With regards to the 55th anniversary of the mass murder of Indonesian communists named “G30S” by the reaction, we want to publish the document: “SELF-CRITICISM BY THE POLITICAL BUREAU OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE INDONESIAN COMMUNIST PARTY”.
On september 30th, 1965, the all-out crackdown and mass-murder of leaders, cadres and sympathizers of the PKI, as well as friends and family members began. Up to a million were murdered in the most barbarian massacre, that reduced the 3rd largest communist party in the world to shreds and allowed Suharto to establish a fascist dictatorship. Suharto’s coup and the reign of terror that followed, were in the interest and with active support of US-imperialism, as well as Australian and British imperialism.
The document was written in 1966, only one year after the massacre, and published in the People’s Republic of China (as part of a pamphlet). Sudisman, Politbureau member of the PKI and co-author of the document, was arrested himself in 1966, put through a slow trial and executed in 1968. While it certainly has it’s limitations, it gives a great example because of the speed of its publication, and the clarity, in that, while the masses were waging heroic resistance against the attack, it was the parties anti-proletarian policy, stemming from modern revisionism that made this massacre happen. Therefore, while condemning the attack, it shows unbreakable optimism that in the end, revolution will prevail.
“The self-criticism emphatically points out that the experience of the struggle waged by the party in the past has shown how indispensable it is for the Indonesian Marxist-Leninists, who are resolved to defend Marxism-Leninism and to combat modern revisionism, to study not only the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, but also to devote special attention to studying the Though of Mao Tse-tung who has succeeded in brilliantly inheriting, defending and developing Marxism-Leninism to its peak in the present era.”
Maoism is the third, highest and last stage of the proletarian ideology and it was systematized by Chairman Gonzalo. The application of the great truth of Maoism on the Indonesian reality will with no doubt be a sharp weapon in the hands of the Indonesian people and their vanguard in applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to forward the Indonesian revolution.
SELF-CRITICISM BY THE POLITICAL BUREAU
OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE
INDONESIAN COMMUNIST PARTY
(Ercerpts)
September 1966
lndonesian Tribune published in its January issue (No.
3) the self-criticism adopted by the Political Bureau of the
Central Committee of the Indonesian Communist Party
(P.K.I.) in Septemb,er 1966. The self-criticism is entitled
"Build the P.K.I. Along the Marxist-Leninist Line to
Lead the People's Democratic Revolution in Indonesia".
The self-criticism says that the disaster which has
caused such serious Iosses to the P.K.I. and the revolu-
tionary movement of the Indonesian people after the out-
break and the defeat of the September 30th Movement has
lifted up the curtain which for a long period has hidden
the grave weaknesses of the P.K.I.
The Political Bureau is aware that it has the greatest
responsibility with regard to the grave weaknesses and
mistakes of the Party during the period under review.
Therefore, the Political Bureau is giving serious atten-
tion to and highly appreciates aII criticisms from cadres
and members of the Party given in a Marxist-Leninist
spirit, as well as honest criticism from Party sympathiz-
ers that have been expressed in different ways. The
Political Bureau is resolved to make self-criticism in a
Marxist-Leninist way, putting into practice the teaching
of Lenin and the example of Comrade Musso in unfold-
ing Marxist-Leninist criticism and self-criticism.
The self-criticism says that under the situation where
the most vicious and cruel white terror is being unleashed
by the military dictatorship of the Right-wing army
generals Nasution and Suharto, it is not easy to make
as complete criticism and self-criticism as possible. To
meet the urgent necessity, it is necessary to point out
the main issues in the ideological, political and organiza-
tional fields, in order to facilitate the study of the weak-
nesses and mistakes of the Party during the current
rectification movement.
With all modesty and sincerity the Political Bureau
presents this self-criticism. The Political Bureau ex-
pects all members to take an active part in the discus-
sions of the weaknesses and mistakes of the Party lead-
ership, critically analyse them, and do their utmost to
improve this self-criticism of the Political Bureau by
drawing lessons from their respective experiences, col-
lectively or individually. The Political Bureau expects
all members to take firm hold of the principle: "unity
- criticism - untiy and "learning from past mistakes to
avoid future ones, and curing the sickness to save the
patient, in order to achieve the twofold objective of
clarity in ideology and unity among comrades". The
Political Bureau is convinced that, by holding firmly to
this correct principle, every Party member will take part
in the movement to study and surmount these weak-
nesses and mistakes with the determination to rebuild
the P.K.I. along the Marxist-Leninist line, to strengthen
communist unity and solidarity, to raise the ideological,
political and organizational vigilance, and to heighten
the fighting spirit in order to win victory.
THE MAIN WEAKNESSES IN THE
IDEOLOGICAL FIELD
The serious weaknesses and mistakes of the Party in
the period after 1951, the self-criticism says, certainly
had as their source the weaknesses in ideological field,
too, especially among the Party leadership. Instead of
integrating revolutionary theories with the concrete prac-
tice of the Indonesian revolution, the Party leadership
adopted the road which was divorced from the guidance
of the most advanced theories. This experience shows
that the P.K.I. had not succeeded as yet in establishing
a core of leadership that was composed of proletarian
elements, which really had the most correct understand-
ing of Marxism-Leninism, systematic and not fragmen-
tary, practical and not abstract understanding.
During the period after 1951, subjectivism continued
to grow, gradually became greater and greater and gave
rise to Right opportunism that merged with the influence
of modern revisionism in the international communist
movement. This was the black line of Right opportunism
which became the main feature of the mistakes committed
by the P.K.I. in this period. The rise and the develop-
ment of these weaknesses and errors were caused by the
following factors:
First, the tradition of criticism and self-criticism in
a Marxist-Leninist way was not developed in the Party,
especially among the Party leadership.
The rectification and study movements which from
time to time were organized in the Party were not carried
out seriously and persistently, their results were not sum-
med up in a good manner, and they were not followed
by the appropriate measures in the organizational field.
Study movements were aimed more at the rank and file,
and never at unfolding criticism and self-criticism among
the leadership. Criticism from below far from being care-
fully listened to, was even suppressed.
Second, the penetration of the bourgeois ideology along
two channels, through contacts with the national bour-
geoisie when the Party established a united front with
them, and through the bourgeoisification of Party cadres,
especially the leadership, after the Party obtained cer-
tain positions in governmental and semi-governmental
institutions. The increasing number of Party cadres who
occupied certain position,s in governrnental and semi-
governmental institutions, in the centre and in the re-
gions, created "the rank of bourgeoisified workers" and
this constituted "the real channels for reformism". Such
a situation did not exist before the August Revolution
of 1945.
Third, modern revisionism began to penetrate into our
Party when the Fourth Plenary Session of the Central
Committee of the Fifth Congress uncritically approved
a report which supported the lines of the 20th Congress
of the C.P.S.U., and adopted the line of "achieving so-
cialism peacefully through parliamentary means" as the
Iine of the P.K.I. This "peaceful road", one of the char-
acteristics of modern revisionism, was further reaffirmed
in the Sixth National Congress of the P.K.I. which ap-
proved the following passage in the Party Constitution:
"There is a possibility that a peoptre's democratic system
as a transitional stage to socialism in Indonesia can be
achieved by peaceful means, in parliamentary way. The
P.K.I. persistently strives to transform this possibility
into a reaIity." This revisionist line was further empha-
sized in the Seventh National Congress of the P.K.I. and
was never corrected, not even when our Party was al-
ready aware that since the 20th Congress of the C'P.S.U.,
the leadership of the C.P.S.U. had been following the
road of modern revisionism.
The self-criticism stresses that the experience of the
P.K.I. provides the lesson that by criticizing the modern
revisionism of the C.P.S.U. leadership alone, it does not
mean that the P.K.I. itself will automatically be free
from errors of Right opportunism, the same as what the
modern revisionists are doing. The experience of the
P.K.I. provides the lesson that modern revisionism, the
greatest danger in the international communist move-
ment, is also the greatest danger for the P.K.I. For the
P.K.I., modern revisionism is not "a latent but not an
acute danger", but a concrete danger that has brought
great damage to the Party and serious losses for the rev-
olutionary movement of the Indonesian people. There-
fore, we must not in any way underestimate the danger
of modern revisionism and must wage a resolute and
ruthless struggle against it. The firm stand against
modern revisionism in all fields can be effectively main-
tained only when our Party abandons the line of "preserv-
ing friendship with the modern revisionists".
It is a fact that the P.K.I., while criticizing the modern
revisionism of the C.P.S.U. leadership, also made revi-
sionist mistakes itself, because it had revised Marxist-
Leninist teachings on class struggle, state and revolution.
Furthermore, the P.K.I. leadership not only did not wage
a struggle in the theoretical field against other "revolu-
tionary" political thoughts which could mislead the pro-
letariat, as Lenin has taught us to do, but had voluntarily
given concessions in the theoretical field. The P.K.I.
leadership maintained that there was an identity between
the three components of Marxism: materialist philosophy,
political economy and scientific socialism, and the so-
called "three components of Sukarno's teachings". They
wanted to make Marxism, which is the ideology of the
working class, the property of the whole nation which
includes the exploiting classes hostile to the working class.
THE MAIN ERORS IN THE POLITICAL FIELD
The self-criticism says that the mistakes of Right op-
portunism in the political field which are now under
discussion include three problems: (1) the road to people's
democracy in Indonesia, (2) the question of state power,
and (3) the implementation of the policy of the national
united front.
One of the fundamental differences and problems of
disputes between Marxism-Leninism and modern revi-
sionism lies precisely in the problem of choosing the road
to socialism. Marxism-Leninism teaches that socialism
can only be achieved through the road of proletarian
revolution and that in the case of colonial or semi-colonial
and semi-feudal countries like Indonesia, socialism can
only be achieved by first completing the stage of the
people's democratic revolution. On the contrary, revi-
sionism dreams of achieving socialism through the
"peaceful road".
During the initial years of this period since 1951, our
Party had achieved certain results in the political struggle
as well as in the building of the Party. One important
achievement of this period was the formulation of the
main problems of the Indonesian revolution. It was
formulated that the present stage of the Indonesian rev-
olution was a new-type bourgeois democratic revolution,
whose tasks were to liquidate imperialism and the vestiges
of feudalism and to establish a people's democratic sys-
tem as a transitional stage to socialism. The driving
forces of the revolution were the working class, the peas-
antry and the petty bourgeoisie; the leading force of
the revolution was the working class and the principal
mass strength of the revolution was the peasantry. It
was also formulated that the national bourgeoisie was a
wavering force of the revolution who might side with
the revolution to certain limits and at certain periods
but who, at other times, might betray the revolution.
The Party furthermore formulated that the working class,
in order to fulfill its obligation as the leader of the rev-
olution, must forge a revolutionary united front with
other revolutionary classes and groups based on worker-
peasant alliance and under the leadership of the working
class.
However, there was a very important shortcoming
which in later days developed into Right opportunism
or revisionism, namely, that the Party had not yet come
to the clearest unity of minds on the principal means and
the main form of struggle of the Indonesian revolution.
The Chinese revolution, the self-criticism says, has
provided the lesson concerning the main form of struggle
of the revolution in colonial oi semi-colonial and semi-
feudal countries, namely, the people's armed struggle
against the armed counter-revolution. In line with the
essence of the revolution as an agrarian revolution, then
the essence of the people's armed struggle is the armed
struggle of the peasants in an agrarian revolution under
the leadership of the working class. The practice of the
Chinese revolution is first and foremost the application
of Marxism-Leninism to the concrete conditions of China.
At the same time, it has laid down the general law for
the revolutions of the peoples in colonial or semi-colonial
and semi-feudal countries.
To achieve its complete victory, it stresses, the Indo-
nesian revolution must also follow the road of the Chinese
revolution. This means that the Indonesian revolution
must inevitably adopt this main form of struggle, namely,
the people's armed struggle against the armed counter-
revolution which, in essence, is the armed agrarian rev-
olution of the peasants under the leadership of the
proletariat.
All forms of legal and parliamentary work should serve
the principal means and the main form of struggle, and
must not in any way impede the process of the ripening
of armed struggle.
The experience during the last fifteen years has taught
us that starting from not explicitly denying the "peaceful
road" and not firmly holding to the general law of rev-
olution in colonial or semi-colonial and semi-feudal coun-
tries, the P.K.I. gradually got bogged down in parliamen-
tary and other forms of legal struggle. The Party leader-
ship even considered this to be the main form of struggle
to achieve the strategic aim of the Indonesian revolution.
The legality of the Party was not considered as one
method of struggle at a given time and under certain
conditions, but was rather regarded as a principle, while
other forms of struggle should serve this principle. Even
when counter-revolution not only has trampled underfoot
the legality of the Party, but has violated the basic human
rights of the Cornmunists as well, the Party leadership
still tried to defend. this "legality" with all their might.
The "peaceful road" was firmly established in the
Party when the Fourth Plenary Session of the 'Central
Committee of the Fifth Congress in 1956 adopted a docu-
ment which approved the modern revisionist line of the
20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. In such a situation, when
the revisionist line was already firmly established in the
Party, it was impossible to have a correct Marxist-Leninist
Iine of strategy and tactics. The formulation of the main
lines of strategy and tactics of the Party started from
a vacillation between the "peaceful road" and the "road
of armed revolution", in the process of which the "peace-
ful road" finally became dominant.
Under such conditions, the General Line of the P.K.I.
was formulated by the Sixth National Congress (1959).
It reads, "To continue the forging of the national united
front, and to continue the building of the Party, so as
to accomplish the demands of the August Revolution of
1945." Based on the General Line of the Party, the slogan
"Raise the Three Banners of the Party" was decided.
These were: (1) the banner of the national united front,
(2) the banner of the building of the Party, and (3) the
banner of the 1945 August Revolution. The General Line
was meant as the road to people's democracy in
Indonesia.
The Party leadership tried to explain that the three
Banners of the Party were the three main weapons to
win the people's democratic revolution which, as Comrade
Mao Tse-tung has said, were "a well-disciplined Party
armed with the theory of Marxism-Leninism, using the
method of self-criticism and linked with the masses of
the people; an army under the leadership of such a Party;
a united front off all revolutionary classes and all revolu-
tionary groups under the leadership of such a Party".
Thus the second main weapon means that there must
be a people's armed struggle against armed counter-
revolution under the leadership of the Party. The Party
leadership tried to replace this with the slogan "Raise
the banner of the 1945 August Revolution".
In order to prove that the road followed was not the
opportunist "peaceful road", the Party leadership always
spoke of the two possibilities, the possibility of a "peace-
ful road" and the possibility of a non-peaceful road.
They held that the better the Party prepared itself to
face the possibility of a non-peaceful road, the greater
would be the possibility for a "peaceful road". By doing
so the Party leadership cultivated in the minds of Party
members, the working class and the masses of the work-
ing people the hope for a peaceful road which in reality
did not exist.
In practice, the Party leadership did not prepare the
whole ranks of the Party, the working class and the
masses of the people to face the possibility of a non-
peaceful road. The most striking proof of it was the
grave tragedy which happened after the outbreak and
the failure of the September 30th Movement. Within
a very short space of time, the counter-revolution suc-
ceeded in massacring and arresting hundreds of thou-
sands of Communists and non-communist revolutionaries
who found themselves in a passive position, paralyzing
the organization of the P.K.I. and the revolutionary mass
organizations. Such a situation surely would never hap-
pen if the Party leadership did not deviate from the
revolutionary road.
The Party leadership declared, says the self-criticism,
that "our Party must not copy the theory of armed strug-
gle abroad, but must carry out the Method of Combining
the Three Forms of Struggle: guerrilla warfare in the
countryside (especially by farm labourers and poor peas-
ants), revolutionary actions by the workers (especially
transport workers) in the cities, and intensive work among
the enemy's armed forces". The Party leadership criti-
cized some comrades who, in studying the experience of
the armed struggle of the Chinese people, were consider-
ed seeing only its similarities with the conditions in
Indonesia. On the contrary, the Party leadership put for-
ward several allegedly different conditions that must be
taken into account, until they arrived at the conclusion
that the method typical to the Indonesian revolution was
the "Method of Combining the Three Forms of Struggle".
To fulfill its heavy but great and noble historical mis-
sion, to lead the people's revolution against imperialism,
feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism, the Indonesian
Marxist-Leninists must firmly reject the revisionist
"peaceful road", reject the "theory of the Method of
Combining the Three Forms of Struggle", and hold aloft
the banner of armed people's revolution. Following the
example of the glorious Chinese revolution, the Indone-
sian Marxist-Leninists must establish revolutionary base
areas; they must "turn the backward villages into ad-
vanced, consolidated base areas, into great military, polit-
ical, economic and cultural bastions of the revolution".
While working for the realization of this most principal
question we must also carry out other forms of struggle;
armed struggle will never advance without being co-
ordinated with other forms of struggle.
The line of Right opportunism followed by the Party
leadership was also reflected in their attitude with regard
to the state, in particular to the state of the Republic
of Indonesia, the self-criticism says.
Based on this Marxist-Leninist teaching on state, the
task of the P.K.I., after the August Revolution of 1945
failed, should have been the education of the Indonesian
working class and the rest of the working people, so as
to make them understand as clearly as possible the class
nature of the state of the Republic of Indonesia as a
bourgeois dictatorship. The P.K.I. should have aroused
the consciousness of the working class and the working
people that their struggle for liberation would inevitably
lead to the necessity of "superseding the bourgeois state"
by the people's state under the leadership of the work-
ing class, through a "violent revolution". But the P.K.I.
leadership took the opportunist line that gave rise to the
illusion among the people about bourgeois democracy.
The self-criticism says that the climax of the deviation
from Marxist-Leninist teaching on state committed by
the Party leadership was the formulation of the "theory
of the two aspects in the state power of the Republic of
Indonesia".
The "two-aspect theory" viewed the state and the
state power in the following way:
The state power of the Republic, viewed as contra-
diction, is a contradiction between two opposing aspects.
This first aspect is the aspect which represents the
interests of the people (manifested by the progressive
stands and policies of President Sukarno that are sup-
ported by the P.K.I. and other groups of the people).
The second aspect is the aspect that represents the
enemies of the people (manifested by the stands and
policies of the Right-wing forces and die-hards). The
people's aspect has now become the main aspect and
takes the leading role in the state power of the Republic.
The "two-aspect theory" obviously is an opportunist
or revisionist deviation, because it denies the Marxist-
Leninist teaching that "the state is an organ of the rule
of a definite class which cannot be reconciled with its
antipode (the class opposite to it)”. It is unthinkable that
the Republic of Indonesia can be jointly ruled by the
people and the enemies of the people.
The self-criticism says that the party leadership who
wallowed in the mire of opportunism claimed that the
"people's aspect" had become the main aspect and taken
the hegemony in the state power of the Republic. It was
as if the Indonesian people were nearing the birth of a
people's power. And since they considered that the forces
of the national bourgeoisie in the state power really con-
stituted the "people's aspect", the Party leadership had
done everything to defend and develop this ,,people’s
aspect". The Party leadership had altogether merged
themselves in the interests of the national bourgeoisie.
By considering the national bourgeoisie the ,,people’s
aspect" in the state power of the Republic, and presi-
dent Sukarno the leader of this aspect, the Party leader-
ship erroneously recognized that the national bourgeoisie
was able to lead the new-type democratic revolution.
This is contrary to historical necessity and historical facts.
The Party leadership declared that the "two-aspect
theory" was completely different from the "theory of
structural reform" of the leadership of the revisionist
Italian Communist Party. However, the fact is, theoreti-
caliy or on the basis of practical realities, there is no
difference between the two "theories". Both have for
their starting point the "peaceful road" to socialism.
Both dream of a gradual change in the internal balance
of forces in the state power. Both reject the road of
revolution and both are revisionist.
The anti-revolutionary "two-aspect theory" glaringly
exposed itself in the statement that "the struggle of the
P.K.I. with regard to the state power is to promote the
pro-people aspect so as to make it bigger and dominant,
and the anti-people force can be driven out from the
state power".
The Party leadership even had a name for this anti-
revolutionary road; they called it the road of "revolution
from above and below". By "revolution from above" they
meant that the P.K.I. "must encourage the state power
to take revolutionary steps aimed at making the desired
changes in the personnel and in the state organs". While
by "revolution from below" they meant that the P.K.I.
"must arouse, organize and mobilize the people to achieve
the same changes". It is indeed an extraordinary phan-
tasy! The Party leadership did not learn from the fact
that the concept of President Sukarno on the formation
of a co-operation cabinet (the old-type government of
national coalition), eight years after its announcement,
had not been realized as yet. There was even no sign
that it would ever be realized, despite the insistent
demands. Let alone a change in the state power!
The self-criticism stresses that to clean itself from the
mire of opportunism, our Party must discard this "theory
of two-aspect in the state power" and re-establish the
Marxist-Leninist teaching on state and revolution.
* * *
The 5th National Congress of the Party in the main
had solved theoretically the problem of the national
united front. It formulated that the worker-peasant
alliance was the basis of the national united front. With
regard to the national bourgeoisie a lesson had been
drawn on the basis of the experience during the August
Revolution that this class had a wavering character. In
a certain situation, the national bourgeoisie took part in
the revolution and sided with the revolution, while in
another situation they followed in the steps of the com-
prador-bourgeoisie to attack the driving forces of the
revolution and betrayed the revolution (as shown by their
activities during the Madiun Provocation and their ap-
proval of the Round Table Conference Agreement).
Based on this wavering character of the national bour-
geoisie, the Party formulated the stand that must be
taken by the P.K.I., namely, to make continuous efforts
to win the national bourgeoisie over to the side of rev-
olution, while guarding against the possibility of its be-
traying the revolution. The P.K.I. must follow the policy
of unity and struggle towards the national bourgeoisie,
the self-criticism says.
Nevertheless, since the ideological weakness of subjec-
tivism in the Party, particularly among the Party leader-
ship, had not yet been eradicated, the Party was dragged
into more and more serious mistakes, to such an extent
that the Party lost its independence in the united front
with the national bourgeoisie. This mistake had led to
the situation in which the Party and the proletariat were
placed as the appendage of the national bourgeoisie.
The self-criticism states that a manifestation of this
loss of independence in the united front with the national
bourgeoisie was the evaluation and the stand of the Party
leadership towards Sukarno. The Party leadership did
not adopt an independent attitude towards Sukarno.
They had always avoided conflicts with Sukarno and, on
the contrary, had greatly over-emphasized the similarities
and the unity between the Party and Sukarno. The public
saw that there was no policy of Sukarno that was not
supported by the P.K.I. The Party leadership went so
far as to accept without any struggle the recognition to
Sukarno as "the great leader of the revolution" and the
leader of the "people's aspect" in the state power of the
Republic. In many articles and speeches, the Party
leaders frequently said that the struggle of the P.K.I.
was based not only on Marxism-Leninism, but also on
"the teachings of Sukarno", that the P.K.I. made such
a rapid progress because it realized Sukarno's idea of
Nasakom unity, etc. Even the concept of the people's
democratic system in Indonesia was said to be in con-
formity with Sukarno's main ideas as expressed in his
speech "The Birth of Pantjasila" on June 1, 1945.
The self-criticism repudiates the erroneous view that
"to implement the Political Manifesto in a consistent
manner is the same as implementing the programme of
the P.K.I."
The statement that consistently implementing the
Political Manifesto meant implementing the programme
of the P.K.I. could only be interpreted that it was not the
programme of the P.K.I. that was accepted by the bour-
geoisie, but that, on the contrary, it was the programme
of the national bourgeoisie which was accepted by the
P.K.I., and was made to replace the programme of the
P.K.I., it points out.
The self-criticism says that the abandonment of prin-
ciple in the united front with the national bourgeoisie had
developed even further in the so-called "General Line
of the Indonesian Revolution" that was formulated as
follows: "With the national united front having the work-
ers and peasants as its pillars, the Nasakom as the core
and the Pantjasila as its ideological basis, to complete
the national democratic revolution in order to advance
towards Indonesian Socialism." This so-called "General
Line of the Indonesian Revolution" had not even the
faintest smell of the revolution. Because, from the three
preconditions to win the revolution, namely, a Strong
Marxist-Leninist Party, a people's armed struggle under
the leadership of the Party, and a united front, only the
united front was retained. Even then, it was not a rev-
olutionary united front, because it was not led by the
working class, nor was it based on the alliance of the
working class and the peasantry under the leadership of
the working class, but on the contrary it was based on
the Nasakom.
The Party leadership said that "the slogan for national
co-operation with the Nasakom as the core will by no
means obscure the class content of the national united
front". This statement is incorrect. The class content
of the Nasakom was the working class, the national bour-
geoisie, and even elements of the compradors, the bureau-
crat-capitalists and the landlords. Obviously, putting the
Nasakom in the core not only meant obscuring the class
content of the national united front, but radically chang-
ing the meaning of the revolutionary national united front
into an alliance of the working class with all other classes
in the country, including the reactionary classes, into
class collaboration.
This error must be corrected. The Party must throw
to the dust-bin the erroneous "General Line of the Indo-
nesian Revolution" and return to the correct conception
of a revolutionary national united front based on the
alliance of the workers and peasants under the leader-
ship of the working class.
The abandonment of principle in the united front with
the national bourgeoisie was also the result of the Party's
inability to make a correct and concrete analysis of the
concrete situation, the self-criticism says.
The self-criticism points out that ever since the failure
of the August Revolution of 1945, except in West lrian,
the imperialists did not hold direct political power in
Indonesia. In Indonesia, political power was in the hands
of compradors and landlords who represented the inter-
ests of imperialism and the vestiges of feudalism. Be-
sides, there was no imperialist aggression in Indonesia
taking place. Under such a situation, provided that the
P.K.I. did not make political mistakes, the contradiction
between the ruling reactionary classes and the people
would develop and sharpen, constituting the main con-
tradiction in Indonesia. The primary task of the Indone-
sian revolution is the overthrow of the rule of the reac-
tionary classes within the country who also represent
the interests of the imperialists, in particular the United
States imperialists. Only by taking this road can the
real liquidation of imperialism and the vestiges of feudal-
ism be realized.
By correcting the mistakes made by the Party in the
united front with the national bourgeoisie it does not
mean that now the Party need not unite with this class.
On the basis of the worker-peasant alliance under the
leadership of the working class, our Party must work
to win the national bourgeois class over to the side of the
revolution.
THE MAIN MISTAKES IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL FIELD
The self-criticism says that the erroneous political line
which dominated the Party was inevitably followed by
an equally erroneous organizational line. The longer and
the more intensive the wrong political line ruled in the
Party, the greater were the mistakes in the organizational
field, and the greater the losses caused by them. Right
opportunism which constituted the wrong political line
of the Party in the period after 1951 had been followed
by another Right deviation in the organizational field,
namely, liberalism and legalism.
The line of liberalism in the organizational field mani-
fested itself in the tendency to make the P.K.I. a party
with as large a membership as possible, a party with a
loose organization, which was called a mass Party.
It says that the mass character of the Party is not
determined above all by the large membership, but pri-
marily by the close ties linking the Party and the masses,
by the Party's political line which defends the interests
of the masses, or in other words by the implementation
of the Party's mass line. And the mass line of the Party
can only be maintained when the prerequisites deter-
mining the Party's role as the advanced detachment are
firmly upheld, when the Party members are made up
of the best elements of the proletariat who are armed
with Marxism-Leninism. Consequently, to build a Marx-
ist-Leninist Party which has a mass character is impossi-
ble without giving primary importance to Marxist-Lenin-
ist education.
The self-criticism points out that during the last few
years, the P.K.I. had carried out a line of Party building
which deviated from the principles of Marxism-Leninism
in the organizational field.
The self-criticism says that this liberal expansion of
Party membership could not be separated from the polit-
ical line of the "peaceful road". The large membership
was intended to increase the influence of the Party in
the united front with the national bourgeoisie. The idea
was to effect the gradual change in the balance of forces
that would make it possible to completely defeat the die-
hard forces, with a Party that was growing bigger and
bigger, in addition to the continued policy of unity with
the national bourgeoisie.
The stress was no longer laid on the education and
the training of Marxist-Leninist cadres to prepare them
for the revolution, for work among the peasants in order
to establish revolutionary bases, but on the education of
intellectuals to serve the needs of the work in the united
front with the national bourgeoisie, and to supply cadres
for the various positions in the state institutions that
were obtained thanks to the co-operation with the na-
tional bourgeoisie. The slogan of "total integration with
the peasants" had become empty talk. What was being
done in practice was to draw cadres from the country-
side to the cities, from the regions to the centre, instead
of sending the best cadres to work in the rural areas.
To raise the prestige of the P.K.I. in the eyes of the
bourgeoisie, and to make it respected as the party of intel-
lectuals, the 4-Year Plan stipulated that all cadres of the
higher ranks must obtain academic education, cadres of
the middle ranks high school education, and cadres of the
lower ranks lower middle school education. For this pur-
pose the Party had set up a great number of academies,
schools and courses. So deep-rooted was the intellectual-
ism gripping the Party leadership that all Party leaders
and prominent figures of the popular movements were
obliged to write four theses in order to obtain the degree
of "Marxist Scientists".
The deeper the Party was plunged into the mire of op-
portunism and revisionism, the greater it lacked organiza-
tional vigilance and the more extensively legalism devel-
oped in the organization. The Party leadership had lost
its class prejudice towards the falsehood of bourgeois
democracy. All the activities of the Party indicated as if
the "peaceful road" was an inevitable certainty. The Party
leadership did not arouse the vigilance of the masses of,
Party members to the danger of attacks by the reaction-
aries who were constantly on the look for the chance to
strike. Due to this legalism in the organizational field,
within a short span of time counter-revolution has suc-
ceeded in paralysing the P.K.I. organizationally.
Liberalism in organization had destroyed the principle
of internal democracy in the Party, destroyed collective
leadership and had given rise to personal leadership and
personal rule, to autonomism.
In a situation when liberalism dominated the organiza-
tional line of the Party, it was impossible to realize the
Party's style of work "to combine theory and practice, to
keep close bonds with the masses and to conduct self-
criticism". It was equally impossible to realize the method
of leadership whose essence is the unity of the leadership
and the masses; to realize it the leadership must give an
example to the rank-and-file.
The self-criticism points out that thus, in general the
wrong political line which ruled in the Party was followed
by the wrong line in the organizational field which vio-
lated the principles of a Marxist-Leninist Party, destroyed
the organizational foundation of the party, namely, dem-
ocratic centralism, and trampled on the party’s style of
work and method of leadership.
The self-criticism emphatically points out that to build
the P.K.I. as a Marxist-Leninist Party, we must thor-
oughly uproot liberalism in the organizational field and
its ideological source. The P.K.I. must be rebuilt as a
Lenin-type Party, a Party that will be capable of fulfilling
its role as the advanced detachment and the highest form
of class organization of the Indonesian proletariat, a party
with a historical mission of leading the masses of the In-
donesian people to win victory in the anti-imperialist,
anti-feudal and anti-bureaucrat-capitalist revolution, and
to advance towards socialism. Such a Party must fulfill
the following conditions: Ideologically, it is armed with
the theory of Marxism-Leninism, and free from subjectiv-
ism, opportunism and modern revisionism; politically, it
has a correct programme which includes a revolutionary
agrarian programme, has a thorough understanding of the
problems of the strategy and tactics of the Indonesian rev-
olution, masters the main form of struggle, namely, the
armed struggle of the peasants under the leadership of the
proletariat, as well as other forms of struggle, is capable
of establishing a revolutionary united front of all anti-
imperialist and anti-feudal classes based on the worker-
peasant alliance under the leadership of the working class;
organizationally, it is strong and has a deep root among
the masses of the people, consists of trustworthy, expe-
rienced and steeled Party members who are models in the
implementation of the national tasks.
Today, we are rebuilding our Party under the reign of
counter-revolutionary white terror which is most cruel
and ferocious. The legality of the party and the basic
human rights of the Communists have been wantonly
violated. The Party, therefore, has to be organized and has
to work in complete illegality. While working in complete
illegality, the Party must be adept at utilizing to the full
all possible opportunities to carry out legal activities ac-
cording to circumstances, and to choose ways and means
that are acceptable to the masses with the aim of mobiliz-
ing the masses for struggle and leading this struggle step
by step to a higher stage.
The self-criticism stresses that in rebuilding the P.K.I.
along the Marxist-Leninist line, the greatest attention
should be devoted to the building of Party organizations
in the rural areas, to the establishment of revolutionary
bases.
The task to rebuild a Marxist-Leninist Party as has
been stated above requires arduous and protracted work,
and is full of danger, and consequently it must be carried
out courageously, perseveringly, carefully, patiently and
persistently.
THE WAY OUT
The self-criticism says that once we know the weak-
nesses and mistakes of the Party during the period after
1951 as have been explained above, obviously what we
have to do is to realize the most urgent tasks faced by the
Indonesian Marxist-Leninists at the present time, the first
one being the rebuilding of the P.K.I. as a Marxist-Lenin-
ist Party which is free from subjectivism, opportunism
and modern revisionism.
To rebuild the P.K.I. as such a Marxist-Leninist Party,
Party cadres of all levels and then all Party members
must reach a unanimity of mind with regard to the mis-
takes made by the Party in the past, as well as concerning
the new road that must be taken.
In order to reach unanimity of mind, a rectification
movement must be carried out in the whole party.
Through this rectification movement we will remould the
erroneous ideas of the past into correct ideas. In order to
advance along the new road, it is absolutely necessary to
abandon the wrong road.
