therefore, we must always keep the iron hot and attack them without respite." (E. Hoxha, Reports and Speeches, 1970‑1971, pp. 460‑461.)

In the presentation of the socalled "second world", which includes mostly capitalist and neo-colonialist countries, which constitute the main supporters of the two superpowers, as the ally of the "third world" allegedly in struggle against US imperialism and Soviet social imperialism, the anti-revolutionary and pseudo-anti-imperialist character of the theory of the "three worlds" is quite obvious.

This is an anti-revolutionary "theory" because it preaches social peace, collaboration with the bourgeoisie, hence giving up the revolution, to the proletariat of Europe, Japan, Canada, etc., who have to fight the monopoly bourgeoisie and the system of exploitation in the countries of the "second world" because the interests of the defence of national independence, and particularly the struggle against Soviet social imperialism, allegedly require this.

This is also a pseudo-anti-imperialist theory because it justifies and supports the neo-colonialist and exploiting policy of the imperialist powers of the "second world" and calls on the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America not to oppose this policy, allegedly for the sake of the struggle against the superpowers. In fact, this way the anti-imperialist and anti-social imperialist struggle of the peoples of the so-called "third world" and those of the socalled "second world" is weakened and sabotaged.


Revolutionary strategy is that which puts the revolution in the centre. "The strategy and tactics of Leninism," wrote Stalin, "constitute the science of leadership of the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat." (J. V. Stalin, Works, vol. 6, p. 155, Alb. ed.)

The Leninist strategy considers the world proletarian revolution as a single process, made up of several great revolutionary trends of our era, at the centre of which stands the international proletariat.

This revolutionary process is going on unceasingly in the countries which are advancing on the road of true socialism as a fierce and irreconcilable struggle between the two roads ‑ socialist and capitalist ‑ to ensure the complete and final triumph of the former over the latter, to bar all the paths to the danger of turning back through counterrevolutionary violence and imperialist aggression or through peaceful bourgeois-revisionist degeneration. The revolutionaries and peoples of the whole world are watching this struggle with the most active interest, considering it as a vital question for the cause of the revolution and socialism all over the world. They give the socialist countries their full and unreserved support and backing against any attempt of imperialism against these countries, because in the socialist countries they see a powerful base and centre of the revolution, they see the realisation in practice of the ideals for which they themselves are fighting. Lenin's ideas on the necessity and first-rate importance of the aid and support by the international proletariat for the country where the socialist revolution has triumphed are immortal. But this always implies that we are speaking about a genuinely socialist country, which implements the revolutionary teachings of Marxism-Leninism with the utmost vigour and consistently adheres to proletarian internationalism. Otherwise, if it is transformed into a capitalist country, maintaining only a fraudulent "socialist" disguise, it must not be supported.

The revolutionaries and peoples know that the successes and the struggle of the socialist countries are blows which weaken imperialism, the bourgeoisie and international reaction, that they are a direct aid and support for the revolutionary and liberation struggle of the workers and peoples.

Lenin and Stalin always considered the revolutionary task of the proletariat of a socialist country not only as making every effort to develop socialism in its own country, but also as supporting the revolutionary and liberation movements in the other countries in an all-round way. "Lenin, never regarded the Republic of Soviets as an aim in itself," wrote J. V. Stalin. "He always regarded it as an indispensable link in strengthening the revolutionary movement in the western and eastern countries, as an indispensable link to facilitate the victory of the workers of the whole world over capital. Lenin knew that this is the only correct concept, not only from the international point of view, but also from the point of view of the preservation of the Republic of the Soviets itself." (J. V. Stalin, Works, vol. 6, p. 52 Alb. ed.) Precisely for this reason, a truly socialist country cannot include itself in such groupings as the socalled "third world" or "non-aligned countries", in which any kind of class boundaries have been erased and which serve only to divert the peoples from the road of the struggle against imperialism and for the revolution.

