Revolution and Socialism
No One Can Erase Them From History!
As well as Marx, Engels, Lenin; Stalin is ours too!
The following article is from the 188th issue of Yürüyüş (Marching) magazine (12 July 2009). The recent statements shared on X accounts linked to the Kurdish nationalist DEM (Democracy and Equality) Party prompted us to remind them of what socialism and Stalin mean to us.
“It is a historically proven saying: “No army can withstand an idea whose time has come.”
In the mid-1800s, the idea whose time had come was socialism. It was socialism’s turn to take the stage of history. The armies of the bourgeoisie tried to resist this idea whose time had come, and—as in the Paris Commune—they tried to drown it in blood. Yet even the armies of the bourgeoisie could not stop the development and spread of socialist thought.
With socialism, the oppressed encountered a new hope, a new alternative. This hope grew steadily. It was strengthened through struggles in many parts of the world, from the industrial centres of imperialist countries to the rural areas of neo-colonial regions. The oppressed soon realized that revolution was necessary to open the door to a socialist society. Then came the search for how this revolution could be carried out. In a sense, Lenin was the historical answer to this question. The Soviet Revolution was the embodiment of this answer. With the Soviets, the oppressed established their first state in history.
The idea whose time had come had taken the stage of history, and now the solutions that this idea would bring to humanity’s problems were being tested by the peoples and by history. As socialism achieved successes and victories, hostility toward socialism grew on the bourgeois side. The bourgeoisie left virtually no method unused in trying to destroy or neutralize socialist thought. These methods included massacres, prisons, provocations, and psychological warfare…
It has been a century and a half since socialist thought appeared on the stage of history, and the bourgeoisie is still busy trying to destroy socialist ideology. Around thirty years ago, NATO once again made a decision aligned with the wishes of the entire bourgeoisie: “Either change your thinking or die!” But the decision could not be implemented, because revolutionaries, Marxist-Leninists, resisted. Thirty years later, German imperialism appears before us with the same imposition: “Either change your thinking or die!” Our answer is clear: we may die, but we will not abandon our ideas. This struggle will continue. The bourgeoisie will not stop confronting us with this imposition in every sphere of life. And we will not give up.
The real target of German imperialism’s “Either change your thinking or die!” ultimatum is socialism—just as in the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) added a new link to the systematic attacks that European imperialism has long been waging against socialism, adopting a decision equating socialism with Nazism. The arrests carried out by German imperialism against revolutionaries and the OSCE’s anti-socialist decision complement each other.
Three years ago, representatives in European Union institutions also put forward a proposal that “the leaders of communism should be tried just as the leaders of Nazism were tried.” The OSCE’s decision is a continuation of that attack. Whenever and wherever the bourgeoisie feels strong, it takes decisions that shamelessly distort history. With such decisions, European imperialism slanders socialism while legitimizing Nazism. It hides the responsibility of the European imperialist monopolies and leaders in the fascisms of Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco.
This attempt to equate “Nazism with Stalinism” is perhaps one of the greatest historical distortions ever seen. Politically, it is dishonesty; morally, it is degeneracy.
First of all, it must not be forgotten that Nazism is not the name of a unique, once-ever, never-to-return form of rule. On the contrary, Nazism—fascism—has appeared many times in many parts of the world throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, and still exists today in dozens of countries. Nazism is fascism; it is the name of the form fascism took in the specific conditions of Germany.
Nazism has not remained in the past. European imperialism’s so-called opposition to Nazism is hypocritical; there are several reasons and indicators for this.
First:
European imperialism has never fully acknowledged its own responsibility in the fascisms of Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco.
Second:
Although the system appears to impose bans and restrictions on the organizations of Nazi remnants, in reality racist organizations continue to be encouraged by monopolies and governments.
Third:
European imperialism has been the main supporter of fascist regimes in dozens of countries around the world. For these reasons, no imperialist’s “anti-Nazi” discourse or decisions have any validity. The decision taken at the OSCE is not about the Nazis; its real purpose is to smear and criminalize socialism. The true aim of the “Anti-Terror Laws” introduced by German imperialism under the pretext of “Islamist terror” is, as always historically, to stop revolution and silence socialism. The rest is demagogy.
