Boris Ziherl
Communism and Fatherland
VI.
The revolutionary transformations in the
countries of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe
turned these countries from bourgeois "father
lands" into socialist fatherlands of the working
masses whose objective interests are indivisibly
linked with the realisation of the social ideals
of their most progressive part, the working class.
The territories upon which the working
people have won their fatherlands have expanded substantially and they are continuing
to do so in China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Greece
etc. As a fatherland of the working people, the
Soviet Union is no longer alone and the only one.
It is surrounded by new countries which are
building socialism and which, with full right
can term themselves socialist fatherlands just
as the Soviet Union did, and which it actually
was, in the first phase of its state development
The socialist countries constitute a community of states, a socialist world which consciously
lays down socialist construction and communism
as its unified goal.
All the working people of the capitalist world
see in the socialist world a mighty pillar on
which to rely, and in the relations among that
socialist countries a model inspiring them in
their struggle against the imperialist system of
national oppression and inequality, against the
domestic bourgeois reaction whose anti-popular
policy — as correctly stressed by Vishinsky it
his article — is today alienating it from the
whole nation and opposing the nation, not considering its own native land as "its 'fatherland',
but the United States which it serves."1
What, then, should relations among socialist
countries be like, between the countries of people's democracy and the USSR?
The relations among these countries, in brief,
must be, the absolute opposite of these between
the United States and the countries under their
hegemony; instead of political and economic dictation — the agreed solution of all important
political and economic problems, of all problems
which are of inter-socialist and international
significance; instead of unilateral priority in
trade — comprehensive priority among socialist
countries; instead of racial emphasis on the separate "world mission" of one nation in relation
to other nations — mutual respect of nations
and recognition of their contribution to the general development of universal culture: instead
of endeavours aimed at the spiritual effacement
of the individuality of some, especially small.
nations — the comprehensive development of all
the creative forces of each nation in the struggle
for socialist construction, with the fruitful exchange of national cultural achievements.
There is no doubt that in the community
of socialist countries which came into being after
the Second World War, the Soviet Union occupies
the position of first among equals both by being
the first country of victorious socialism and by
its international role and significance as a big
power.
The Soviet press has of late been publishing
many articles about the attitude of communists
in all countries towards the USSR as being the
measure of genuine internationalism, in which
of course, the Yugoslav Communists and the
leadership are invariably presented as an example of incorrect "nationalist" relations. In
these articles and in the latest Soviet geography
textbooks, in which the countries of people
democracy are simply put in among the capitalist ones, the USSR alone is denoted as the
socialist homeland of working people. In his
article "Communism and Fatherland", Vishinsky
endeavours to launch the term "popular-democratic fatherland" which remains something rather
vague. Just as vague was everything else written
in the press of the USSR until recently about
people's democracy. What perhaps held good for
one or two countries, and that precisely for those
that were the most backward in their revolutionary development, has been taken as typical
of all countries of people's democracy, from which
have followed the most monstrous "theoretical
conclusions" about the People's Front in Yugoslavia and about other social phenomena which
emerged from our Popular Revolution.
Of late the countries of people's democracy
are being equalised, with unusual persistence
as exclusive objects of liberation by the Soviet Army. Such equalization undoubtedly constitute
a distortion of historical fact. And even when
this or that country was indeed predominantly
the object of liberation by the Soviet Army
where the revolutionary parties either for objective or subjective reasons had not succeeded
in mobilising the broad masses for active struggle
against the German invaders and their domestic
bourgeois hirelings before the arrival of the
Soviet Army, the continual underlining of this
fact must give rise to a certain feeling of immaturity among the people, to moral inferiority,
to a lack of confidence in their own forces, which
by no means contributes to the internal consolidation of the united socialist front and to
the strengthening and development of the revolutionary forces of that country.
In determining mutual relations among the
socialist countries, the writers of such articles
do not take as a point of departure the unity
of the socialist world which, by building a socialist order in different countries, should consolidate itself in all its parts, consolidate itself
into a monolithic stronghold of peace and progress. In all their articles and dissertations
nothing exists but the USSR and "what is on
the other side of the Soviet frontier", The working people of every country outside the Soviet
frontiers have only one single duty towards the
Soviet Union: "to fight in all ways possible for
its prosperity, to secure the conditions for its
unhampered and victorious development towards
communism,"2 "to unconditionally defend and
support the CPSU(b) and the USSR".3
So long as all these lessons about the necessity for the working people of the world to
offer maximum and unconditional support to the
Soviet Union and the CPSU (b) are always and
directly linked with attacks on the Communist
Party of Yugoslavia and its leadership which
are supposed to have betrayed the CPSU(b) and
the USSR because they refused to accept unconditionally all that they were accused of in the
letters of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b)
and in the Cominform resolution of some communist and worker's parties, then the matter
should be given some consideration.
If "unconditionally to defend and support
the CPSU (b) and USSR" means to support the
Soviet Union and Bolshevik Party in its efforts
to aid the consolidation of the socialist world
as a whole with its own consolidation, to accelerate the victory of the democratic forces in the
entire world, if this means to support the Soviet
Union unconditionally in war and in peace, in
deed and not only in word and with resolutions,
then the Yugoslavs need no lessons on internationalism. But the Yugoslavs bear in mind
the changes that have occurred since the Second
World War. Owing to these changes the frontiers
of the socialist world have advanced up to the
Adriatic Sea, to the Socha (Isonzo) River, to the
Leitha, to the Sudeten to the Oder. Just as the
peoples in the countries of people's democracy
must regard the Soviet Union as their fatherland
and love it no less than their own fatherland
in the narrower sense of the word, so the Soviet
citizen must not see in these countries only an
object of liberation, but rather his fatherland —
socialist countries, and he should fight for their
prosperity, to ensure the conditions for their
unhampered and victorious advance towards socialism, not imposing upon thorn like a stereotype the specific features of the development
in his own country but rather understanding
their specific features and aiding them to take
advantage of everything in these distinctive characteristics that makes for more rapid socialist
construction. Every other attitude from whatever
quarter tends to weaken the ties among the
socialist countries and introduces among them
elements of nationalism, coercion and disagreement, instead of internationalism, cooperation
and goodwill.
The Yugoslav peoples and the Yugoslav
Communists are aware that they have been fulfilling their international obligations towards the
Soviet Union and towards other socialist countries unconditionally, that they are fulfilling
them and that they are firmly resolved to fulfill
them unconditionally in the future. But, if "unconditionally" means compulsory submission to
Cominform procedure with all its shameless
fabrications, slanders and Machiavellianism in
stopping at nothing in its struggle against the
Communist Party of Yugoslavia and the Yugoslav peoples, with all its measures which in
practice mean the obstruction of socialist construction in Yugoslavia — then, instead of a
reply, let as rather take up another subject.
Notes
1. "Voprossy Vilosofii", 1948, No. 2. p. 71.
2. "Voprossy Filosofii", 1948, No. 2, "Against Bourgeois Ideology of Cosmopolitanism", p. 26.
3. "Pravda", January 12, 1949, article by Abahn, Party of Lenin-Stalin — Leading Force in Struggle
for Construction of Communism".