As it happens every time in History, the period of preparation for a great imperialist war increases the need for a substantive discussion, dialogue and theoretical, political struggle within the ranks of the communist movement, in order to formulate an effective revolutionary strategy.
Objectively, critical and complex issues are at the center of the discussion, which require investigation and clear answers from each Communist Party. Issues such as:
One hundred and fifty-five years later, the 1871 Paris Commune remains one of the clearest guides to understanding both the possibilities and the limits of revolutionary struggle. Its enduring significance lies not simply in the fact that it was the first historical attempt by the working class to establish its own power and confront the bourgeois state in practice, nor in the extraordinary heroism of the Communards, but in the lessons it provided on the central question of every revolution: What must be done with bourgeois power?
In conditions of intensified imperialist competition—characterized by wars, realignments, and shifts in the global balance of power—the need for theoretical clarity becomes more decisive than ever.
However, it is precisely under such conditions that ideological confusion often appears in the form of radicalism. One of the most characteristic expressions of this confusion today is what is commonly referred to as “Third Worldism”, a current that claims to defend anti-imperialism while deviating from the fundamental principles of Marxism–Leninism.
The death of Jürgen Habermas closes the life of one of the most influential intellectual figures of postwar Europe. For more than half a century his name stood at the center of debates about democracy, rationality and the public sphere.
Few philosophers shaped so decisively the language through which Western Europe interpreted its own political legitimacy after 1945.
For decades, Noam Chomsky has occupied a peculiar and paradoxical position within global political discourse. He is celebrated as a fearless critic of U.S. imperialism, a dissident voice against war, propaganda, and corporate power. Generations of students encountered radical politics for the first time through his lectures and books.
Yet at the very heart of his political worldview lies a contradiction so profound that it cannot be explained away as error, nuance, or misunderstanding. It is a contradiction that reveals the real limits of his politics: a systematic, principled hostility to Marxism-Leninism, to socialist state power, and to every historical attempt by the working class to actually seize and hold power.
By Nikos Mottas
The recurrent attempt to divide Marxism into “Western,” “Eastern,” “Third-World,” or other geographically marked variants reflects a deeper theoretical retreat from Marxism as a scientific worldview and a revolutionary method. Such distinctions implicitly transform Marxism from a universal theory of capitalist society and class struggle into a set of culturally conditioned perspectives, shaped primarily by geography rather than by objective social relations. From a Marxist-Leninist standpoint, this approach is fundamentally mistaken. Marxism is one, not because it ignores historical and national specificity, but because it rests on objective laws of social development that operate globally wherever capitalism exists.
Aleka Papariga, the former long-time leader (1991-2013) of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), celebrates her 80th birthday as a militant whose personal biography has become inseparable from the continuity of a KKE that has refused every form of retreat, compromise, and incorporation into the system of exploitation. Her political life reflects not only the history of the KKE but also its strategic persistence amid some of the most difficult decades for communists worldwide.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk in Utah has been immediately seized upon by the bourgeois press and state as a national tragedy, a “political assassination” that must unite society against “radical left extremism.”
Yet while the ruling class floods the airwaves with solemn denunciations of violence, it continues daily to unleash far greater violence upon the working class and oppressed peoples — through war, police repression, and the slow violence of exploitation.
The results of Sunday's elections in Bolivia were devastating for the leftist “Movement of Socialism” (Movimiento al Socialismo), known by the acronym MAS. Eduardo del Castillo, MAS’s candidate, received only approximately 3 percent of the vote—a historic collapse for a party that had ruled Bolivia for nearly two decades.
This result highlighted deep-seated economic crisis—20–25 percent inflation, fuel and dollar shortages, public frustration—and internal divisions within MAS (notably between Morales-aligned “Evista” and Arce-aligned “Arcista” factions).
Is the murder of a capitalist an "act of revolution"? Does the workers' movement, the working class in general, gain anything if someone places a bomb in the headquarters of a multinational company? Practically speaking, who benefits from individual acts of terrorism?
The so-called "left-wing terrorism," that is, individual terrorism with a "leftist," "revolutionary" ideological and political guise, has its roots in various anarchist trends of the 19th century.
Imperialism is not the creation of any one or of any group of states. It is the product of a particular stage of ripeness in the world development of capital, an innately international condition, an indivisible whole, that is recognizable only in all its relations, and from which no nation can hold aloof at will…
- Rosa Luxemburg, The Crisis of German Social Democracy (1916)
Today marks the 107th anniversary of the single most important event ofmodern history: The 1917 Great October Socialist Revolution. Its significance lies in the fact that it was historically the first conscious step for the transition from capitalism to socialism and the abolition of man by man. Lenin's slogan “the ice was broken, the road was paved” summarizes the passage of social development to its highest level, that is socialism, the ultimate perspective of which is the classless communist society.
-V.I. Lenin, 1915
“The entire history of bourgeois democracy lays bare this illusion: to deceive the people, the bourgeois democrats have launched and always launch all the “slogans” they want. The problem is to verify their sincerity, to compare words with facts , not to be content with idealistic or vain phrases, but to see class reality . Imperialist war does not cease to be imperialist when charlatans or petty bourgeois philistines launch a sweet "slogan", but only when the class that directs the imperialist war and is linked to it with millions of threads (even ropes) of an economic nature, It is actually overthrown and replaced in power by the truly revolutionary class, the proletariat. Otherwise, it is impossible to get rid of an imperialist war, as well as an imperialist, predatory peace . ”
The question of whether or not modern China is a socialist country, is one of the most polarizing issues among self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninists today. DKU's position on this question defines our position on a wide range of theoretical, political, philosophical and economic issues that we have to deal with in our daily activities. Therefore, we must give a clear answer to our view on the political character of China.
"The World Anti-imperialist Platform (WAP) is the latest addition to the consolidation of opportunist forces in this period.
Facts count more than words. Xi Jinping says, "China respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries." A couple of days later, the Chinese Consul General in Manchester stepped onto UK territory outside the consulate gate. He grabbed a demonstrator from a noisy but peaceful rally, dragged him into the consulate compound, and had his staff beat the man up.
However, for those persons still wedded to evaluating the PRC by its words, let us look at how Xi Jinping's report to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) uses "Marxism" and "Marxism-Leninism." His 25,000-word speech contains exactly one mention of Lenin or Leninism:
Every time a Communist Party compromised the aim of workers' power in order to participate (or support) a “progressive”, “left-wing”, “anti-capitalist”, “anti-fascist” etc, bourgeois government the results were utterly disappointing, leading to ideological degeneration and disintegration of the workers-popular movement.
A few days ago, the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP), a party with significant history, paid the price of its participation in the “progressive” government of the Socialists, by receiving a rather disappointing 4.4% and four seats in the legislative elections. This result marks an almost 2% loss compared to the 2019 election.
The teleconference was attended by Communist and Workers' parties from the following countries: Austria, Belarus, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Moldova, Norway, Poland, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine.
Click here to read the introductory speech of Giorgos Marinos, member of the Political Bureau of the CC of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE).