Communism (Revolutions)

1 "Tout ce que je sais, c'est que je ne suis pas Marxiste." (Karl Marx 1 ) Kein Gespenst ging 1989 um in Europa, sondern ein Aufatmen: Man vermeldete das Ableben des real existierenden Sozialismus, dem man als Beigabe das OEuvre Marxens gleich mit ins Grab legte, denn war Marx nicht mit dem sozialistischen Régime gestorben? Das Gespenst, das 1848 den alten Mächten Schrecken einjagte, stand nun für eine totalitäre Vergangenheit, die vor allem die Täter und Mitläufer von einst verfolgte und nicht selten auch einholte. Der Sozialismus ist tot, Marx ist tot, der Kapitalismus ist nun ‚alternativlos', die Geschichte gelangt an ihr Ende 2 . Die verständliche Freude über das Ende einer Diktatur mischte sich trübe mit dem Wunsch, nun auch aller Zweifel an der Deutungshoheit ‚neoliberaler' Theorien 3 , die schon seit Ende der siebziger Jahre die Wirtschaftswissenschaften ebenso wie die Politik bestimmten, ledig zu sein. Der Markt produziert unter den Vorzeichen von Konkurrenz und Profitinteresse 1 Friedrich Engels zitiert diese Äußerung Marxens in einem Brief an Conrad Schmidt vom 5. August 1890 (MEW 37, 436). Aus den Werken von Karl Marx und Friedrich Engels wird im fortlaufenden Text unter den jeweiligen Siglen mit (Abteilungs-,) Band-und Seitenzahl zitiert: Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe, im Auftrage des Marx-Engels-Instituts Moskau hrsg. von David Rjazanov, Berlin 1927-1935 (abgek.: MEGA 1 ); Gesamtausgabe (abgek.: MEGA 2 ), hrsg. vom Institut für Marxismus / Leninismus beim ZK der KPdSU und beim ZK der SED; ab 1990 hrsg. von der Internationalen Marx-Engels-Stiftung, Berlin 1975ff; Werke, hrsg. vom Institut für Marxismus/Leninismus beim ZK der KPdSU und beim ZK der SED, dem Institut für die Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung und der Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung, 44 Bände, Berlin 1955-1999 (abgek.: MEW); zitiert wird im fortlaufenden Text. 2 Die Gespenster-Metapher griff Jacques Derrida auf und versuchte, sie für eine Re-Interpretation der Marxschen Theorie fruchtbar zu machen; vgl. ders., Marx' Gespenster. Der verschuldete Staat, die Trauerarbeit und die neue Internationale. Übersetzt von Susanne Lüdemann, Frankfurt/M. 5 2016; kritisch dazu Moishe Postone, Dekonstruktion als Gesellschaftskritik. Derrida über Marx und die neue Weltordnung, in: Krisis 21/22, Bad Honnef 1998, 115ff; auch im Netz unter http://www.krisis.org/1998/dekonstruktion-alsgesellschaftskritik/#1 (letzter Zugriff: 8. Juni 2018). 3

Il mito rappresenta [...] la forza sociale e sotterranea di una immensa rivoluzione che minava nel sottosuolo ovunque il mondo antico.

Era comodo procedere quando il Maestro faceva tacere e tremare tutti, regalando miracoli, sanando infermi, risuscitando morti, facendo cadere l'arma dalla mano dell'aggressore.

Gli operai vinceranno se capiranno che nessuno deve venire. L'attesa del Messia ed il culto del genio, spiegabili per Pietro e per Carlyle, sono per un marxista del 1953 solo misere coperture di impotenza.

La Rivoluzione si rialzerà tremenda, ma anonima.

In 1949, the Communist Party of China pledged that its approach to health care would differ markedly from that of the former Nationalist government and the "imperialist" West. For the next thirty years, under Mao's leadership, the People's Republic of China made improving the health of the entire population a central pillar of its policy. International health stakeholders came to view it as a statistical outlier in its ability to achieve better health outcomes with limited resources. The People's Health is the first systematic study of health care and medicine in Maoist China. Drawing on hundreds of files from rarely seen party archives and oral testimonies from experts, local cadres, and villagers across China, Zhou Xun shifts her historian's gaze away from official statistics towards the records of local institutions and personal memories that reflect and give voice to lived experiences. Through the everyday interactions of policy makers, national and local administration, and communities, Zhou illustrates the dynamic relationship between politics and health, and between individual lives and the political system. Presenting case studies of internationally acclaimed public health initiatives in the PRC - the anti-schistosomiasis campaign and the Barefoot Doctor program - this book offers the first thorough, politically neutral analysis of their background, execution, and national and international repercussions. Opening a unique window into the lives - and health care - of individuals living under communism, The People's Health examines the links between local interest, cultural sensibilities, resources, and abilities, exploring the often unforeseeable consequences of political planning and social engineering.

