One of the main regularities of the transition from capitalism to socialism is the revolutionary overthrow of the power of capital and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat in one form or another. 1 This regularity, discovered by the founders of Marxism, was first verified and confirmed a hundred years ago, in the days of the Paris Commune of 1871 - the first proletarian revolution. It is not surprising that today, when the working class is at the forefront of world social development, communists invariably turn not only to the most fundamental milestone in history - the Great October Revolution, but also to the experience of the Paris Commune, as if checking their compass with history.

The same reason - the regularity of the socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat as a state in transition from capitalism to socialism, which has received repeated historical confirmation over the past half century - forces, however, the ideological enemies of Marxism-Leninism to constantly return fire. They are trying to discredit the idea of the socialist revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat and its concrete historical incarnations, starting with the Paris Commune. In an effort to refute at all costs the Marxist-Leninist conception of the ways of transition to socialism, the ideologists of the modern bourgeoisie and right-wing social democracy are particularly insistent in trying to prove the" incompatibility "of the dictatorship of the proletariat with democracy and" excommunicate " the Paris Commune in particular. The method used by the bourgeois-reformist falsifiers to cast a shadow on the picture of the modern socialist world and at the same time distort the true image of the first proletarian state is extremely simple: dictatorship and democracy are opposed as abstract concepts; their real class content is completely emasculated.

As a result of this "operation", the dictatorship of the proletariat is brought under the heading of "totalitarian regime". "A dictatorship is always a dictatorship" - this is how French bourgeois politicians once formulated this thesis, meaning to strike at the Marxist-Leninist concept of the proletarian state. 2 The same en-

1 See "Program documents of the struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism", Moscow, 1964, p. 12.

2 See G. Cogniot. Quelques einseignements de la Commune de Paris. "Cahiers du communisme", 1958, N 4, p. 627; " Ideology of modern reformism. Critique of the concepts of right-wing Socialists", Moscow 1970, p. 438 sl. ; F. M. Burlatsky. Lenin, gosudarstvo I politika [State and Politics], Moscow, 1970, p. 332 pp.

page 95

The tick-communist stamp, which has found wide application in the practice of ideological sabotage by imperialist reaction3, was used by government propaganda during the May 1968 events in France. When the authorities intended to move an army against the striking workers of Paris, the official press, in order to defame the Communists, used the hackneyed argument that the country was threatened with a "dictatorship of totalitarian communism".4 At the same time, bourgeois democracy is apologetically presented by the ideologists of imperialism and the right-wing socialist theorists who propagate their views in the form of "pure", supra-class democracy, which represents an "ideal" form of statehood, supposedly beneficial for all members of society .5
In these constructions, the analysis of specific historical phenomena and facts is usually replaced by a game of words. Nevertheless, the ideologues of the imperialist bourgeoisie still do not refuse to resort to this method, which, although outdated and long since proven useless, is still sometimes successful among people who are not experienced in theory and politics .6 Revealing the inconsistency of such an antithesis and showing the essence of the proletarian state on the example of the Paris Commune, the well-known French communist theorist, member of the Central Committee of the PCF V. Joannes noted that during the regime of personal power, political figures of the ruling class," appealing to firmly rooted prejudices", sophistically opposed the concepts of "democracy", "freedom" (without any restrictions).or clarifications) to the concept of "dictatorship" (also without any explanations), while avoiding raising the only relevant and necessary question, the answer to which would reveal the real content of these concepts: democracy and freedom for whom, for what classes and social groups, dictatorship - for what class, in whose class interests?7 . This is exactly what V. I. Lenin demanded8 , and this is recalled today by figures of the international communist and labor movement in their works on the Paris Commune.

The deliberate confusion of bourgeois-reformist ideologists with concepts that are separated from the social, historical substratum, as modern practice shows, is one of the most common methods of "substantiating" the concepts of anti-communism. Faced in their daily activities with malicious distortions of political concepts and with perversions of the very principles and goals of the communist and workers ' parties, the Communists tirelessly expose these political speculations. A scientific interpretation of the experience of the Paris Commune, based on the analysis of the events of 1871, given in the works of Karl Marx, F. Engels and V. I. Lenin, provides the Communists with an invaluable service in political education and teaching the masses the alphabet of Marxism-Leninism, in the struggle for democracy and socialism. Together with the Marxist historian Zh. It can be said to Daughtry that, although the Versaillians dealt a fatal blow to the Commune, it not only did not recognize and does not recognize it

3 See B. N. Ponomarev. The struggle against anti-communism is the most important condition for the success of the revolutionary forces of our time. "Against modern anti-communism". Prague. 1970, p. 48.

4 See Yu. V. Egorov. The working-class movement in France in 1968 " Class struggle and the modern world. (Actual problems of the working-class movement in developed capitalist countries)", Moscow 1970, p.83.

5 For these theories, see "The ideology of modern reformism. Critique of the concepts of right-wing Socialists", p. 237 el.

6 See G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 627.

7 V. Joannes. La Commune de Paris, la dictature du proletariat. "Cahiers de l'lnstitut Morke Thorez", 1968, N 10, p. 51.

8 See V. I. Lenin, PSS. vol. 41, p. 425.

page 96

9, but, as in the time of E. Potier, "in spite of everything, alive" 10 .

Yes, the Communards are still in battle formation today. Their heroic battles and innovative socio-political creativity live on in the actions of the Marxist-Leninist parties and serve them as a school of political experience and enlightenment of the masses. This explains first of all the great attention that the Communist and workers ' parties, and especially the French Communist Party, which stands out as "the rightful heir to the revolutionary and democratic traditions of the French people, as the successor of the heroic Paris Commune"11, pay to propagating the revolutionary achievements of the Commune of 1871 , linking them with the urgent needs of the proletarian struggle of today. With its ten-week existence, the Paris Commune refutes the claim often found in the works of anti - communists that the dictatorship of the proletariat is a "purely Russian" phenomenon; that its goal is only "overcoming underdevelopment"; that in the countries of Western civilization with their high level of economy, there is "no ground for proletarian dictatorship".12 Historical facts do not in any way agree with such ideas: it cannot be erased from history that the prototype of the dictatorship of the proletariat first appeared - and the theoretical thought of the communists especially emphasizes this circumstance - in one of the most significant and highly civilized countries of Western Europe - in France .13
Of course, Marxist-Leninists do not at all identify the political structure of the future socialist society of those Western countries that are still capitalist with the Commune of 1871, because it was only an embryonic form of the dictatorship of the proletariat during its comparative immaturity. However great the international significance of the Commune, first the Great October Revolution, and then the socialist revolutions in the countries of three continents after World War II, brought so much new to the Marxist-Leninist concept of the transition to socialism that the question of the pace, methods of this transition, and forms of socialist statehood is now raised in many ways differently. There is no doubt that the new socialist revolutions will bring with them a new experience. It will be determined both by the richness of the national specifics of those countries that will become the arena of revolutionary and socialist transformations, and by the further change in the balance of forces of capitalism and socialism in favor of the latter.

However, the revolutionary experience of 1871, 1917, and the following years will still retain its enduring international value for the working class. After all, even in new countries where the socialist revolution is victorious, it is inevitable that some of the most general principles and features of this experience will be repeated. It is in this sense that Karl Marx prophetically wrote that the principles of the Commune are eternal and cannot be destroyed. In this connection, is it not remarkable that in our day, when the question of the conquest of power by the proletariat is placed on the order of the day as a task to be solved?-

9 J. Dautry. La Commune battue ne s'avoue pas vaincue. "France nouvelle", N 1013, 17 - 23.III.1965, pp. 24 - 26.

10 E. Tersen. La Commune de Paris, fourrier d'une societe nouvelle. "La Nouvelle Revue Internationale", 1961, N 5, pp. 101 - 102.

11 "Greetings of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the Central Committee of the French Communist Party" (Pravda, 29. XII. 1970).

12 See, for example, R. Lowenthal. Der russische Oktober als Revolution neuen Typs. "Deutschland und die russische Revolution". Stuttgart. 1968, S. 28; R. Lewitzky. Die kommunistische Partei der Sowjetunion. Portrat eines Ordens. Stuttgart. 1967, S. 153.

13 See A. I. Molok. Historical significance of the Paris Commune. "Kommunist", 1961, N 4, p. 88.

page 97

The theoretical organ of the Communist Party of Great Britain, Marxisme Today, has chosen the famous phrase of Fr. Kropotkin as the epigraph to one of its issues devoted to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Engels, which ended his introduction to the French Civil War by Karl Marx, and printed it in red letters on the title page: "Look at the Paris Commune. It was the dictatorship of the proletariat. " 15 It is also noteworthy that the French Communists, when they adopted the Address on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Lenin's birth at their XIX Congress, considered it necessary to emphasize in this document the attention with which the great leader of the proletariat studied the history of the Paris Commune and the fruitful lessons that he learned from its heroic experience. 16 These and many other facts attest to the unfading significance of the Commune in the struggle of the international communist and labor movement for its ideals.

