7. Revisionists (E. Bernstein & Co.) and modern revisionists (Kruschev, Togliatti, etc. ) have repeatedly tried to "take advantage" from Engels’ introduction of 1895. "Gradual accumulation of forces within bourgeois society? Certainly! Look to our more and more numerous parliamentary groups, able, influential, and heeded by the government. Our votes continuously growing, our trade unions with millions of members that ministers and industrialists heed and consult with due respect. Our flourishing co-operatives, our publishers, newspapers, cultural associations gathering the country’s intelligentsia, and our extended relations in every important institution. This, the revolutionary forces’ accumulation! ". It is a pity to make use of Engels work in such a way, that, even if he didn’t see the 20th century’s events, has made clear that care must be taken, made clear that the growing success on the election front by the social democratic party (proving the socialist movement’s presence within the working class and its developing hegemony over the popular masses) wouldn’t go on forever, and warned that the bourgeoisie would "subvert its own legality" when becoming a problem to its rule. Though the main problem isn’t what "F. Engels did or did not say". The main problem is that reality, facts, and events, have made manifest that the accumulated forces, the subject of revisionists’ arguments, have, in every crisis or serious struggle easily dissolved. Particularly when such forces were led by revisionists and, were the only "revolutionary forces". It is enough to recall Italy in 1919-1920, Indonesia in 1966, Chile in 1973. Such accumulation of forces has been a positive trend when it was the legal arm of a party, of a class, of the working class building up the real and determining revolutionary forces in a different way (we hold up as an example Russia in 1917).
8. It isn’t by pure coincidence that self-proclaimed pacifists become war’s supporters. Clamorous was the case of G. Sofri who became a supporter of the USA - European military intervention in the Balkans. Events go on developing against the pacifist’s wishes, to the point where they either must side with one of the warring factions or against imperialism. Their pacifism can’t transform event’s development, so it is event’s development that transforms their pacifism. Pacifism isn’t a "third way". To some people it is a transitory stage to lining up for the war, to others, it is a political aim to prevent the popular masses’ struggle against the imperialist bourgeoisie: they preach disarmament and peace to the unarmed masses, so as to leave free the fields of action to the imperialist bourgeoisie that is fully armed. A typical spokesman of pacifism’s latter faction is Pope Woityla.
9. Concerning this subject, a model has been the second world war. It was, simultaneously, a war between imperialist groups and a war between the working class and the imperialist bourgeoisie. The contradiction between the two aspects determined the nature, progress and outcome of the second world war. Amongst those that don’t understand this contradiction, or due to their opportunistic political attitude, refute it, there are some that see unilaterally one aspect (imperialist war) or (class war). Both groups get bogged down in a tangle of contradictions, unable to free themselves. On this contradiction that featured the second world war, see the article by M. Martinengo, ’The political movement in Europe during the 30s’, in Social Relations n.21, 1999.
11. Please note, that the same people were, on the contrary, experienced and able to draw a plan for a general strike, founding of co-operatives, publishing houses, or leading an election campaign, etc. Briefly, for all activities that were the subject of the Italian socialist and trade union’s movement and, of the majority of parties belonging to the Second International.
12. On this subject: the two letters (10 January and 2 April 1924) by A. Gramsci to Z. Zinni published in Rinascita n.17, 25 April 1964; and, the sixth chapter of ’The History of the Italian Communist Party’ by P. Spriano. vol. 1, and chapter 14/15 in ’Proletarians without revolution’ by R. del Carria.
13. From the preface by J. Duclos, 1972 and G. Dimitrov, oeuvres choisies, Edition Sociales, p.21/22. On the socialist revolution’s form, the International communist centre did not have very clear ideas: for a certain period hoped (in particular in Italy and Germany) that in Western Europe, the seizure of power by the working class would be realised through improvised communist parties or, parties like the PSI, that had joined the Communist International only formally. Afterwards, it tried (unsuccessfully) to promote insurrectionary movements. Typical, is the publication by A. Neuberg ’Armed insurrection’. Later on, the 7th congress 1935, launched the anti-fascist popular front’s line, which every party interpreted differently. The socialist revolution’s conception as an insurrection, as the seizure of power within a short length of time (completely different is an insurrection as a tactical operation during a war, like the numerous insurrections in Italy in the spring of 1945), cages the communist party in a situation where the seizure of power by the working class becomes impossible, except in particular cases. As a matter of fact, during the period preceding the insurrection, the party and the revolutionary forces achieve great experience; though over a field that doesn’t have anything to do with the seizure of power. The masses overstep legal activities (that have very little to do with the seizure of power and a new State) only on few occasions: under pressure of emotions, during riots, clashes and, by independent actions by groups or individuals, as a consequence of repression and provocations. These actions aren’t co-ordinated actions of a war directed by the party, where the party leads the tactical operations of a war’s plan and where our forces hold the initiative and carefully draw conclusions and teachings. Quite the contrary, such a party and its revolutionary forces, that don’t have any experience of war’s tactical and strategic action, of leadership and organisation of men destined to military operations, should turn into forces capable of rapid, energetic actions, so as to be able in a few days, or a few hours to decide the outcome, like in an insurrection!
19. Formulas may express concepts, though concepts aren’t entirely comprised in a formula. If we make formulas independent from concepts, we follow the bourgeois jurist’s fashion as to constitutions and codes, etc. With the result that each jurist, each organism, means different things with the same formula. If we read the CARC’s publications, we discover, gradually, formulas slightly different from the party’s general line, used to express the same concept. On doing so we try to express concepts more clearly, taking better account (within the formula) of a concept’s aspect that has become relevant in practice. We try to make sure, that each time, the formula’s elaboration is more complete, exact, and inclusive of various aspects.
20. Within the FSRS in Italy, there are some who maintain that the new communist party must have, from the start, within its members, strong and numerous groups of workers coming from the country’s major productive centres. If these comrades think that the new communist party has to come out of a mandate by the various, current workers’ organisations (as a "political shore" by COBAS, SLAI-COBAS, etc.), like the English Labour party, born out (as a "political arm") of trade unions, or like numerous socialist parties, such as the PSI, born out of workers’ solidarity organisations and workers’ defensive organisms, such comrades "are looking to turn back history’s clock". If, on the contrary, these comrades are looking for the constitution of strong, numerous workers’ groups, before the communist party’s foundation, they are putting forward unreasonable demands, similar to other comrades’ pretences, looking for a communist party already acknowledged by the masses as their leadership. Such pretences are contradicting the international communist movement’s experience and the development of the communist movement in our country. These are arbitrary pretences that lead to an indefinite postponement of the communist party’s foundation, that on the contrary, is now possible and necessary. We agree completely with the thesis that the formation of numerous and strong communist workers’ groups will transform the new communist party, bringing it to a stage, for the attainment of which, our modest, initial steps may have contributed.
25. Is it enough, for a communist party to be an underground party so as to successfully carry out its task? Obviously not. The main factor, for the communist party’s success, consists of its political line. If the political line isn’t the right political line, being an underground party won’t avoid the communist party’s defeat. However, the underground structure will help the communist party to draw the right conclusions from its defeat and rectify its political line. The communist party’s success depends on its ties with the masses, a wrong political line keeps the masses away from the party. If an underground communist party carries on with a wrong political line, in the long run, it will cease to exist, even as an underground party. Because, to be an underground party isn’t possible without strong, growing ties with the popular masses.
27. On this subject see: CARC, F. Engels/10,100,1000 CARC for the communist party’s reconstruction, 1995, Social Relations editions, and Pippo Assan, ’Cristoforo Colombo’ Vine editions, Florence, 1988.