A análise de obras de Marx, desde os Manuscritos econômico-filosóficos de 1844 até cartas escritas no início dos anos de 1880, demonstra mudanças e continuidades na formação teórica e política desse pensador. Essa dinâmica, por sua vez, também se revela na apresentação que Marx fez em relação ao comunismo. Este artigo apresenta elementos chaves da visão de Marx sobre o comunismo, examina as suas nuances e a sua coerência teórica interna e se refere a aspectos da relevância atual dessa concepção marxiana de organização social. (The analysis of Marx's works, from the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 to letters written in the early 1880s, shows changes and continuities in the theoretical and political formation of this thinker. This dynamic, in its turn, appears also in the presentation that Marx about the communism. This article presents some key elements of Marx's communism view, examines its nuances and its internal theoretical coherence and refers to aspects of the current relevance of this Marxian conception of social organization).

Ένα νέο έργο αφιερωμένο στους ήρωες της Αντίστασης (1941)(1942)(1943)(1944) με εξώφυλλο την μητέρα αγωνίστρια, μαχήτρια, αρχηγό σε φωτογραφία από το οικογενειακό αρχείο στην Πλατεία της Φλώρινας (1944) και τον εαυτό του (id) ντυμένος επετειακά ως ανταρτάκι προς τιμήν του δολοφονηθέντος πατρός στην Αντίσταση vs των Γερμανών και των άλλων. Η τεκμηρίωση της φωτογραφίας ήδη από το εξώφυλλο (η στολή έγινε στην Οικοκυρική Σχολή Φλώρινας από τον Γ. Μπασιακούλη) φανερώνει την επιστημονική, ιστορική αγωνία του συγγραφέα για την ανάδειξη αυτών που έγιναν και έδρασαν χωρίς πολλαπλές διαμεσολαβήσεις. Σε 220 σελίδες ο συγγραφέας, ιστοριοδίφης και ενεργός πολίτης, αγωνιστής σε προφορικό λόγο και ύφος, με αυτοβιογραφική τεχνική, αλλά παράλληλα με παραπομπές σε δημοσιευμένο ιστορικό υλικό μας αυτοπαρουσιάζεται ως οικογενειακή ιστορία και ως ιστορία τόπου, ως μνήμη οικογενειακή, ιστορική, κοινοτική σε αυστηρά, κομμουνιστικό πολιτικό συγκείμενο.

Троцкизм, который в нынешнюю эпоху глубокой контрреволюции считается течением экстремистским, является лишь фланговым авангардом русского империализма, а теоретически и в плане повседневной политики ничем иным как демократическим вариантом буржуазной мысли. Отстаивая с шумом и гамом свое право на имена Ленина и Троцкого, он не перестает попирать ногами марксизм, неизменную революционную доктрину, только лишь реализаторами которой желали быть эти два руководителя Октябрьской революции.

This article discusses reactions to the October Revolution and birth of the Soviet state between 1917 and 1922 in Brazil and Argentina, and how different segments of the local press and intelligentsia developed their own narratives surrounding this dramatic upheaval in a far-off land. It looks at various articles in newspapers and journals as well as select publications from the period, and identifies how conservatives, trade unionists, anarchists and socialists interpreted very different meanings from the scattered information they could obtain about events in Russia. It also includes the mixed reaction found in Argentina’s Russian-language press, whose primarily Russian Jewish readership found themselves scapegoated and victimized during this period by the anti-communist paramilitary Argentine Patriotic League. Despite widespread support from the Argentine and Brazilian left for the Russian revolutionaries in the first years after October, by 1921 the suppression of the Kronstadt rebellion, critical reports from non-Bolshevik eyewitnesses and the Communist International’s declaration that all member parties must submit to control from Moscow had decimated this consensus, dividing ongoing supporters of the regime, including the newly formed Communist Party of Argentina, from its new critics.