In their efforts to implement them, foreign communists systematically and persistently explain to the working people the truth that the first workers ' power in history represented "the broadest democracy, the most decisive social progress, and the most profound embodiment of national interests."17 . That is why, despite the fact that history has gone far ahead since the Commune, and the ideas of the Commune and the Great October Revolution have now become a reality for a third of humanity, the international communist movement does not cease to remember the heroic 72 days of 1871. Communists tirelessly analyze the revolutionary experience of the past, " opening up new beautiful pages in the history of the Commune and drawing new lessons from that unusual spring, "as L'Humanite wrote. "Dear Commune," the newspaper of the French Communist Party mentally addressed the fighters of 1871, expressing the feelings of the entire revolutionary working class of the country, "let the reaction not be mistaken on this score, we have not stopped reading about you, writing about you, being inspired by you ..." 18
The persistent efforts of revisionists to interpret the Paris Commune in the spirit of denying and distorting its true historical essence and character are also largely explained by the continuing relevance of the experience of state, social and cultural construction of communards. Right-wing revisionists, by adapting the state structure of the Commune to their own political attitudes, seem to project into the past "ideal models of socialism" invented by themselves, which have nothing in common with scientific socialism. They often interpret the Commune as a "pure" democracy of the" liberal "type and, while absolutizing the shortcomings of the Commune, its inconsistency in the application of workers' power, call for taking into account and using these very weaknesses of the communards ' activities "when modeling the political organization of modern socialism." Under the guise of defending the principles of proletarian self-government and direct democracy introduced by the Commune, the idea of "liberalized socialism" is preached, and the demand is made for the destruction of the "partiocracy", that is, the elimination of the leading role of the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party in the system of the dictatorship of the proletariat. References to erroneous federalist tendencies 19 ,

14 Arismendi river. Marx, Engels and Lenin on the ways of revolution. Kommunist, 1970, No. 2, p. 31.

15 See Marxisme Today, vol. 13, 1969, No. 11.

16 См. "L'Appel: pour le centieme anniversaire de la naissance de Lenin". "L'Humanite", 9.II.1970, p. 11.

17 SEE N. Feld. Huit jours en mai. "L'Humanite", 26.V.1964, p. 6.

18 M. Boris. Des livres pour honorer la Commune. "L'Humanite", 25.V.1962, p. 2.

19 See, for example, N. Smailagic. Marx i Bakunjin о Pariskoj kornuni. "Pregled", 1965, N 9, str. 163 - 188; 1966, N1 - 2, str. 31 - 48; N 3, str. 193 - 209.

page 98

sometimes manifested in the communards, the necessity of political decentralization in a socialist society is "justified". Moreover, according to right-wing revisionists, the Commune allegedly proved that in the transition from capitalism to socialism, power should not be built at all "under the sign of a revolutionary dictatorship": the proletariat can do without it. This view is in complete contradiction with historical facts and with their assessment and conclusions drawn by the founders of Marxism - Leninism. "Development forward, i.e., towards communism," wrote V. I. Lenin, "proceeds through the dictatorship of the proletariat and cannot proceed otherwise, for there is no one else to break the resistance of the capitalist exploiters and there is no other way." 20
By exposing the anti-socialist orientation of the right-Revisionist conceptions of the history of the Paris Commune, Marxist-Leninists show that such conceptions are veiled appeals to the rejection of the dictatorship of the proletariat in favor of bourgeois democracy, which are misinterpreted by historical facts. Denial of the dictatorship of the proletariat is a classic feature of modern revisionism, as defined by H. Hall. Modern revisionists like to declare the Marxist doctrine of class struggle "acceptable", but at the same time they declare the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat "invalid": it has allegedly become a "ballast" that must be abandoned (such advice was given, for example, to the Communist Party of Finland during the discussion on the question of ways to transition to socialism, which took place in her environment in the early 60s)21 . However, as its General Secretary rightly pointed out at the 19th Congress of the Communist Party of the United States, "scientific theory is not a simple collection of propositions from which you can choose any one, like a dish in a cafeteria. This is a logically interrelated complex - a whole chain of positions, where one is an indispensable consequence of the other. Thus, the idea of the political power of the working class as the necessary basis of socialism inevitably follows from the Marxist concept of class struggle. It is impossible to discard one thing without discarding the other. " 22 And this is exactly what right-wing revisionists do when they refer, in particular, to 1871. They distort the experience of the Communards when they claim that the Paris Commune was a form of public self-government based on "non-State unity" and "free associations" with "direct democracy." These attacks against democratic centralism in the organization of political power of the working class, based on a distorted understanding of the Commune, are an old occupation of the enemies of Marxism, who were dealt a crushing blow by V. I. Lenin when analyzing the views of opportunists who falsified K. Marx's conclusions drawn on the basis of studying the experience of the Commune.

In reality, the Commune was the epitome of proletarian democratic centralism, and Marxist-Leninists constantly remind us of this trait, taking care to explain their ideas and goals to the masses as fully and thoroughly as possible. It is no accident that in a conversation with the delegation of the magazine "Problems of Peace and Socialism" in September 1969, a member of the Politburo of the PCF Zh. Duclos drew attention to the seemingly insignificant fact that the Communards once changed the name of their official organ and instead of "Journal officiel de la Republique Francaise" issued it under the name "Journal de la Commune de Paris". This was a typically particularist political mistake.

20 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 33, p. 88.

21 See " On the Ways of Transition to Socialism and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat "(Kommunist, 1965, No. 4, p. 92).

22 G. Hall. On Course: The Revolutionary Process. Report to the 19th National Convention of the Communist Party U.S.A. by Its General Secretary. N. Y. 1969, p. 84.

page 99

But, as Duclos noted, it "lasted only one day - the revolutionaries had to resort to self-criticism, and they returned to the old name" 23, that is, the idea of centralism triumphed.

It has long been proven that the Paris Commune acted primarily as a French-wide government: The Council of the Commune recognized the illegality of the Versailles National Assembly and all its acts; it passed laws intended for the whole country, and not only for the capital; it sought to extend the revolution to the whole territory of France. 24 Thus, the reconstruction of the true history of the Paris Commune helps the Communists in their struggle against the right-revisionist perversions of the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The distortion of the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat and its actual rejection, masked, however, by hypocritical references to the Paris Commune, is a characteristic feature not only of right - wing revisionism, but also of modern "left" revisionism. More than once, the theorists of" left " sectarianism have tried to proclaim and theoretically justify their understanding of the political upheaval that is allegedly being carried out as a follow-up to the experience of the Paris Commune. The blasphemous nature of such attempts is quite obvious. What do the authorities of the Paris workers and artisans of 1871, which were truly democratic for the working people, have in common, a government closely connected with the people and based on the people, and a regime that is separated from the people? After all, it is characterized precisely by the infringement of the rights and freedoms of citizens, the actual liquidation of representative institutions. According to the witty definition of a Bulgarian scientist, this is a "dictatorship without a proletariat" 25, in which there is not a grain of proximity to the Paris Commune. And the appeal to her experience to justify the revision of the Marxist-Leninist concept of the socialist state cannot be qualified otherwise than as a mockery of the memory of the heroes and martyrs of 1871.

In refutation of the writings of bourgeois slanderers, opportunists, right-wing and" left " revisionists, Marxist-Leninists emphasize that by saying "no" to the old system, the Communards tried to destroy the military-bureaucratic machine of the bourgeois state and create their own state, "their own government system"26 , which was a model of "democracy for all working people, incomparably superior to the old system". higher than the formal, shaky democracy of the most liberal bourgeois regimes"27 . While paying tribute to the first builders of this new democracy with respect and appreciation, the Marxist-Leninists again and again recall the specific features that distinguished the Commune as a democratic State of the working people. The Paris Commune abolished the privileges of high-ranking civil servants and thus eliminated the highest official bureaucracy-the mainstay of bourgeois rule. The commune abolished the Prefecture of Police, reorganized the judicial department on a democratic basis, established electability, turnover, and real, not ostentatious, responsibility to the people of officials who emerged from the midst of the masses. 28 Communards radically

23 See " The work of French Communists in Municipalities "(Problems of Peace and Socialism, 1970, No. 2, pp. 81-82).

24 См. I. Grajewska. Komuna Paryska 1871 г. Zagadnienia wladzy proletariackiej. Warszawa. 1961, str. 96 - 110.

25 Ya. Radev. A dictatorship without a proletariat. "Novoe vremya", 1970, N 7, p. 80 sl.

26 Kurtad settlement. Storming the sky. Pravda, 18. III. 1962.

27 G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 622.

28 Ibid; A. Molok. The historical significance of the Paris Commune, pp. 81-82; J. Cohen. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat as seen by Marx, Engels and Lenin. "Marxism Today", vol. 13, 1969, N 11, pp. 328 - 330; V. Gerratana. Introduzione (V. I. Lenin. Stato e rivoluzione). Roma. 1966, p. 43 etc.

page 100

they changed the nature of representative institutions: parliamentarism as a special system of "division of labor", legislative and executive, as well as a privileged position for deputies, disappeared; the Commune was a "working corporation" (in contrast to the parliamentary talkshops of bourgeois states, which cover up the omnipotence of executive power). The dismantling of the old bourgeois state, the building up of a State organization based on the people in certain basic features - this is what characterizes the Commune as a dictatorship of the proletariat, a proletarian democracy. The Communists especially emphasize the new character of this democracy, and above all the fact indicated by the founders of Marxism - Leninism that "the Council of the Commune was not only a debating and legislative assembly, but also a Council of Execution and Action. He leaned on the people, for he came out of the people." This "connection with the people, organized in clubs and syndicates, is the model of 'direct popular law', the further development of which was the Soviets"29 .

Resolutely fighting attempts to discredit the Marxist doctrine of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the Leninists, referring to the experience of the Paris Commune, emphasize the idea that the basic functions of the proletarian state (repressive, protective, and creative) are not in the same ratio at different times. Bourgeois ideologues, followed by right-wing social democrats and revisionists, deliberately distort the essence of the dictatorship of the proletariat and identify it with some abstractly understood "totalitarianism", and focus exclusively on those political functions of the proletarian state that involve the use of violence. This shift in the center of gravity is a vicious distortion of the Marxist-Leninist understanding of the historical destiny of the working-class state. In revealing it, M. Torez often recalled the words of V. I. Lenin that "in our ideal there is no place for violence against people" and that "all development leads to the destruction of the violent domination of one part of society over another." 30 "The goal of communists," M. Torez said at the International Conference of Representatives of Communist and Workers 'Parties in 1960," is the happiness of people, the liberation of the whole society, the flourishing of all human abilities for everyone, the greatest freedom for everyone in conditions of socialist harmony and universal peace. " 31
Being consistent humanists, communists use the opportunities presented to avoid violence both during the conquest of power and during the construction of socialism. To the extent that it depends on it, the working class tries to give preference to methods of persuasion rather than coercion. But not everything depends on the workers! The more widely the bourgeoisie expresses its readiness to cooperate with the proletariat and its allies, the easier, faster, and with less material and human losses socialist transformations are carried out .32 But, as N. G. Chernyshevsky wrote, history is not the sidewalk of Nevsky Prospekt. The proletariat is sometimes forced to use violence against the exploiters in order to break up the old state apparatus, which is an instrument of repression, and also in order, in alliance with other strata of the people, to suppress the resistance of the deposed exploiting classes, which are often supported from outside, as the experience of the Paris Commune and the experience of the Great October Socialist Revolution,

29 J. Gacon. Le 90e anniversaire de la Commune de Paris et quelques ouvrages qui s'y rapportent. "Cahiers du communisme", 1961, N 3, p. 562.

30 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 30, p. 122.

31 M. Thorez. Oeuvres choisies. T. 3. P. 1965, p. 196

32 V. Joannes. Op. cit., p. 56.

page 101

the civil war and the fight against counter-revolutionary plots against the Soviet government.

The dismantling of the apparatus of bourgeois class rule and its replacement by a new government; the dissolution or renewal of the former army (with its characteristic contrast of rank and file and officers by class) and the creation of a democratic army, the model of which was first given by the Paris Commune; the organization instead of the old police-the democratic corps of order, armed combat detachments of a workers ' militia of the type created in 1871 or of the type of our Red Guard; in other words, the transformation of the state apparatus into a tool for suppressing counter-revolutionary attempts on the part of expropriated individuals and ensuring democracy for the working people - such is the law discovered by Karl Marx, developed by V. I. Lenin, and confirmed by the Paris Commune and, later, by the those who made the revolutionary transition to socialism. This law remains fully effective to this day.

Therefore, the significance of revolutionary violence for the proletarian dictatorship should not be underestimated in any way. The Communist parties are well aware that it has its justification. The experience of the revolutionary movement of our time shows that the former oppressors, resorting to the support of international imperialism, seek to overthrow the new system and restore capitalism. The events of 1956 in Hungary and 1968 in Czechoslovakia speak quite eloquently about this. That is why the dictatorship of the proletariat, the State of the working people, must show firmness in defending the gains of socialism and give the most decisive rebuff to the machinations of the forces of reaction. "To be Leninist in defending and upholding the principles of socialism," L. I. Brezhnev pointed out, "is the lesson that life teaches us." 33
The experience of the present-day revolutionary struggle also shows that where, for whatever reason, the old State machine of exploiters is not liquidated within the limits necessary and with proper consistency, this negatively affects the development of the socialist revolution. This was the case in Hungary until 1956. One of the reasons that made the counter-revolutionary plot of 1956 easier was the fact that after the victory of the socialist revolution in the country "relatively peacefully", the bourgeoisie " retained to a large extent its cadres and its active political role. J. Kadar, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers ' Party, noted that due to special developments, we did not immediately break down the bourgeois state apparatus, with the exception of the gendarmerie and the army, but only gradually changed it. In this way, the bourgeoisie was even able to maintain its influence over the state administration and the solution of economic and cultural problems for a long time and to a considerable extent."34 The Cuban communist publicist, F. P. Blavatsky, pointed out the importance of breaking down the state apparatus of the reactionary classes. Grobart, covering the lessons of the Paris Commune for socialist Cuba. The revolution "both in its agrarian - anti - imperialist phase and in its modern, socialist phase," he wrote on the occasion of the Commune's 91st anniversary, is a complete confirmation of the main lessons of the Paris Commune... If the Cuban Revolution hadn't broken the bureaucratic-militaristic ma-

33 "International Conference of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, June 5-17, 1969 Documents and materials", Moscow, 1969, p. 54.

34 Ya. Kadar. Selected articles and speeches (1957-1960). Moscow, 1960, p. 52

page 102

a semi-colonial and semi-feudal state, its victory, its peaceful development into a socialist revolution, and its outstanding economic, social, and cultural achievements would have been impossible. " 35
At the same time, the destructive (initially) and repressive functions of the dictatorship of the proletariat are necessarily important, but still only one aspect of it. 36 The main function of the proletarian state is positive and constructive: to rally and organize the working people for the construction of socialism. The main content of such a state, as stated in the CPSU Program, "is not violence, but the creation and construction of a new, socialist society, and the defense of its gains from the enemies of socialism."37 Highlighting the constructive and organizational tasks of the dictatorship of the proletariat as the primary and most significant, Marxist researchers show that the Paris Commune also had a creative character, which took the first steps, albeit timid and inconsistent, towards socialism. Having wrested power from the hands of the bourgeoisie, the working class carried out a series of measures to destroy the system of capitalist exploitation. This was the inner meaning of such measures as the opening of public workshops, the transfer of factories abandoned by their owners to workers ' associations (decree of April 16), and the introduction of elements of production planning there. All these measures "were aimed at the social emancipation of the proletariat." 38
Thus, the first power of the proletariat in history immediately became the builder of a new, socialist life, although it acted more by "instinct", "instinct", and did not yet clearly realize the true meaning of its actions. The policy of the Paris Commune as a new type of state was largely determined by socialist motives: it threw "bridges" from capitalism to socialism, 39 striving, as Paris mechanics and metalworkers wrote to the Commune Council on April 23, "to put an end to the exploitation of man by man, this last form of slavery."40
Even if the social measures of the Paris Commune were limited, even if it was able to put forward only the outlines of a program of socialist transformation, they have by no means lost their relevance to the struggling working class to this day. It is significant, for example, that while enumerating the social reforms of the Commune, the leaders of the PCF pay special attention to those that retain their real significance in the economic and political struggle of the French proletariat, in particular to the equalization of women's rights with men by the communards (the establishment of equal pay for equal work), to the preparation for the introduction of free learning at school 42 . By reconstructing the true face of the Paris Commune and rebuffing its detractors from the camp of anti-communist and Revisionist ideologues, Marxist-Leninists also note the merit of the Commune's fighters, who not only proved the ability of the workers to manage society, but also their ability to "solve democratic problems that bourgeois democrats only talk about"43 . Paris-

35 F. Gvrobart. Ensenanzas de la Comuna de Paris. "Cuba socialista", 1962, N 7, pp. 63, 67.

36 J. Cohen. Op. cit., pp. 334 - 335.

37 "Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union", Moscow, 1961, p. 42.

38 G. Cogniot. Op. cit, p. 628.

39 See V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 33, p. 44.

40 "The Paris Commune of 1871", Moscow, 1964, p. 177.

41 G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 629.

42 N. Feld. Op. cit., p. 6.

43 J. Duelos. 89е anniversaire de la Commune de Paris. "Cahiers du communisme", 1960, N 4, p. 622.

page 103

The previous commune "served the cause of freedom and democracy well," noted communist historian J. P. Blavatsky. Gacon 44; it showed that the working class is worthy to rule the country 45 .

By studying and popularizing the history of the Paris Commune as a proletarian state, Marxist-Leninists explain to the masses the true democratic nature of the proletarian dictatorship, which is so perverted by reactionary bourgeois ideologues and revisionists of the right and "left" persuasion. Marxist-Leninists reveal the greatness of the Commune, which clearly proved that only the working class is able to implement and ensure a democracy of qualitatively much higher content than bourgeois democracy. Marxist-Leninists, on the other hand, point out that if the Commune has made mistakes in the area of democracy and political liberties , they have not made mistakes at all in the area of democracy and political freedoms, but in the area of democracy and political freedom. the fact that the communards "did not observe the rules of democracy, but that they showed too much scrupulousness in this regard"47 . Proletarian democracy, as emphasized in the works of communist and labor movement figures devoted to the Commune, is a power that acts openly, in the eyes of the masses, from whom it does not conceal anything, with whom it always consults; a power that is accessible to them, flows from them, and expresses the will of the majority. Turning into a law, such a will becomes mandatory for the minority as well. "The dictatorship of the proletariat is democratic in a new way - for the working people; it is also dictatorial in a new way: in relation to big capital... In principle, this is the broadest democracy that has never existed before... The dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian or socialist democracy are two sides of the same coin. The dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian democracy are synonymous " 48 .

The French Marxist historian M. Schury in one of his articles, based on archival documents, expressively outlined a vivid episode of the events of 1871, indicating that communication with the broadest masses was the main principle of the Commune's activity. When the question was discussed in the Council of the Commune whether the Federation of Clubs should inform the Council of the opinions of the people before they are translated into decrees, the Proudhonist F. P. Blavatsky wrote: Jourdes stated that " the mass cannot be the judge of the issues that are being discussed here." In response to this, F. Parizel said very strongly, " No, not only can she be a great judge, but I think she is the supreme judge! They say that the people have often made mistakes; I will allow myself to say that if the people make mistakes, they also pay; but we must not make mistakes, so on each of our acts we need to have the opinion of the people... " 49 . "To have the opinion of the people", "to rely on the opinion of the people" - this is what guided the Commune. Its power was supported and inspired by the masses - the National Guard, syndicates, clubs; they also controlled the Commune.

This was the expression of the direct democracy of the workers ' state, which, as Zh. Gacon, " conjures up images of Sans-culottes

44 J. Gacon. Op. cit., p. 562.

45 N. Feld. Op. cit. ("L'Humanite", 22.V.1969), p. 4.

46 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 17, p. 594.

