6th IMCWP, Contribution of Communist Party of Denmark

10/8/04 12:45 PM
  • Denmark, Communist Party of Denmark 6th IMCWP En Europe Communist and workers' parties

Athens Meetind 8-10 October 2004, Contribution of CP of
From: SolidNet, Friday, October 22, 2004
http://www.dkp.dk , mailto:dkp@dkp.dk

International Meeting Communist and Workers' Parties
"Resistance to Imperialist Aggressiveness. Fronts of
Struggle and Alternatives"
8 10 October 2004, Athens

Contribution of Communist Party of Denmark (DKP)

Short of CP of Denmark: Founded in 1919 in the aftermath of
the October Revolution. Highlights: unemployment movement
in the 30ies, resistance to nazi-occupation during World
War II, resistance to joining the EU in the early 70ies.
Collaps and coma about 1990 and brought back to active life
3 years ago. Now in a phase of reconstruction, which is
hard work. We are optimistic, and we are improving. We
don't have all the answers, but we have some of the
questions. This weekend we have a meeting in the Central
Committee, and for the first time in 30 years we can tell
about an increase in numbers of members. We are celebrating
our 85 anniversery in November in a positive spirit of
having a future and not only a glorious past.

Short of me: My grandfather war one of the founders of the
party, and he was excluded from the party, because he
opposed the party leaders revisionistic views. Never the
less he was building in his hometown a popular front in the
30ies workers, small farmers, blue cross (fighting
alcohol) and jewish community. He took active part in the
resistance towards nazi-occupation, and so did his two
adult sons, one of which was my father. They were all
arrested, and my father was put in a concentration camp in
Germany. Luckily for me he survived but barely. In the
late 50ies he and my mother was almost exclude from the
party again for opposing revisionist trends. I was in the
same position in the 70ies. Some years ago our present
chairman asked me to run for membership of the Central
Committee for the reconstruction of the party, and I have
been there since. So I think there is still hope for the CP
of Denmark.

Resistance to imperialist aggression: The reason this is
actually an issue is the fact, that we no longer have the
SU to be the first and natural front. I have with
satisfaction noticed, that more and more people can see and
express the fact, that it was and is a great loss in all
aspects of international life, that the SU is missing: it
is a loss to resistance to imperialist aggression, to the
remaining socialist countries, to the welfare in the
western countries, to the environment, to the economy of
the developing countries, to democracy to practically
everything considered good. Along with this surprising fact
surprising because most people actually believed, that the
SU was the main obstacle to worldwide democracy, prosperity
and even socialism! along with this surprising fact comes
the insight, that IF there is to be a resistance to
imperialist aggression, we have to do it ourselves without
the SU. We are back to before square one. We haven't had a
communist movement without the SU. No wonder we have

Lack of unity: Whether we like it or not: the SU was the
turning point in communist unity. Pro et con. Those who
were against the SU from the left also suffered severe
losses, when the SU disappeared. Both the Maoists and the
left socialists. And China didn't take the place of the SU
on the international scene such as in the Security Council
of the UN. We were left alone. We have to think and decide
on our own now. It is not easy, and that's why we are
divided. It's not lack of coordination or coordinators.
It's lack of unity. We don't want to be coordinated,
because we don't agree on which terms to unite. I see two
ways out: a) we continue to meet and to talk, until a unity
is reached: b) or we create a unity, a cooperation that is
able to contain the different points of views that exist.
We have the same problem in my country Denmark with a
least 5 communist parties. We also talk about cooperation
and unity, but the results are not outstanding. The
chairman of my party CP of Denmark expresses our opinion
in this way: The party, we need, is a party, where every
communist can tell: "I feel at home here". That is: a party
able to contain communists with different opinions about a
number of political matters. I will give you one example: I
think it is possible to be a communist with these two
different point of views: a) we have to support Iraqi
resistance to imperialist aggression and occupation and b)
we have to support the CP of Iraq in building popular
organizations to fight for the interests of the Iraqi
people. The reason for this opinion is, that the basic
facts are not contradictional. The facts are 1) the Iraqis
are in their good right to fight the foreign occupational
forces and their Iraqi supporters and 2) the CP of Iraq is
in its good right to decide how to fight for socialism in
Iraq. We can't support random kidnappings and bombings, and
we can't support the CP of Iraq participating in fighting
the resistance. I am well aware, that there are a lot of
"grey areas", but still: this is a constructive way of
dealing with different opinions between communists. It
means, that in a lot of areas we accept that it is natural,
that communists disagree. Otherwise we will be divided
forever. And don't misinterpret this: we have been divided
forever in the past, and it didn't prevent us from
achieving great victories. I just think, it could be easier
to achieve and to preserve our achievements, if we could
see each other not as enemies, but as comrades with
different opinions.

Building fronts of struggle: The earlier mentioned ability
to contain differences can also help us in the work to
build fronts of struggle. For a start it enable us to see
Cuba as well as DPR of Korea as part of the front against
imperialist aggression. DPR of Korea is not an obstacle in
the fight as was not the SU. It is part of the front and we
have to support it! And as a minimum we have to stop seeing
it as a problem. If the DPR of Korea disappear, our
struggle will be more difficult. The same goes for Nepal.
Some might find, that the Maoists shouldn't have started
the armed fight for socialism. But they did, and they are
part of the front, so we have to support them or at least
not fight them. A good sign of this kind of thinking was
the broad support for Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, who is also
part of the front regardless of whether or not we agree in
all, what is happening there. Summarized I want to say,
that we communists have to work on being more inclusive and
less exclusive, to see each other as a supplement instead
of as a competitor. There is room for all of us too much
room actually. And we can do that, because we know, that it
is in practice, in the daily struggle that it will turn
out, which opinions were the right ones. It can't be
decided in beforehand. We can decide what to do, but we
can't decide, if it will be right. This remain to be seen
in the real world. Not many would have given the October
Revolution a chance, and it was really a miracle, that it
succeeded. The same is true today. Nobody knows, what will
happen in Iraq or Nepal or Palestine or Venezuela. And we
have to act accordingly and from what we want to happen. Do
we want the the Iraqi resistance to be wiped out? De we
want the Nepalese Maoists to stop fighting? Do we want the
Palestinians to behave themselves? Do we want Hugo Chavez
to stay in power? And what are the possible alternatives?

My last point: I think we should join the different social
movements, which has appeared the last years. We have just
had the Social Forum in Denmark for the second time. And it
is still a movement against the neoliberal development. It
is true, that some social democratic organizations is
trying to steal the movement and make it part of the
establishment. This is no different from other areas of
fighting. It is part of the struggle to go against social
democratic influence. The waste majority of people in our
countries are convinced or spontaneous supporters of the
existing system. They think, that there are just some minor
problems to be fixed. That is our struggling condition. And
again: we can't tell in beforehand, what will happen. But
what is sure is that if we walk away from for example the
Social Forums then it is more likely, that they will be a
part of the establishment. And a lot of good people have
lost a place to fight.