Il 28 giugno del 1948, con la risoluzione di Bucarest, la Jugoslavia veniva espulsa dal Cominform. Era il culmine di una crisi che trovava le sue ragioni nel fiero autonomismo dei comunisti jugoslavi dall'URSS, nonché in frizioni di politica estera dovute in particolare ai progetti di federazione balcanica mal visti da Mosca. La rottura metteva in discussione la pedissequa replica del modello sovietico seguita fino ad allora, con il varo nel 1946 di una costituzione federale che riproduceva quella dell'URSS del '36, l'avvio della collettivizzazione nelle campagne e del primo piano quinquennale 1 . Ma invece di capitolare ed andare a "Canossa", come forse si aspettava Stalin, gli jugoslavi proclamarono allora la propria diversità e originalità nel campo socialista. All'inizio Tito ed i suoi furono disorientati, ma quando fu chiaro che la rottura era definitiva, lo "scisma" pose ai dirigenti comunisti un pressante problema di identità e legittimazione sia all'interno, con i propri militanti legati al mito e al modello sovietico, che all'esterno, verso il resto della compagine del comunismo internazionale. La questione non era di facile soluzione per gli jugoslavi che, orfani dell'URSS, avvertivano l'esigenza di differenziarsi per mantenere il potere e sopravvivere. In gioco c'era la stessa evoluzione in senso socialista del Paese: nel contesto di incipiente guerra fredda, una Jugoslavia abbandonata dai sovietici che non avesse trovato una propria via poteva diventare preda del capitalismo occidentale. Gli USA, non a caso, capirono subito che si poteva aprire una finestra di opportunità e si mossero per tenere a galla Tito, includendo il Paese nell'UNRRA con lo Jugoslav Emergency Relief Act 2 . Così gli jugoslavi arrivarono a partorire il proprio inedito disegno, che avviava un'esperienza rimasta unica e singolare nella storia degli esperimenti comunisti, l'Autogestione. I dibattiti del pensiero socialista furono scavati alla ricerca degli elementi su cui basare la nuova teoria, passando da Owen, Fourier, Proudhon, Marx, Lenin e recuperando una distinzione tra "nazionalizzazione" e "socializzazione" dei mezzi di produzione, tramite la quale leggere l'involuzione statalista e burocratica dell'Unione Sovietica. Ferma restando l'interpretazione della Rivoluzione d'ottobre come primo tentativo di introdurre l'autogestione operaia, accanto a questo riferimento fu ripreso l'esempio della Comune di Parigi per quanto atteneva le forme di governo locale. Quest'ultimo modello permise di mettere subito in essere i primi provvedimenti, con la legge del 28 maggio 1949, innestandoli sugli istituti sperimentati durante la lotta partigiana nelle aree liberate, i Consigli popolari 3 . L'anno successivo, il 27 giugno 1950, veniva varata la Legge sul passaggio delle fabbriche alla gestione operaia. L'articolo 1 stabiliva:

RÉSUMÉ

Le Printemps de Prague de 1968 est un événement complexe, ambivalent et multiforme. On y découvre du meilleur et du pire. Il achève une époque où une réforme du communisme paraissait à certains encore possible. Il a marqué non seulement l’histoire des peuples tchèque et slovaque, l’histoire des pays communistes et du mouvement communiste mondial mais, de manière plus générale, le conflit entre l’Est et l’Ouest qui a dominé le « court XXe siècle ». Il ne s’agissait pas d’un simple « accident de parcours » sur le chemin de la « détente », comme l’ont proclamé à l’époque certains politiciens et diplomates occidentaux. Comme l’a constaté à juste titre l’historien français Antoine Marès, on peut même considérer la Tchécoslovaquie comme un « sismographe de l’Europe au XXe siècle ».
Pour résumer ce qui se passa entre janvier et août 1968 en Tchécoslovaquie, ce livre prend en compte trois niveaux foncièrement différents.
1) celui des instances dirigeantes du parti communiste et de l’État tchécoslovaques ;
2) celui des écrivains, des philosophes et des journalistes, les vrais promoteurs des changements qui furent assez rapidement rejoints par le public, y compris les ouvriers ;
3) celui de l’Union soviétique et de ses quatre satellites du Pacte de Varsovie qui se rendirent maîtres de la situation et « rétablirent l’ordre » (Milan Šimečka) à l’aide de leurs armées.
J’insère le Printemps de Prague dans les étapes de la contestation des régimes communistes en Europe du Centre-Est. L’ouverture partielle des archives après 1989 et la publication de très nombreux documents m’a permis de corriger, compléter, préciser ou nuancer l’image du Printemps de Prague et de ses protagonistes. Je laisse parler les acteurs du Printemps de Prague pour permettre aux lecteurs de saisir leurs idées, ainsi que l’ambiance générale.
Ensuite, d’autres questions présentant un intérêt de portée générale, sont abordées. Entre autres les réactions des pays communistes (et de leurs partis dirigeants) qui n’ont pas prêté leur concours à l’invasion militaire soviétique : en Europe la Roumanie, l’Albanie et la Yougoslavie ; les réactions des pays communistes d’Asie ; l’attitude des dirigeants des partis communistes de certains pays démocratiques ; last but not least les réactions des dirigeants de certains pays occidentaux. L’ouvrage analyse aussi la place des pays successeurs de la Tchécoslovaquie dans l’Union européenne de nos jours.