47 G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 626.

48 V. Joannes. Op. cit., pp. 57 - 58.

49 M. Choury. Encore de nouveau sur la Commune de Paris. "La Pensee", N 139, 1968, p. 84.

page 104

The second year of the Republic, their sections, but at the same time anticipates the Soviets as well."50
When today the communists of capitalist countries are fighting for a deep democratization of their socio-political system, they are worthy successors to the communards. The Communists act in the clear consciousness that in our epoch the tasks of the struggle for democracy and for socialism have come closer together; that fundamental democratic reforms are now preparing the conditions for a socialist revolution. The achievements of the Paris Commune as a truly democratic working people's State inspire Communists in their struggle for democracy and socialism. "The Communists are convinced," wrote the Central Committee of the PCF in the Manifesto adopted at Champigny in December 1968, which is the program of action of the French Communists for a whole historical period, 51 " that advanced democracy, which arises as a result of the unity and versatile struggle of the masses of the people, can open the way to the socialist reconstruction of French society in the interests of the working class, countries " 52 . The success of the struggle of the French working class and its allies in 1968-1970 demonstrates the effectiveness of the democratic alternative put forward by the Communist Party.

The Italian Communists are also waging a battle for deep democratic reforms, a necessary prerequisite for the transition to socialist transformation. "The link between the democratic struggle and the struggle for socialism is the central core of our policy... On this path of sharp and powerful mass democratic battles, we will move forward to socialism, " 53 its General Secretary, L. Longo, said at the 12th Congress of the Communist Party in February 1969. The struggle for democracy is one of the most important activities of the communist and workers ' parties and other capitalist countries. Revisiting again and again the experience of the Paris Commune, the Communists tirelessly expose the hypocrisy and anti - popular nature of bourgeois democracy as the dictatorship of the exploiting minority over the exploited majority, the dictatorship of "capitalist monopolies over society"54 , which is the exact opposite of the dictatorship of the proletariat-majority democracy directed against the overthrown exploiting minority. The authors of works on the revolution of 1871 published in the Communist press argue that the phrases used by bourgeois propaganda about "pure", "Western", "universal" and "integral" democracy are only a camouflage designed to hide the fact that "pure democracy", which is equally acceptable to all the world, is not a political phenomenon. the oppressed and the oppressors, in a society divided into antagonistic classes, do not and cannot exist 55 . The so-called democratic state under the capitalist system is an instrument of the bourgeoisie. The power of the bourgeoisie is a dictatorship, sometimes more, sometimes less violent, but always directed against the working people, against the exploited. In a bourgeois democracy, the masses are excluded from taking part in the government of the country.

Linking an analysis of the lessons of the Paris Commune with an assessment of politics-

50 J. Gacon. La Commune et la democratic reelle. "France Nouvelle", N 1023, 26.V. -1.VI.1965, p. 7.

51 E. Fazhon. On the theses of the 19th Congress of the French Communist Party. "Problems of Peace and Socialism", 1970, N 6, p. 18.

52 "Pour une democratie avancee, pour une France socialiste! Manifeste du Comite Centrale du P.C.F." ("L'Humanitb, 7.XII.1968, p. 7).

53 L. Longo. Un alternative per uscire dalla crisi. Rapporto al.XII Congresso del Partito comunista italiano. Roma. 1969, pp. 28 - 29.

54 "Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union", p. 33.

55 V. Joannes. Op. cit., p. 57.

page 105

On the eve of the establishment of the regime of personal power, J. Condeau denounced their anti-democratic course, in particular, the ongoing efforts to revise the constitution in order to further strengthen the executive power and curtail the rights of deputies elected by universal suffrage. Freedom and democracy, he pointed out, are respected by the bourgeoisie only to the extent that they serve its interests. If they turn in favor of the people, the bourgeoisie tries to stifle them. And only the vigorous intervention of the masses can prevent this. The precariousness of bourgeois democracy is precisely demonstrated by the efforts of the reaction to change the electoral law by abolishing proportional representation, out of fear of the growing influence of the Communist Party .56 Ten years later, V. Joannes, as if continuing this analysis of events in his article on the Commune, showed the results of the constitutional reforms implemented in 1958. Today, the Communists, he wrote, can collect 1/5 of the votes of the electorate, but will receive only 1/15 of the parliamentary seats. He recalled the repressions, blackmail, and violence of the ruling circles against truly democratic elements. All this, V. Joannes stated, confirms the obvious truth that there can be no true equality until the possibility of exploitation is eliminated. The operator cannot be equal to the operator 57 .