A typical example of this demagogy is the bourgeoisie’s persistent use of the term “Stalinism.” There is no such thing as Stalinism. It is an invention of the bourgeoisie. Stalin is, of course, an important leader for the peoples of the world. Leaders are not only themselves; they undertake the task of representing and symbolizing many historical things. This also applies to Stalin. Above all, Stalin is the symbol of the building of socialism and of the victory against fascism. It is this symbol the bourgeoisie attacks.
Today, various reformist circles also establish parallels and equivalences between Stalin and Hitler, socialism and fascism—parallels similar to those constructed by the bourgeoisie. Among these groups are those so blind as to equate fascist dictatorship with the dictatorship of the proletariat. These views are not merely reformist views; they are directly the views of the bourgeoisie. Those who begin their sentences with “Hitler and Stalin…” or “Fascism and communism…” have surrendered their minds to the bourgeoisie and speak with its voice; they are leftists within the system. Because they have so fully internalized the discourse of “Stalin’s dictatorships,” they participate—knowingly or unknowingly—in attacks on socialism. Discussing the rights and wrongs of Stalin or another revolutionary leader is the matter of the left, the people, the proletariat. We will never hold this discussion with the bourgeoisie anywhere. Those who do are condemned.
The war between imperialism and the peoples continues fiercely. The discontent of the masses grows in various forms. This discontent will undoubtedly bring with it a search for alternatives. The bourgeoisie’s endless “annihilation” attacks on socialism are precisely to prevent this search from turning into practical revolution. For this reason, the bourgeoisie attacks revolutionaries and socialism with full force even in imperialist countries. Arrests of revolutionaries and decisions against socialism should not be seen as isolated incidents but as parts of this broader attack.
European imperialism no longer hesitates to shelve freedom of thought and expression—rights won by European workers with centuries of struggle, blood, and sacrifice. Under the pressure of socialism, it had once been forced to grant certain economic and social rights to the people; now it confiscates them without restraint. And yet, the “spectre haunting Europe” that began wandering in the mid-1800s—the spectre of communism—is still their terror. Let everyone be sure of that.
They say “socialism is dead,” yet they remain afraid. They call these “Stone Age ideas,” yet they impose such strict and intense censorship and isolation against these ideas that it becomes clear how much they still fear them. Germany’s Stammheim prisons and Turkey’s F-Type prisons are expressions of this fear. Imperialism dictates that “you will change your ideas.” When it cannot change or subdue ideas, it resorts to annihilation. Stammheim and F-Type prisons are institutions built as instruments of this annihilation—physically or mentally destroying people.
Imperialism seeks to establish absolute domination over all the peoples of the world. One of the prerequisites of this domination is to persuade the masses that no other social system is possible. Afghanistan and Iraq were occupied to eradicate all ideas of resistance to imperialism.
Capitalism and socialism are two entirely different systems—historically, politically, socially, and culturally. Nazism belongs to capitalism; Stalin is a cadre of socialism. Therefore, the two can never be equated. History rejects such identification, science rejects it. And truth is stronger than European imperialists think.
They have been attacking Stalin for half a century… Sometimes Lenin is the target through Stalin, sometimes Marx, sometimes socialism itself. Their aim is to rid themselves of revolution and socialism. But they will not succeed. We will continue to defend Stalin, the revolution, socialism… We will not let them stain Stalin, the revolution, or socialism. We will not allow socialism to cease being a hope and an alternative for the peoples.
Stalin is ours. We are Stalin. We are Stalingrad. We are the Soviets who fought against fascism. We are the makers of the October Revolution. We are those who will create new Octobers.
Because It Is Irreconcilable With Imperialism; The Bourgeoisie Attacks!
Because It Is Insistent on Socialism, on the Dictatorship of the Proletariat; Those Without a Real Socialist Claim Attack!
When the October Revolution of 1917 shook the world and heralded a new era, the name of Stalin was always mentioned right after Lenin. Stalin was the devoted follower of Lenin’s line—Leninism. For that reason, Stalin was present wherever Lenin was.
In the struggle led by Lenin—in the fight for power, in the civil war, in the construction of socialism—they stood side by side.
At the age of 21, following Lenin and as his student, Stalin became part of the Bolshevik movement. From those years onward, he took part in every stage of the socialist struggle. He was arrested for his revolutionary activities and spent time in captivity. Thus, when he assumed the leadership of the CPSU after Lenin’s death, he had such a history of struggle behind him.
After Lenin died from complications caused by the bullets of a counter-revolutionary, the entire imperialist front expected internal splits and conflicts within the Bolsheviks in the USSR. Imperialists—who thrive in murky circumstances—spared no provocation or incitement to create the chaos they longed for. But their expectations did not come to pass. Stalin assumed the leadership of his people, the Party, the Soviets, and continued the construction of socialism. This was the first great “disappointment” Stalin inflicted upon the bourgeoisie; and the bourgeoisie’s hostility toward him grew in proportion to the bitterness of seeing their plans ruined. When it became clear that the building of socialism was progressing firmly and steadily, the hostility toward socialism took the form of hostility toward Stalin and reached its peak.
Beneath Anti-Stalin Hostility Lies Fear of Socialism!
Stalin was the second leader, after Lenin, to possess the honour and mission of building socialism in his country. He fulfilled this mission properly. For this reason, Stalin’s name entered history as a leader associated with socialism, and as the one who “guided the construction of socialism in one country under encirclement.”
Because of this mission, he became the focal point of attacks directed at socialism. Bourgeois ideologues directed their first blows usually at Stalin. Despite this, the attacks of imperialism—sometimes turning into large-scale “campaigns”—against socialism through Stalin never achieved their aim. Despite decades of smear campaigns, Stalin’s honourable place among the peoples, and his standing as a leader among revolutionaries, was never destroyed.
Of course, these attacks were not completely ineffective. They caused varying degrees of confusion and distortion in the consciousness of the masses; and they influenced the reformist, conciliatory left as well. Leftists whose minds were guided by the bourgeoisie eventually joined the attacks on Stalin “from the left,” thereby strengthening the bourgeoisie.
Why did the bourgeoisie direct its attacks on socialism and on revolutionary leaders first toward Stalin? The answer to this question is extremely instructive.
After the Second Imperialist World War, new socialist states emerged; socialism became dominant in a significant part of the world. Although the fundamental cause of the Second Imperialist War was the imperialists’ struggle for markets, the imperialist front also aimed to destroy the socialist USSR through this war. With fascist Germany’s attack on the Soviets, the USSR would be occupied and socialism destroyed!
The imperialists were convinced that Nazi armies—having swept across Europe from end to end—would also destroy the USSR in short order. Thus, during this phase of the war (the Nazi invasion of the USSR), they remained mere spectators. According to their calculations, “after Hitler finished off Stalin,” the imperialist armies would take the stage.
But Stalin inflicted on the bourgeoisie a second great “disappointment.”
The imperialists’ expectation of destroying socialism through Hitler did not come true. The force that repelled fascism—did not merely repel it but chased it into its lair and strangled it there—and thwarted the imperialists’ plans of carving up Soviet territory, was the great resistance led by Stalin.
The imperialists harboured deep resentment and hostility toward Stalin for ruining their schemes.
Stalin’s leadership was decisive in defeating the fascist armies and in establishing revolutionary people’s governments in countries such as Romania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. The imperialists could not tolerate the establishment of revolutionary people’s power so near to them, and out of this bitterness, they attacked socialist leaders, especially Stalin.
The situation that emerged after the imperialist war made socialism an alternative in the eyes of the peoples of the world.
Stalin, who expanded the revolution and made socialism an alternative, became one of the primary targets in the psychological war waged by the bourgeoisie against socialism.
The widespread nature of the attacks against Stalin, and the bourgeoisie’s special “preference” for targeting him, was influenced by the attacks carried out globally by revisionism and reformism against Stalin.
While attacking a leader like Stalin—who devoted his life to the revolution and, through his leadership, brought countless victories to his people—the imperialists drew strength from these deviant currents.
Exploiting the damage created by revisionism and reformism’s attacks on Stalin, they tried to legitimize their own assaults.
After Stalin’s death, Khrushchev launched a smear campaign against him in the Soviet Union.
This smear campaign led by the revisionists was exactly what the bourgeoisie had been looking for.
The slanders of revisionism and reformism against Stalin strengthened the attacks of the bourgeoisie.
The revisionism that came to dominate the Communist Party of the Soviet Union provided abundant material for this attack.
With his revolutionary ideas, Stalin was also an obstacle for the revisionists.
Unable to impose their own distorted views without first destroying Stalin and his revolutionary thought, they carried out these attacks for years.
Stalin Is Irreconcilability in Struggle
One of the qualities that made Stalin a revolutionary leader was his irreconcilability in the struggle against imperialism and fascism. Irreconcilability was one of the defining characteristics of Stalin’s leadership.
Throughout the various stages of the revolution, Stalin defended the revolution and socialism under all conditions against the enemies of the proletariat.
In the early stages of the revolution, he was imprisoned. He did not despair or compromise under Tsarist repression. During one of his periods of imprisonment, he defended revolutionary principles in the split that occurred between the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks.
Later in the Caucasus, he stood out with his irreconcilability and determination in the ideological defeat of Menshevism and in the defence of the ideological principles of the Marxist party.
Stalin’s irreconcilability and his stance against the enemies of the revolution can also be seen in the years when socialism was being built.
During the most critical periods of the revolution, he was always at Lenin’s side as a defender of Marxism. During those difficult days when the government was overthrown and the socialist revolution was achieved, Stalin was one of those who shouldered the process with determination.
The revolutionary period was even more difficult. Overcoming the obstacles to constructing socialism, defeating counterrevolutionary forces in the civil war, and breaking the imperialist encirclement were among the main challenges that had to be solved.
During the construction of the revolution, Stalin dealt the greatest blow to Trotskyism—which had reached a point of harming the revolution—exposing its counterrevolutionary face.
Through irreconcilable struggle against all counterrevolutionaries and deviations, he rendered them ineffective.
Stalin put Lenin’s teachings into practice in the socialist industrialization of the Soviet Union.
He carried out major industrial and agricultural investments in the country.
The Five-Year Plans were completed ahead of schedule, bringing significant advances in socialist construction.
Stalin Is Commitment to Socialism
Another factor that made Stalin a revolutionary leader was his determination to walk the path of socialism.
The imperialists understood the role Stalin played in the struggle for socialism; this is why they attacked him more fiercely.
Against dogmatic and faithless groups who said “there can be no socialism in one country,” Stalin continued socialist construction under imperialist encirclement.
Under his leadership, the Party guided millions of Soviet workers, peasants, and citizens, making significant progress in the struggle to build the future.
During the process of building socialism, all the attacks of internal and external enemies were defeated by mobilizing millions of people.
In the years when Hitler’s fascism attacked and occupied the Soviet Union, fascism was defeated under Stalin’s leadership.
More than half a century after his death, Stalin remains one of the leaders of revolution and socialism, one of the symbols of the revolutionary power of the proletariat.
The reason why imperialist hostility toward Stalin has been almost uninterrupted is precisely this.
Stalin’s leadership qualities were seen concretely during the construction of socialism and in the defence of the Soviet country against fascism.
Stalin, with his commitment to socialism and determination in defending socialism, continues to be a source of fear for the bourgeoisie.
To heighten the fears of the bourgeoisie, it is necessary to embrace Stalin and Stalin’s ideas.
Therefore we say: Stalin is ours.
Stalin is ours, because Stalin means liberation and socialism.
Stalin is ours, because Stalin means an uncompromising, bold, and determined struggle to defeat fascism and imperialism.