Examining the revolutionary origins of Soviet communism this paper argues that symbolic structures were crucial in the making of Soviet communism as a political force. It conceptualizes symbolizations as contingent interpretive acts that capture people in extraordinary situations of dissolutions of political order. In the first part, I identify the dramatic and imaginative sources of the Bolshevik Revolution, which created a schismogenetic system, in which symbolic structures of time, representation, and leadership would become disintegrative forces in Soviet society. In the second part, I elaborate on the creativity of political symbolism by understanding symbolizations as rites of passage, constructions of origins and ends, as well as reality-creating self-fulfilling prophecies. Rather than to know the origins of symbols, the proposition here is to understand how symbolic meanings contributed to the creation not only of the empirical-objective world of Soviet communism but also of dominant social science interpretations.

Comment la révolution d'Octobre a changé le monde https://www.investigaction.net/fr/comment-la-revolution-doctobre-a-change-le-monde 1/10 Comment la révolution d'Octobre a changé le monde 07 Nov 2017 JACQUES PAUWELS À l'occasion du centenaire de la révolution d'Octobre, l'historien Jacques Pauwels revient sur cet événement qui a marqué le monde. Comment les soldats, les ouvriers et les paysans de l'empire russe ont renversé l'ordre établi ? Quel rôle Lénine et les bolcheviks ont-ils joué ? Pourquoi le reportage d'un journaliste américain, présent au coeur de la tempête, a eu un eet retentissant à travers le monde, jusqu'au coeur des Etats-Unis ? Comment la contestation y a-telle été étouée par les champions autoproclamés de la démocratie, avec le concours du Ku-Klux-Klan ? Comment l'Union soviétique a changé le cours de l'Histoire, depuis les mouvements pour l'indépendance dans les colonies jusqu'à la victoire sur le nazisme en passant par la lutte pour la libération des Afro-Américains ? Démêlant les mythes des réalités, Jacques Pauwels nous explique comment la révolution d'Octobre a changé le monde et pourquoi nous sommes redevables des peuples de l'empire tsariste qui se sont soulevés, il y a cent ans. En 1917, alors qu'elle était encore profondément impliquée dans la Grande Guerre, la Russie fut secouée par une double révolution. Une première vague révolutionnaire a traversé le pays vers la fin de février, selon le calendrier julien alors encore en usage dans l'empire des tsars ; c'était déjà en mars selon le calendrier grégorien, plus précis, qui avait été adopté depuis longtemps dans la plupart des autres pays, mais qui devait être introduit en Russie seulement au début de 1918. Une deuxième phase révolutionnaire a suivi en octobre, ou novembre selon le calendrier grégorien. De sorte que cette « révolution d'Octobre » devait être commémorée plus tard chaque année au onzième plutôt qu'au dixième mois. La révolution de février/mars a conduit à l'abdication du tsar ainsi qu'à toutes sortes de réformes démocratiques remarquables, comme la séparation de l'Église et de l'État ou l'introduction du suffrage universel. Mais octobre a vu l'arrivée au pouvoir des bolcheviks, dirigés par Lénine. C'étaient des socialistes marxistes, mais ils différaient très fort des adeptes, bien plus nombreux, de la variété « réformiste » ou « évolutionniste » du socialisme. Ceux-là étaient simplement appelés « socialistes » ou sociauxdémocrates. Contrairement à ces derniers, les bolcheviks continuaient à croire qu'une transition révolutionnaire était nécessaire et souhaitable pour passer de l'ordre établi capitaliste à une société socialiste. En Russie, cet ordre établi était encore principalement féodal. Sous les auspices bolcheviques, la révolution russe s'est radicalisée, comme en témoignent les mesures « communistes » telles que la redistribution des terres ainsi que la socialisation des usines et autres moyens de production. Une autre décision importante, véritablement révolutionnaire, prise par Lénine et ses camarades, fut de retirer la Russie d'une guerre qui durait depuis des années, une guerre qui avait provoqué des pertes et une misère sans précédent pour le peuple russe. Une révolution bien accueillie par les masses populaires à