An important part of the political activity of the French Communists is their work to win local self-government bodies and in the municipalities themselves .58 One of its tasks is to ensure that, according to Zh. Lacroix, a member of the Federal Committee of the PCF in the department of Saint-Denis and Deputy mayor in Noisy-le-Sec, "to reveal to the public the true role of the monopoly state and lead the masses through the struggle for immediate concrete demands to the struggle for fundamental changes" 59 . Acting in this direction and resolutely dissociating themselves from the reformist ideas of "municipal socialism", the Communists actively defend municipal rights and liberties .60 Here, too, the PCF turns to the history of the Paris Commune, whose traditions are still alive in the hearts of the working people. After all, the Paris commune in a certain sense was, according to the definition of J. P. Blavatsky. Duclos, and the municipal revolution, since "the existence of the Commune," as Karl Marx pointed out, " led, as a matter of course, to local self-government..."61 . The ideal of communards in organizing power on a national scale was local communal power and the federation of communes of France .62
Consistently exposing the anti-democratic policy of the ruling circles towards municipalities, the PCF contrasts it with the municipal policy of the Proletarian revolutionaries of 1871, which favored the development of municipal autonomy. Marxist-Leninists advocate the centralization of State power. But it does not mean the destruction of local self-government. On the contrary, the policy of the ruling classes in France leads to the infringement of municipal freedoms. Municipalities and genet-

56 G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 625 - 626.

57 V. Joannes. Op. cit., p. 57.

58 For more information, see A. L. Efimov. The work of communists in local self-government bodies. "The struggle of the Communist Party of France for the unity of the Left forces", Moscow, 1968, pp. 192-228.

59 See "The work of French Communists in the municipalities", p. 83.

60 This is once again proved by the resolutions of the Plenum of the Central Committee of the PCF in Drancy (21 May 1970), which define the Communist Party's line in this area. См. "Sur les elections municipales" ("Cahiers du communisme", 1970, N 6, pp. 118 - 119); "Sur l'orientation du travail municipal" (ibid., pp. 119 - 124).

61 K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 17, p. 345.

62 See "The work of the French Communists in the municipalities", pp. 81-82.

page 106

local councils are deprived of basic rights. The power of the prefect in the department suppresses local initiative coming from the people. The articles of the Constitution defining the administrative rights of general Councils remain a dead letter. Since 1871, Paris has generally been in a special position: intimidated by the Commune, the bourgeoisie has deprived it of the rights that any community, even formally, has-it does not have an elected mayor. The power of the prefect of the capital is almost unlimited, and he, as well as the highest officials of the Ministry of the Interior, often tramples on the will of the municipality .63 And all this the apologists of false bourgeois democracy call equality before the law .64 Revealing its falsity, J. Conjo wrote that freedom under this regime is the freedom to mercilessly exploit the working people and turn the full power of the state machine against them .65
In this way, Marxist-Leninists use concrete facts and compare the Commune with contemporary socio-political reality to find out how the vague demand for "freedom and democracy" in the mouths of bourgeois politicians and propagandists becomes a means by which they try to throw thunder and lightning against the Communists. When the" fog of abstractions "heaped up by the ideological opponents of the Commune clears, it is clearly seen that the defense of "freedom and democracy" by the ideological servants of imperialism "conceals a very concrete defense of the freedom of the big bourgeoisie, which in practice excludes any real content of freedoms and democratic institutions." 66 Not so was the Paris Commune, which embodied a completely different concept of democracy! And it is precisely the history of the suppression of the Paris Commune by the Versaillians that has clearly shown the workers what bourgeois democracy is. The orgy of terror, the bloodbath that followed the military defeat of the Commune, taught the working people not to take the bourgeoisie at its word when the oma praised its "democracy." Since that time, this democracy has been expressed in the famous phrase of Thiers, telegraphed to the prefects: "The earth is strewn with their (communards - M. Z.) corpses. This... let the spectacle serve as a lesson." But the lesson learned by the French working class was not what Thiers had hoped for. "It was not a lesson of submissiveness and slavish humility before the bourgeoisie. In the savage repressions and white terror, on the contrary, the working class saw confirmation of what the Central Committee of the National Guard had already expressed in its proclamation of March 20, 1871: "The bourgeoisie opposes the free development of the working people by all its forces and means. In the unfading light of this truth... the workers realized that they must not follow the opportunist path of preserving the bourgeois system, but follow the road of the socialist revolution, the glorious road that the Paris Commune had outlined... " 67
The experience of the Paris Commune, together with the experience of subsequent proletarian revolutions, and especially and above all the Great October Socialist Revolution, is being used today by the communist and workers ' parties of capitalist countries for political enlightenment and training of the masses, for guiding them in new historical conditions, in order to help the working people fully realize the necessity of fighting against the power of capital, the revolutions.

63 "Contrat communal propose par le Parti communiste francais pour une gestion sociale, moderne, democratique". "Cahiers du communisme", 1970, N 11, p. 29.

64 CM. G. Cogniot. Op. cit., p. 623 - 624.

65 Ibid.

66 V. Joannes. Op. cit., p. 52.

67 G. Cogniot Op. cit., p. 627.

page 107

Permanent link to this publication: