First Published: Canadian Revolution, No. 2, August-September 1975
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Malcolm and Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
The second issue of Canadian Revolution has two main features: strong polemics against opportunism, and scientific analysis of Canadian conditions – specifically the “national question” and the character of the Canadian revolution.
The two most lengthy articles in this issue are polemics: Dave Paterson’s exposure of the counter-revolutionary nature of the Communist Party of Canada, Marxist-Leninist; and Jack Scott’s critique of Steve Moore and Debi Well’s recently-published book, Imperialism and the National Question in Canada. Paterson’s article attacks the CPC(M-L) concretely in relation to their anti-Marxist-Leninist lines on ideology, on politics, and on organization. It demonstrates their total inability to apply the science and method of Marxism-Leninism to Canadian conditions. It explains the essence of their political line as the reformism and class-collaboration of the revisionists and social-democrats (neo-revisionism). And it exposes their organizational errors and fantasies of declaring a circle of petit-bourgeois militants to represent the vanguard of the proletariat and of building a new “international” of communist parties directed by a single center and leader (neo-trotskyism). Paterson’s critique of the CPC(M-L) appears almost simultaneously with polemics against this group by the MREQ and EN LUTTE! in Quebec. Many conclusions of Paterson’s article are shared with these two groups; the CPC(M-L) is seen as fundamentally opportunist and counterrevolutionary and as a group that must be exposed and denounced. We are confident that Paterson’s polemic will aid other Marxist-Leninists in reaching these conclusions and will encourage them to take up the task of combatting the CPC(M-L) as an obstacle to the re-building of a genuine communist party to lead the Canadian socialist revolution.
Scott’s review and critique of Imperialism and the National Question in Canada is most timely. The relative lack of analysis of this question by other than bourgeois nationalists has unfortunately given this book a certain amount of credibility amongst Marxist-Leninists and progressive people. Scott’s attack on this book deals with several points: the distortion of statistics and quotes, and the effect of the author’s trotskyist political line on an incorrect analysis of the world situation (ignoring Soviet social-imperialism, creating a mythical “collective” imperialism), and on liquidating the effect and strategic significance of Canada’s dependency on U.S. imperialism. Scott’s political conclusion – that Canada cannot be primarily considered an imperialist country – will be the subject of fierce debate within our movement. But his arguments against this book should convince our readers of the pitfalls of combatting bourgeois nationalism with unscientific methodology and trotskyist political lines.
Paterson and Scott’s articles represent an important and positive development in the Marxist-Leninist movement: the trend toward strong polemics against opportunist views dressed up in “revolutionary” disguise. For too long the Marxist-Leninist movement in Canada has mistaken a basic weakness – the lack of such polemics – for a strength of so-called “implicit unity” and “non-sectarian debate”. For too long the idealist illusion has been maintained that the proletarian line will emerge without struggle, without contradiction, without demarcation of the revolutionary line from opportunism in all forms. In our view the trend toward polemics like Paterson’s and Scott’s must be encouraged and intensified, to help consolidate the principled unity necessary to a Marxist-Leninist party.
Along with these polemics, this issue of Canadian Revolution develops the concrete analysis of the “national question” and the character of the Canadian revolution. Besides Scott’s contribution to this question we are presenting the conclusion of the two-part series on Imperialism and the Canadian Political Economy begun in our first issue by the Worker’s Unity collective. After reviewing Lenin’s fundamental method in analyzing imperialism in the first issue, the authors now go on to apply this analysis to Canada. They argue that the mode of production can clearly be shown to have evolved to the stage of monopoly capitalism or imperialism, and at the same time discuss Canada’s role as a second-world country dependent on one of the two super-powers, U.S. imperialism. The article represents a useful contribution to analysis of concrete conditions in Canada and will aid in intensifying and clarifying the two-line struggle with those (like Scott in this issue) who do not see Canada’s main characteristic as an imperialist country.
The kind of analysis, like that of Scott and the Worker’s Unity collective, which applies Marxism-Leninism to the actual Canadian situation is absolutely necessary to the development of strategic line and program. Unfortunately Canadian Revolution has not received articles of a similar calibre in other areas of concrete analysis in Canada. Particularly in regards to general class analysis and to the special situation of women under monopoly capitalism we wish to make a special appeal to our supporters for such analysis at this time.
The fourth and final article in this issue is a short contribution by the MREQ on the present situation in Portugal. This contribution is useful not only because of our necessity to understand the dynamics of the international revolutionary struggle but also because it exposes the counter-revolutionary role of the Portuguese Communist Party, rejecting the widespread illusion that the PCP is something other than a revisionist party and a tool of the Soviet social-imperialists.
The letters in this issue indicate that Canadian Revolution is quickly gaining readers and support and has already begun to generate debate. We would like to remind our readers that any letters of support, criticisms or contributions to debate will be given high priority for publication. Our distribution of our first issue was successful; with the aid of many comrades across the country we sold or gave out most of the 1,000 copies we printed and we expect to sell 1,000 of this issue. However by far the bulk of our copies are going to the main centers of Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver; any aid from our readers in distribution outside these cities would be greatly appreciated. We must also thank the many people who have helped financially with subscriptions and generous donations; and remind our supporters that financial assistance is essential to the continuing publication of Canadian Revolution.