Under the present situation, it will not be easy to come
to unanimity of mind concerning all past mistakes down
to the minutest details. But, what is absolutely necessary
is unanimity of mind regarding the fundamental problems
raised in this self-criticism.
The self-criticism says that the opportunist and revi-
sionist mistakes in the political and organizational fields
made by our Party which have been subjected to this crit-
icism were not merely the outcome of the social and
historical conditions during the last decade, but could be
traced farther back in the social and historical conditions
since the founding of our Party. We must, therefore, get
rid of the notion that everything will be all right once
we have made the present criticism and self-criticism. So
long as the ideology of subjectivism is not completely
eradicated from the Party, or worse still, if it is still to be
found among the Party leadership, then our party will
not be able to avoid other mistakes of Right or “Left” op-
portunism because, if such is the case, our Party will not
be able to analyse the political situation correctly, and
consequently will not be able to give correct directives on
work. It is above all the task of the leadership and the
central cadres, and then of the regional leadership and
cadres at all levels to combat subjectivism persistently and
wholeheartedly.
Subjectivism can be effectively combated and liquidated
when the abitity of the whole Party to distinguish pro-
letarian ideology from the ideology of the petty bour-
geoisie is raised, and when criticism and self-criticism is
encouraged. To raise the ability of the whole Party to dis-
tinguish proletarian ideology from the ideology of the
petty bourgeoisie will be possible only by intensifying the
education of Marxism-Leninism. The Party must educate
its members to apply the Marxist-Leninist method in an-
alysing the political situation and in evaluating the forces
of the existing classes, so that subjective analysis and
evaluation can be avoided. The Party must draw the atten-
tion of the members to the importance of investigation
and study of social and economic conditions, in order to
be able to define the tactics of struggle and the corre-
sponding method of work. The Party must help the mem-
bers to understand that without an investigation of the
actual conditions they will get bogged down in phantasy.
The self-criticism emphatically points out that the ex-
perience of the struggle waged by the party in the past
has shown how indispensable it is for the Indonesian
Marxist-Leninists, who are resolved to defend Marxism-
Leninism and to combat modern revisionism, to study not
only the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, but
also to devote special attention to studying the Thought
of Mao Tse-tung who has succeeded in brilliantly inherit-
ing, defending and developing Marxism-Leninism to its
peak in the present era.
The P.K.I. will be able to hold aloft the banner of Marx-
ism-Leninism, only when it takes a resolute stand in the
struggle against modern revisionism which today is cen-
tred around the leading group of the C.P.S.U. The fight
against modern revisionism cannot be consistently carried
out while, at the same time, preserving friendship with
the modern revisionists. The P.K.I. must abandon the
wrong attitude it held in the past with regard to the ques-
tion of the relations with the modern revisionists. Loyalty
to proletarian internationalism can only be manifested by
a merciless stand in the struggle against modern revision-
ism, because modern revisionism has destroyed proleta-
rian internationalism, and betrayed the struggle of the
proletariat and the oppressed people all over the world.
In rebuilding the Party, the Indonesian Marxist-Lenin-
ists must devote their attention to the creation of the
conditions to lead the armed agrarian revolution of the
peasants that will become the main form of struggle to
win victory for the people's democratic revolution in In-
donesia. This means that the greatest attention should
be paid to the rebuilding of Party organizations in the
rural areas. The greatest attention must be paid to the
solution of the problem of arousing, organizing and mo-
bilizing the peasants in an anti-feudal agrarian revolution.
The integration of the Party with the peasants, in partic-
ular with farm labourers and poor peasants, must be con-
scientiously carried out. Because, only through such an
integration, will the Party be able to lead the peasantry,
and the peasantry, for their part, will be capable of be-
coming the invincible bulwark of the people's democratic
revolution.
As a result of the attacks of the third white terror,
Party organizations in the rural areas in general have suf-
fered greater damage. This fact has rendered it more dif-
ficult and arduous to work in the countryside. But this
does not in any way change the inexorable law that the
main force of the people's democratic revolution in In-
donesia is the peasantry, and its base area is the country-
side. With the most resolute determination that everything
is for the masses of the people, the Indonesian Marxist-
Leninists will certainly be able to overcome the gravest
difficulties. '' By having the most wholehearted faith in
the masses and by relying on the masses, the Indonesian
Marxist-Leninists will certainly be able to transform the
backward Indonesian villages into great and consolidated
military, political and cultural bastions of the revolution.
The Indonesian peasants are the most interested in the
people's democratic revolution. Because, only this revo-
lution will liberate them from the life of backwardness
and inequality as a result of feudal suppression. It is only
this revolution that will give them what they have dreamt
all their lives and which will give them life: land. That is
why the peasants will surely take this road of revolution
for land and liberation, no matter how arduous and full
of twists and turns this road will be.
Obviously, the second task of the Indonesian Marxist-
Leninists at present is the creation o the necessary condi-
tions for the armed agrarian revolution of the peasants
under the leadership of the proletariat. Provided that the
Indonesian Marxist-Leninists succeed in arousing, organ-
izing and mobilizing the peasants to carry through an
anti-feudal agrarian revolution, the leadership of the
working class in the people's democratic revolution and
the victory of this revolution are assured.
However, the Party must continue the efforts to es-
tablish a revolutionary united front with other anti-impe-
rialist and anti-feudal classes and groups. Based on the
alliance of the working class and the peasantry under the
leadership of the proletariat, the Party must work to win
over the urban petty bourgeoisie and other democratic
forces, and must also work to win over the national bour-
geoisie as an additional ally in the people's democratic
revolution. The present objective conditions offer the
possibility for the establishment of a broad revolutionary
united front.
The military dictatorship of the Right-wing army gen-
erals Nasution and Suharto is the manifestation of the
rule by the most reactionary classes in the country, namely,
the comprador-bourgeoisie, the bureaucrat-capital-
ists and the landlords. The internal reactionary classes
under the leadership of the clique of Right-wing army
generals exercise dictatorship over the Indonesian people,
and act as watch-dogs guarding the interests of imperial-
ism, in particular United States imperialism, in Indonesia.
Consequently, the coming into power of the military dic-
tatorship of the Right-wing army generals will certainly
serve to intensify the suppression and exploitation of the
Indonesian people by imperialism and feudalism.
The military dictatorship of the Right-wing army gen-
erals represents the interests of only a very small minor-
ity who suppresses the overwhelming majority of the
Indonesian people. That is why the military dictatorship
of the Right-wing army generals will certainly meet with
resistance from the broad masses of the people.
Thus, the third urgent task faced by the Indonesian
Marxist-Leninists is to establish the revolutionary united
front with all anti-imperialist and anti-feudal classes and
groups based on the worker-peasant alliance under the
leadership of the working class.
Thus, it has becorne clear that to win victory for the
people's democratic revolution, the Indonesian Marxist-
Leninists must hold aloft the Three Banners of the Party,
namely:
The first banner, the building of a Marxist-Leninist
Party which is free from subjectivism, opportunism and
modern revisionism.
The second banner, the armed people's struggle which
in essence is the armed struggle of the peasants in an anti-
feudal agrarian revolution under the leadership of the
working class.
The third banner, the revolutionary united front based
on the worker-peasant alliance under the leadership of
the working class.
The tasks faced by the Indonesian Marxist-Leninists
are very arduous. They have to work under the most
savage and barbarous terror and persecution which have
no parallel in history. However, the Indonesian Marxist-
Leninists do not have the slightest doubt that, by correct-
ing the mistakes made by the Party in the past, they are
now marching along the correct road, the road of people's
democratic revolution. No matter how protracted, tor-
turous and full of difficulties, this is the only road leading
to a free and democratic New Indonesia, an Indonesia that
will really belong to the Indonesian people. For this noble
cause, we must have the courage to traverse the long road.
The self-criticism points out that the Indonesian Marx-
ist-Leninists and revolutionaries on the basis of their own
experience in struggle, do not have the slightest doubt
about the correctness of Comrade Mao Tse-tung's thesis
that "the imperialists and all reactionaries are paper
tigers. In appearance they are terrifying, but in reality
they are not so powerful. From a long-term point of
view, it is not the reactionaries but the people who are
really powerful". The military dictatorship of the Right
-wing army generals which is now in power is also a paper
tiger. In appearance they are powerful and terrifying.
But in reality they are not so powerful, because they are
not supported but on the contrary are opposed by the peo-
ple, because their ranks are beset by contradictions, and
because they are quarrelling among themselves for a big-
ger share of their plunder and for greater power. The
imperialists, in particular the United States imperialists
who are the mainstay of the military dictatorship of the
Right-wing army generals, are also paper tigers. In ap-
pearance they are powerful and terrifying, but in reality
they are weak and nearing their complete downfall. The
weakness of imperialism, in particular United States
imperialism, is vividly demonstrated by their inability to
conquer the heroic Vietnamese people and to check the
tide of the anti-imperialist struggle waged by the people
all over the world, including the American people them-
selves, who are furiously dealing blows at the fortresses
of imperialism.
From a strategic point of view, the imperialists and all
reactionaries are weak, and consequently we must despise
them. By despising the enemies strategically we can build
up the courage to fight them and the confidence to defeat
them. At the same time we must take them all seriously,
take into full account of their strength tactically, and re-
frain from taking adventurist steps against them.
The self-criticism says that today, we are in an era
when imperialism is undergoing its total collapse, and so-
cialism is marching forward triumphantly all over the
world. No force on earth can prevent the total downfall
of imperialism and all other reactionaries, and no force
can block the victory of Socialism throughout the world.
The military dictatorship of the Right-wing army gen-
erals, as the watch-dog guarding the interests of impe-
rialism in Indonesia, is also unable to avert its destruction.
The vicious and savage massacre and torture against the
hundreds of thousands of Communists and democrats
which they are still continuing today, will not be able to
prevent the people and the Communists from rising up
in resistance. On the contrary, all the brutalities and
cruelties will only serve to intensify the tit-for-tat resist-
ance struggle of the people. The Communists will avenge
the death of their hundreds of thousands of comrades
with the resolve to serve still better the people, the revolu-
tion and the Party.
The Indonesian Marxist-Leninists will spare neither
efforts nor energy to fulfill the best wishes of the world
Marxist-Leninists by resolutely defending Marxism-
Leninism and struggling against modern revisionism, by
working still better for the liberation of their people and
country, and for the world proletarian revolution.
The Indonesian Marxist-Leninists who are united in
mind and determined to take the road of revolution, by
putting their wholehearted faith in the people, by relying
on the people, by working courageously, perseveringly,
conscientiously, patiently, persistently and vigilantly, will
surely be able to accomplish their historical mission, to
lead the people's democratic revolution, to smash the mili-
tary dictatorship of the Right-wing army generals and to
set up a completely new power, the people's democratic
dictatorship. With the people's democratic dictatorship,
the joint power of anti-imperialist and anti-feudal classes
and groups under the leadership of the working class, the
Indonesian people will completely liquidate imperialism
and the vestiges of feudalism, build a free and democratic
new society, and advance towards Socialism where the
suppression and exploitation of man by man no longer
exists.
Let us unite closely to take the road of revolution which
is illuminated by the teaching of Marxism-Leninism, the
road leading to the liberation of the Indonesian people
and proletariat, the road leading to Socialism.
(bold face emphases and quotation marks are in the original)
Comments