Messages, appeals and statements of Comintern (SH)

Self-critical preliminary remark by Wolfgang Eggers

From the following resolution, we Stalinists-Hoxhaists today draw an important lesson.

If you want to defend the proletarian ideology against bourgeois ideology, you must not only attack bourgeois ideology and prevent its penetration into the world proletariat and its revolutionary world movement, as for example attacking Maoism, but you must also fulfill a second condition, without which the penetration of anti-Marxist-Leninist currents is unavoidable.

This second condition is to constantly raise the Marxist-Leninist ideology to a qualitatively higher level of its development in order to be able to fight the latest revisionist currents more effectively.

This is precisely the weakness of the following republished resolution of the KPD / ML.

Those who do not develop Marxism-Leninism and remain on the old rung of its development can never defeat revisionism, which is constantly shedding its skin. Such a Marxist-Leninist inevitably transforms himself into a neo-revisionist who, while pretending in words to "faithfully continue" the fight against revisionism, fights it with rusty ideological weapons. Such a "defender" of Marxism-Leninism gradually turns out to be an enemy of its further development, because he recognizes nothing other than a "threat" to Marxism-Leninism in its correct further development. We characterize such an attitude as a dogmatic attitude, the opposite of the Marxist-Leninist attitude, which is always rejuvenating and always at the cutting edge of development. Marxism-Leninism is not a dogma, but a modified guide to the fight against Maoism that is adapted to changing reality and continues to develop.

Who has criticized the Mao Zedong Thought correctly so far – the KPD/ML itself and our party all alone? This false impression arises when the resolution states:

"The investigations and discussions in our party ..."

I ask: insights into Maoism only through our own efforts, only through investigations and discussions in the KPD/ML?

I am of the opinion that we should have been much more modest, although, admittedly, there was no other Marxist-Leninist brother party except for the Party of Labor of Albania that had worked on the question of Maoism more intensively for more than a year.

But who contributed the most to the KPD/ML being able to free itself from the influence of Maoism? It was NOT us ourselves!

It was first of all Comrade Stalin and then, above all, Comrade Enver Hoxha! But the resolution does not mention the struggle against Maoism of these two names. Stalin and Enver Hoxha are not mentioned as Anti-Maoists!

Why? Because their importance was not sufficiently recognized at the time? No. The subsequent history of the KPD/ML showed that a Trotskyist line had already begun to develop in the KPD/ML. The condemnation of Mao Zedong also prevented the recognition of Comrade Enver Hoxha as the fifth classic of Marxism-Leninism. The KPD/ML was unable to completely eliminate Maoism because it limited itself to retreating to the four remaining heads of the Classics of Marxism-Leninism, instead of taking the decisive step forward of recognizing Comrade Enver Hoxha as the fifth classic of Marxism-Leninism. At that time, the KPD/ML was neither able nor willing to replace the Mao head with the head of Enver Hoxha in the newspaper header of "ROTER MORGEN". That would have been the only correct consequence of the fight against Maoism - from today's perspective.

Today we know that you can't beat Maoism if you don't take the standpoint of a more highly developed Marxism-Leninism, namely the standpoint of Stalinism-Hoixhaism.

On its founding day, the Comintern (SH) elevated Comrade Enver Hoxha to the level of the fifth classic of Marxism-Leninism, thereby not only raising the fight against Maoism to a higher level, but also Marxism-Leninism as a whole to the higher level of Stalinism-Hoxhaism.