Only the revolutionary, freedom-loving and progressive forces, the revolutionary movement of the working class and the anti-imperialist movement of the oppressed peoples and nations can be true and reliable allies of the socialist countries. Therefore, to preach the division into "three worlds", to ignore the fundamental contradictions of our times, to call on for alliance of the proletariat with the monopoly bourgeoisie and of the oppressed peoples with the imperialist powers of the socalled "second world" is not to the advantage of the international proletariat, the peoples, or the socialist countries. It is anti-Leninist. J. V. Stalin stressed: "I cannot imagine an occasion such that the interests of our Soviet republic might require our sister parties to make deviations to the right... I cannot imagine how the interests of our republic, which is the basis of the revolutionary proletarian movement in the entire world, could want not the maximum of the revolutionary spirit and political activity of the workers of the West, but the reduction of this activity, the dying down of the revolutionary spirit." (J. V. Stalin, Works, vol. 8, p. 111, Alb. ed.)

In the metropolises of capitalism the process of world proletarian revolution is embodied today in the growing class struggles of the proletariat and the other working and progressive strata against the bourgeois exploitation and oppression, against the attempts of the bourgeoisie to load the burden of the present crisis of the world capitalist system on to the backs of the working people, against the revival of fascism in this or that form, etc. Amongst the broad masses of the working people, headed by the proletariat, the consciousness is developing more and more each day that the only way out to escape from the crisis and other evils of capitalism, from the bourgeois exploitation the fascist violence and imperialist wars, is the socialist revolution and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Life and the facts prove that neither the bourgeoisie nor its open and disguised lackeys, from the social democrats to the modern revisionists, can stop the rising tide of the revolutionary struggle of the masses. "The present struggle of the world proletariat," said comrade Enver Hoxha at the 7th Congress of the PLA, "once again proves the fundamental thesis of Marxism-Leninism that the working class and its revolutionary struggle in the bourgeois and revisionist world cannot be suppressed either with violence or with demagogy." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of PLA, p. 159.)

The objective conditions are becoming ever more favourable for the revolution in the developed capitalist countries. There the proletarian revolution is now a problem taken up for solution. Quite correctly, the Marxist-Leninist parties, which have taken up the banner of the revolution betrayed and discarded fey the revisionists, have undertaken the tasks and set to work seriously to prepare the proletariat and its allies for the coming revolutionary battles, for the overthrow of the bourgeois order. This revolutionary struggle, which is hitting the world capitalist and imperialist system in its main strongholds, enjoys and ought to enjoy the full support of the true socialist countries and of all the revolutionary and freedom- loving peoples throughout the world. But today the modern revisionists, the supporters of the theory of the "three worlds" and the theoreticians of "non-alignment", while saying nothing about the revolution and preparing for it, in fact are trying to sabotage it and to keep the status quo of the capitalist order in existence.

In trying to divert the attention of the proletariat from the revolution, the authors of the theory of the "three worlds" preach that at the present time, the question of the preservation of national independence from the danger of aggression by the superpowers, especially by Soviet social imperialism, which they consider to be the main enemy, is the primary issue. The question of defining which is the main enemy on an international scale at a given time is of great importance for the revolutionary movement. Bearing in mind the course of events, the class analysis of the present situation, our Party stresses that US imperialism and Soviet social imperialism, these two superpowers, are "the main and greatest enemies of the peoples" today, and as such "they pose the same danger". (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of the PLA, p. 186.)

Soviet social imperialism is a savage, aggressive imperialism, thirsty for expansion, which is pursuing a typically colonialist and neo-colonialist policy, which is based on the power of capital and arms.

In rivalry with US imperialism, this new imperialism is struggling to seize strategic positions and to get its grip on all the regions and continents. It stands out as a fire-extinguisher of the revolution and suppressor of the liberation struggle of the peoples. But this in no way means that the other enemy of the peoples and of the whole world, US imperialism, is less dangerous, as the advocates of the "three worlds" theory claim. Distorting the truth and deceiving the peoples, they claim that US imperialism is allegedly no longer warmongering, that allegedly it has been weakened, is in decline, that it has become a "timid mouse", in a word, US imperialism is turning peaceful. Matters have reached the point that even the US military presence in various countries, such as Germany, Belgium or Italy, in Japan and other countries, is being justified and described as a factor for defence. Such views are extremely dangerous to the freedom of the peoples, and the fate of the revolution. Such theses foster illusions about the aggressive, hegemonic and expansionist nature of both US imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism.