The duo of Ramon Magsaysay and Edward Lansdale created a successful counterinsurgency strategy that defeated the Huk Rebellion in the Philippines. This paper will examine the background of the Rebellion and the factors behind the success of the counterinsurgency strategy.

In "My Life" Trotsky sought to vindicate himself in terms
imposed upon him by Stalin and by the whole ideological situation of Bolshevism in the 192os, that is, in terms of the Lenin cult. Stalin had denounced him as Lenin's inveterate enemy, and Trotsky was consequently anxious to prove his complete devotion to, and his agreement with, Lenin. His devotion to Lenin after 1917 was undoubtedly genuine; and the points of agreement between them were numerous and important.

Nevertheless, Trotsky blurred the sharp outlines and the importance of his controversies with Lenin between 1903 and 1917, and also of later differences. But another and much stranger consequence of the fact that Trotsky made his apologia in terms of the Lenin cult was that in some crucial points he belittled his own role in comparison with Lenin's, a feat extremely rare in autobiographical literature.

The book describes the activities of the dogmatic circles within the Polish United Workers’ Party, at national and local levels in the eighties. The dogmatists, in other words the party’s hardliners or the party’s “hawks,” consisted of party-hacks who, in the beginning of the eighties, were the outspoken critics of the “Solidarity” Independent Self-Governing Trade Union and wanted to quell all opposition. In their opinion, autonomous political structures, which were independent of the communist state, posed a threat to the foundational concepts of the Marxism-Leninism precepts. That is why they exercised pressure on the top-brass within the PUWP to implement the radical tools against
“Solidarity” in order to restore “peace” and “stability” in Poland. The dogmatic groups operated informally and enjoyed strong financial and material support from the Soviet Union, the German Democratic Republic and Czechoslovakia – the countries which were particularly interested in the demise of “Solidarity.” The party’s hardliners distinguished themselves from other PUWP members by being firm believers in Communism. They were attached to socialist regulations and eager to
use violence as the best solution to resolve a political crisis in Poland. They always reiterated the achievements of other communist countries and relied on their endorsement. The book focuses on the concept of a dogmatic activity, presenting its origins and the first actions, showing political programs and profiles of the main leaders, together with their political significance and popularity among the PUWP members. The author outlines not only the leaders’ activities but also their links to foreign communist parties and communist special services. The
book comprehensively presents the dogmatic tendency as a political force, which strived to take power within the PUWP, and portrays dogmatists as a political lobby interested in influencing the policy in the top echelons of the party. There are several questions that the book attempts to answer: What were the political, economic, and international reasons for the establishment of formal and informal organizations gathering the party dogmatists during the crisis of 1980-1981? What was
the main reason for many party members to engage in activities, which were prohibited by the internal party rules? What was the role of the security apparatus in behind the scenes struggle for power within the PUWP? Why was I Secretary of the Central Committee of the PUWP Stanisław Kania replaced by General Wojciech Jaruzelski in October 1981? Why was the Association of Socio-Political Knowledge Clubs "Reality" perceived by the PUWP’s leadership as a party faction?
What did the policy of cutting the party’s “wings” really mean? Could the Round Table agreements have been overthrown by the coup of dogmatists and the security apparatus in 1989? These are just
some of the queries that the book elaborates on. The book consists of ten chapters. The first one introduces the issue of factionalism within the communist parties, outlines the problems related to the interpretation of the Polish political system, its post-totalitarian nature, as well as the theoretical and practical role PUWP played there as a political entity. The author presents various definitions and analyzes different networks forming informal social and political ties, including lobbies, clientelism, coteries, and factionalism. The first chapter
also covers the history of the party’s dogmatism until 1980, including the activities of “Natolin” faction, “partisans” faction of Mieczysław Moczar, and a Maoist faction led by Kazimierz Mijal. The second chapter describes the process of the PUWP’s decomposition, which started in autumn 1980. Many party cells ceased to exist, as the party members began returning their identity cards, and many of them joined the “Solidarity” movement. This chapter reconstructs a political and
economic situation on the eve of “Solidarity” establishment, shows the political moods and tendencies within the party, describes VIII PUWP Congress and underlines the importance of the mass workers’ strikes in the summer of 1980, which resulted in removing Edward Gierek from power. The third chapter describes the most important dogmatic structures operating through 1981, such as Katowice Forum Party and Communist Forum in Poznań. The author discusses the party’s
initiatives, which aimed to reform the PUWP’s stiff format, namely “horizontal structures.” These party groups were perceived by dogmatists as “revisionist” and, thus, were frequently criticised.
The fourth chapter analyzes a political agenda of the party hardliners, suggesting that dogmatism constituted a certain eclectic conglomerate of ideas and beliefs referring to the neo-Stalinist orthodoxy. The factors that added to the construction of a dogmatic political identity included the negation of “Solidarity,” the promotion of a multidimensional campaign to preserve the Marxist image of the PUWP and obedience towards the Soviet Union, the psychology of a “besieged fortress,” and the pressure on the leadership to suppress the opposition.The fifth chapter describes the measure of influence of the dogmatists on PUWP and the state institutions’ policy. The sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth chapters present the policy of the dogmatic groups from 1980 to 1983. The last chapter analyzes the party’s hardliners in the second half of
the 1980s. The author provides answers to questions of why dogmatism within the PUWP almost disappeared in 1989 and, in consequence, what happened to the communist ideology.