The proletariat and the proletarian revolution are faced with the task of overthrowing every imperialism, and especially the two imperialist superpowers. Any imperialism, from its very nature, is always a savage enemy of the proletarian revolution. Therefore, to divide imperialisms into more or less dangerous, from the strategic viewpoint of the world revolution, is wrong. Practice has proved that the two superpowers, to the same degree and to the same extent, represent the main enemy for socialism and the freedom and independence of the nations, the greatest force defending exploiting systems, the direct danger that mankind will be hurled into a third world war. To ignore this great truth, to underestimate the danger of one or the other superpower, or even worse, to call for unity with one superpower against the other is fraught with catastrophic consequences and great dangers to the future of the revolution and the freedom of the peoples.

Of course, it happens and may happen that this or that country is oppressed or directly threatened by one of the superpowers, but this in no way and in no case means that the other superpower does not constitute a danger to that same country, and even less that the other superpower has become a friend of that country. The principle, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" cannot be applied when it is a matter of the two imperialist superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States of America. These two superpowers are fighting the revolution with every means, are making every effort to sabotage the revolution and socialism and drown them in blood. The two superpowers are striving to extend their domination and exploitation on various peoples and countries. Experience shows that they launch fierce attacks sometimes on one region and sometimes on another, to extend their bloodthirsty grip on the peoples, that each is striving furiously to replace the other. As soon as the people of some country manage to get rid of the domination of one superpower, the other steps in. The Middle East and Africa provide ample proof of this.

The other major trend of the world revolution in our time is the national liberation movement of the peoples, which is spearheaded against imperialism, neo-colonialism and colonial vestiges. The Marxist-Leninists, the world proletariat are in full solidarity with and render their full support to the national liberation movement of the oppressed peoples, regarding it as an extremely important, irreplaceable factor in the development of the world revolutionary process. The Party of Labour of Albania has always supported the peoples who are fighting for their national freedom and independence. "We stand for the unity of the world proletariat and all the true anti-imperialist and progress-loving forces which, with their struggle, will smash the aggressive plans of the imperialist and social imperialist warmongers. Consistent in their Marxist-Leninist line, the Party of Labour of Albania and the Albanian people... in the future, too, will spare no effort and will fight, together with all the other anti-imperialist and anti-social imperialist peoples, with all the Marxist-Leninist parties, all the revolutionaries and the world proletariat, all progressive people, to foil the plans and manoeuvres of the enemies and ensure the triumph of the cause of the freedom and security of the peoples. At every moment our country will he found standing beside all those peoples whose freedom, independence are threatened and whose rights are violated." (E. Hoxha, Report at the 7th Congress of the PLA, p. 193.) Comrade Enver Hoxha, on behalf of the Albanian Party and Government, proclaimed this firm stand also in the speech he made in the People's Assembly in connection with the approval of our new Constitution. "Today," he said, "the overwhelming bulk of the peoples of the world are making great efforts and strongly opposing the colonial laws and neo-colonialist domination, those rules, practices, customs, the unequal agreements, old and new, established by the bourgeoisie to maintain the exploitation of the peoples, the hateful distinctions and dis- crimination in international relations.... The progressive peoples and the democratic states that refuse to reconcile themselves to this situation and are fighting to establish their national sovereignty over their own assets and striving to strengthen their political and economic independence, and for equality and justice in international relations, enjoy the full solidarity and support of the Albanian people and State." (Speech at the People's Assembly, December 27, 1976.)

Ever since the time of Lenin, the Marxist-Leninists have always regarded the national liberation struggle of the peoples and nations oppressed at the hands of imperialism, as a powerful ally and great reserve of the world revolution, of the proletariat.

In the countries which have won full or partial political independence, the revolution is at various stages of development and is not faced with the same tasks everywhere. Among them, there are countries which are directly faced with the proletarian revolution, while in many other countries, the tasks of the anti-imperialist national democratic revolution are on the order of the day. But in any case, since this revolution is aimed also against the international bourgeoisie ‑ imperialism, it is an ally and reserve of the world proletarian revolution.

But does this mean that such countries must remain at the national democratic stage and the revolutionaries should not speak about and prepare for the socialist revolution, for fear that stages may be skipped or cut out and someone may call them Blanquists? Lenin was talking about the need of the transformation of the bourgeois democratic revolution into socialist revolution in the colonial countries, from the time when the bourgeois-democratic revolutions in these countries were still only in the embryo. In criticising Blanquism, Marx and Engels did not describe either the 1848 Revolution or the Paris Commune as premature. Marxism-Leninism never confuses petty-bourgeois impatience, which leads to the cutting out of stages, with the essential need for the uninterrupted development of the revolution.

Lenin pointed out that the revolution in the colonial and dependent countries must be pushed ahead. Since Lenin's time, great changes have taken place in those countries. In his genius Lenin predicted these changes and his response to them is found in the Leninist theses on the world revolutionary process. The carrying out of the proletarian revolution is a universal law and the main trend of our epoch. All countries without exception, even including Indonesia and Chile, Brazil and Zaire, and so on, must and will go through it regardless of what stages will have to be traversed to get there. If you lose sight of this objective, if you preach the preservation of the status quo and theorise about "avoiding missing out stages", if you forget to fight against Suharto and Pinochet, Geisel and Mobutu, this means that you are for neither the national liberation struggle nor the national democratic revolution.

Europe, too, must and will pass through the proletarian revolution. Whoever loses sight of this perspective, whoever fails to make preparations towards this end, but advocates that the revolution has moved to Asia and Africa and that the European proletariat must join its own "wise and good bourgeoisie" on the pretext of defending national independence, he is in an anti-Leninist position and is for neither the defence of the homeland nor the freedom of the nation. Whoever "forgets" that both the Warsaw Treaty and NATO must be combatted, that both the COMECON and the Common Market must be rejected, takes their side and becomes their slave.

In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, Marx and Engels wrote: "A spectre is haunting Europe, the spectre of communism... All the forces of old Europe... have united to wage a holy war on this spectre." This observation of Marx and Engels is valid for our days, too. The temporary setback suffered by the revolution because of the revisionist betrayal as well as the economic potential and oppressive military strength which imperialism and social imperialism oppose to the revolutionary movement and ideas of communism have not been able and will never be able to change the course of history, or overcome the great strength of Marxism-Leninism.

Marxism-Leninism is the revolutionary ideology that has entered deep into the consciousness of the proletariat and is exerting an ever greater influence on the broad masses of the peoples who are seeking emancipation. The impact of this theory is so strong that the bourgeois ideologists have always been obliged to reckon with it and have never ceased their efforts to find ways and means to distort Marxism-Leninism and undermine the revolution.

The present-day anti-Leninist theories of the "three worlds", "non-alignment", and so on, are also aimed at undermining the revolution, extinguishing the struggle against imperialism, especially against US imperialism, splitting the Marxist-Leninist movement, the unity of the proletariat advocated by Marx and Lenin, creating all kinds of groupings of anti-Marxist elements to fight the true Marxist-Leninist parties which stand loyal to Marxism-Leninism, the revolution.

The attempts to analyse situations allegedly in a new way, differently from Lenin and Stalin, to change the revolutionary strategy which the Marxist-Leninist communist movement has always upheld, lead in devious anti-Marxist ways, to abandoning the fight against imperialism and revisionism. Loyalty to Marxism-Leninism, to the revolutionary strategy of the Marxist-Leninist movement, struggle against all opportunist deviations which the modern revisionists of all hues are spreading, the revolutionary mobilisation of the working class and the peoples against the bourgeoisie and imperialism, serious preparation for the revolution, are the only correct road, the only leading to victory.