When relating to any event that has a major impact in world history, the main focus is situated on fact-related questions. While historians generally try to assert that objectivity is the main standard for judging historical events, a ubiquitous view rooted in the tradition of objectivity has not come to surface yet. It is, however, most important to analyse in a comparative framework the way in which historians representing certain schools/ideas have related to a certain major event. In other words, the focus of analysis should shift from the question of "how events happened?" to the question ""how does the current historiography relate to events?". It is by this framework that a certain phenomenon can be analysed without asserting biased views over the course of history.

Nielegalnie budowane wille i domy letniskowe, darmowe remonty mieszkań, ułatwiony dostęp do talonów samochodowych i innych pożądanych dóbr. To tylko część zarzutów, z którymi po strajkach z sierpnia 1980 r. i zmianach personalnych na najwyższym szczeblu musiała się zmierzyć odchodząca ekipa Edwarda Gierka.
Podczas rewolucji „Solidarności” i w trakcie stanu wojennego trwały zarówno żywiołowe, jak i instytucjonalne rozliczenia z ekipą rządzącą krajem w latach siedemdziesiątych. Władze zostały poddane społecznemu naciskowi, aby ujawnić i osądzić przypadki korupcji i nadużywania stanowisk. W wyjaśnianie tych spraw zaangażowały się instytucje partyjne, państwowe oraz sądy, ale efekty ich działań nie były satysfakcjonujące.
Książka opowiada o korupcji wśród rządzących w sytuacji braku kontroli, o głęboko zakorzenionym społecznym pragnieniu równości i sprawiedliwości oraz o słabości państwa, które bezskutecznie próbowało pociągnąć do odpowiedzialności polityków kierujących krajem w poprzedniej dekadzie.
Książka nagrodzona w konkursie im. Władysława Pobóg-Malinowskiego na Najlepszy Debiut Historyczny Roku.

The communist regime in Romania like in the other ex-communist countries has affected social life, the cultural background, the economical context and the religious traditions of the people of this country, including those of the minorities. These effects were accomplished forcefully by the communist government that wanted to create an egalitarian society having no class difference between social groups. Of all the elements that form the life of a society, family is the most important institution and it can be the most easily affected negatively. The aim of this paper is to examine how family policy changed and applied in Romania during the communist regime and which are the changes that occurred in the respective policy after the Revolution of December 1989. This paper also underlines the effects of these policies on family and society. In the first part of the paper, the concept of family policy and its types manifestation are briefly explained. Different approaches about family policy are also discussed in this section. In the second part, the role and status of women during the communist system is underlined. In this part, difficulties of being a woman in the communist system is discussed because the regime considered the woman as a great mother, achieving all her responsibilities at home, but also she had to be a good socialist worker in social life. Family policies during communism are discussed in the third section. 'The 1966 Law' concerning prohibition of abortion and its consequences are also examined in this part. In the fourth section, the structure of family in this age is described briefly. The changes in the family policies are examined in the last section. The implementation of the new policies is also discussed in this part of the paper.

"Representations", N. 129, Winter 2015.

The essay analyzes the project of maintaining the body of V. I. Lenin in the Mausoleum in Moscow for the past ninety years, focusing on the unique biological science that developed around this project, and the unexpected political role this body has performed.

The rising number of non-status migrants is one of the central political issues of our time. This essay argues that if we want to understand the political and philosophical importance of this phenomenon, the contributions of Alain Badiou, his militant group L'Organisation politique (OP), and the struggle of the sans-papiers movement in France are absolutely crucial. This is the case because, I will argue, Badiou, the OP, and the sans-papiers created a new kind of migrant justice struggle in the mid-1990s that in many ways remains at the practical and theoretical roots of much of non-status migrant organizing today. However, this essay also argues that Badiou's theoretical and political work with the sans-papiers also needs to be revised and updated in light of certain developments in more recent migrant justice struggles.

When Stalin's idol was being smashed and the Stalinist falsification of history was being officially and emphatically denounced, the shade of Stalin's chief antagonist inevitably aroused fresh and lively, though bewildered, interest. In Moscow, Peking, Warsaw, and East Berlin people wondered anew what had been the significance and the moral of Trotsky's struggle against Stalin. Young historians, to whom the archives, hitherto kept under loc0 and key, had suddenly been thrown open, avidly looked for an answer in the unfamiliar records of
Bolshevism. As Khrushchev had declared that Stalin had destroyed his inner party critics by means of false and monstrous accusations, the historians naturally expected an explicit rehabilitation of the victims of the Great Purges. Here and there the rehabilitation was already taken for granted. In Poland, for instance, the writings of Trotsky, and Bukharin, Rakovsky and Radek, were quoted, and even reprinted, as offering much needed illumination of the enigma of the Stalin era (and so were my own books and essays).

3 2015 3 2018 GESELLSCHAFTSANALYSE UND LINKE PRAXIS ich werde sein Drucilla cornell | Gal Hertz | tove SoilanD | Jörn schütrumpf | uwe sonnenberg | walter baier | miriam pieschke | Judith dellheim | michael löwy | Janis ehling | Kate evanS | Jan reHmann | HolGer Politt u.a. _LUX_1702_TITEL_DRUCK ICH wERdE SEIN! ICH wAR, ICH BIN, Und darum wird aus dieser ›Niederlage‹ der künftige Sieg erblühen. ›Ordnung herrscht in Berlin!‹ Ihr stumpfen Schergen! Eure ›Ordnung‹ ist auf Sand gebaut. Die Revolution wird sich morgen schon ›rasselnd wieder in die Höh' richten‹ und zu eurem Schrecken mit Posaunenklang verkünden: « « SCHwERPUNKT: ICH wERdE SEIN SENSIBEL KÄMPFERISCH 18 26 34 42 48 54 56 Eine neue Zivilisation Warum die Freiheit der Einzelnen Bedingung für die Freiheit aller ist EdITORIAL Rosa Luxemburg ist eines der ikonischen Gesichter der sozialistischen Bewegung. Und eine der wenigen Frauen, vielleicht die einzige, deren zentrale Rolle darin unbestritten ist. Bis heute beeindruckt sie als brillante Autorin und klarsichtige Theoretikerin, als mitreißende Rednerin und engagierte Politikerin, als lyrische Chronistin und streitbare Genossin. Sie steht für eine Haltung, in der Entschiedenheit im politischen Kampf und »weitherzigste Menschlichkeit« ein Ganzes bilden. ■ Luxemburg ist nicht nur Namensgeberin der Stiftung, sondern auch Patin dieser Zeitschrift. Das von ihr gelebte Zueinander von Theorie und Praxis, von Analyse und Veränderung, von Strategie und eingreifendem Handeln steht für die Perspektive der LuXemburg und für die Entwicklung eines linken Projekts, als dessen Teil und Debattenorgan sich die Zeitschrift versteht. ■ 100 Jahre nach ihrer Ermordung gibt es kaum jemanden, der/die nicht weiß, wer Luxemburg war -viele kennen ihre geflügelten Zitate. Die Beschäftigung mit ihrem Werk ist jedoch auch in linken Zusammenhängen oftmals oberflächlich, selten gibt es Lesekurse, wird sie gründlich rezipiert. Manche ihrer Äußerungen, wie die zur »Freiheit der Andersdenkenden«, sind in den politischen Mainstream eingewandert, wurden enteignet, in eine antisozialistische Parole umgedeutet. In dieser Jubiläumsausgabe wollen wir Luxemburgs Denken und Tun für heute lebendig werden lassen. Was kann daraus für aktuelle Herausforderungen gewonnen werden, im Umgang mit rechter Bedrohung, einer tiefen Krise des Politischen und der enormen Schwäche der Linken? ■ Wie dachte Luxemburg das Verhältnis von Partei und Bewegung? Wie hielt sie es mit dem Internationalismus? War sie Feministin -oder wie können wir uns als linke Feminist*innen auf sie beziehen? Im politischen Klein-Klein wie in bedeutsamen Kämpfen reiben sich auch heute viele auf -mit welcher Haltung hat Luxemburg diese Herausforderungen gemeistert? Wie ging sie mit dem Widerspruch zwischen Reform und Revolution um? Und was können wir von ihr für die alles entscheidende Frage der Organisierung lernen? ■ In ihrer festen Überzeugung, dass diese Gesellschaft anders werden kann und muss, ist sie uns Vorbild -in ihrer Zuversicht, auch angesichts politischer Niederlagen an eine Zukunft radikaler Emanzipation zu glauben: Ich bin, ich war, ICH WERDE SEIN! UNVERFÄLSCHT MARXISTISCH 64 72 78 88 96 48 Bildstrecke:

In this book we reproduce interviews with ten leaders of the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB) who occuped positions of political leadership in Paraná between 1945 and 1964. We divided the book into two parts, and a methodological note. The first part contains two chapters to place the reader in Brazilian politics of the years 1940, 1950 and 1960. The second part reproduces interviews with leaders of the Communist Party in Parana (PCB-PR). However, in this book there is an interpretation of the information brought by the interviews, but only some more obvious indications of connections between personal views and historical events. This book can be read as a reference for the formulation of hypotheses or as a platform for the preparation of future research.

The 20th century revolutionary process had a big impact on the World System and significantly changed its entire configuration. However, there are essential gaps in terms of theoretical approaches, in particular, in terms of the typology of revolutions. Moreover, there is clearly insufficient research related to qualitative and quantitative analysis and consideration of the revolutions of the 20th century in their entirety. This article aims to fill those gaps by pursuing three main goals: (1) comparison of revolutions of the 20th and 19th centuries, highlighting the important characteristics of the former; (2) classification of revolutions of the 20th century; (3) identification of the main revolutionary waves of the 20th century and their essential characteristics.

Nelson Mandela's clandestine membership of the South African Communist Party (SACP) placed the African National Congress (ANC) and, later, its military wing, under SACP control, created civil war within the ANC on class lines between 1955-1959, and abolished direct one person one vote in the ANC (1957). These moves culminated in the split that created the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC). It is arguable that Mandela's work to protect his class interests delayed South African freedom by maybe twenty years.

Since its creation in 1998, the “German-Russian Historical Commission” has conducted research on the Communist International. Thanks to the archival revolution, the Commission has succeeded in closing important gaps in earlier research on German–Russian relations and the history of German communism. This volume contains over 500 mostly unpublished documents, extensively annotated (about 5000 footnotes), and nearly 1000 abstracts of decisions made by the Soviet Politburo,  it will become a standard work long consulted by future researchers concerning the impact of German-Soviet relations, their relevance for the interwar period, the history of KPD and the history of Communism in general. Hitherto unresolved research questions could be resolved and partial aspects corrected.

After 1960, the year in which the 81 so-called Communist Parties (including Mao's) demonstrated their unanimity on the programme of Krushevite opportunism, a de facto break occurred between Peking and Moscow. We have analysed various documents in which China outlines its own national variant of Stalinism, but unlike the other "national socialisms" of Arab, Cuban or Yugoslav stamp, Chinese "socialism" insists on calling bourgeois Russia to account, on setting itself up as defender of Marxism and reconstructing under its aegis the ranks of the world proletariat. It is this claim, more than the inevitable antagonisms between the Russian and Chinese States, which requires our response, since neither the social practice nor the official political ideology of the Peking leaders is directed toward victory for the Communist programme.