28 - 11 - 2023

We send our militant greetings to the comrades all over the world.

Today the world proletariat celebrates the 203rd birthday of the brilliant thinker and revolutionary, Friedrich Engels, the second classic of Marxism-Leninism. Together with Kal Marx, Friedrich Engels was the founder of the science of the liberation of the world proletariat and all oppressed, the co-founder of the science of the establishment of the communist world society.

Long live the 203rd Birthday of Frederick Engels !

Let us always honour the memory of Frederick Engels, a great fighter and teacher of the proletariat! (LENIN)

Frederick Engels

28. 11. 1820

The decision to celebrate the birthdays and death anniversaries of the 5 classics of Marxism-Leninism every year was taken in the 2011 Annual Plan of the Comintern (SH).

For the past 12 years, we have been addressing greetings to all comrades around the world and publishing their works in different languages of the world.

On occasion of the 165th Deathday of Robert Owen, on 17 November 1858, we will take the opportunity to focus our historical review to Marx and Engels and their critique to the Utopian Socialists.

In the first half of the 19th century, Marx and Engels had already clearly positioned themselves in relation to the so-called "early socialists" and not only distanced themselves from utopian socialism, but also made further progress on their own path to scientific communism. The Communist Manifesto is the first document of scientific communism.

The naming of the "Communist Manifesto" alone proves this. Marx and Engels deliberately did not call it the "Socialist Manifesto", among other things to distinguish it from utopian socialism. This was also a class issue: the supporters of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois socialism ["middle-classes"] called themselves socialists and the revolutionary movement of the emerging working class called itself communist movement: The emancipation of the working class must be the work of the working class itself.

The ideas of utopian socialism formed one of the starting points for Marxism. In this respect, Marx and Engels distanced themselves from the utopian socialists in principle, but never questioned their historical significance. Engels said of the three utopians Saint-Simon, Fourier and Owen,

"that these three men, for all their fantasies and utopianism, are among the most important minds of all time and anticipated countless things with genius, the correctness of which we now prove scientifically." (Preliminary remarks on the "Peasants' War")

It is important to mention that Marx and Engels did not lump all early socialists together, but differentiated their ideas very precisely. This can already be seen in the "Communist Manifesto". Chapter III first criticises (1) reactionary socialism ("a") - feudal socialism, ("b") - petty-bourgeois socialism, ("c") German or "true" socialism. Then follows (2) conservative or bourgeois socialism and finally (3) critical-utopian socialism and communism.

And it is here that we find the first clear statement on the utopian socialists, to whom Saint-Simon, Fourier and Owen belong above all. It is impossible to deal with the subject of "utopian socialism" without this statement in the "Communist Manifesto". It is therefore permissible to quote this section:

"Communist Manifesto"

3. Critical-Utopian Socialism and Communism

We do not here refer to that literature which, in every great modern revolution, has always given voice to the demands of the proletariat, such as the writings of Babeuf and others.

The first direct attempts of the proletariat to attain its own ends, made in times of universal excitement, when feudal society was being overthrown, necessarily failed, owing to the then undeveloped state of the proletariat, as well as to the absence of the economic conditions for its emancipation, conditions that had yet to be produced, and could be produced by the impending bourgeois epoch alone. The revolutionary literature that accompanied these first movements of the proletariat had necessarily a reactionary character. It inculcated universal asceticism and social levelling in its crudest form.

The socialist and communist systems, properly so called, those of Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen, and others, spring into existence in the early undeveloped period, described above, of the struggle between proletariat and bourgeoisie.

The founders of these systems see, indeed, the class antagonisms, as well as the action of the decomposing elements in the prevailing form of society. But the proletariat, as yet in its infancy, offers to them the spectacle of a class without any historical initiative or any independent political movement.

Since the development of class antagonism keeps even pace with the development of industry, the economic situation, as they find it, does not as yet offer to them the material conditions for the emancipation of the proletariat. They therefore search after a new social science, after new social laws, that are to create these conditions.

Historical action is to yield to their personal inventive action; historically created conditions of emancipation to fantastic ones; and the gradual, spontaneous class organization of the proletariat to an organization of society especially contrived by these inventors. Future history resolves itself, in their eyes, into the propaganda and the practical carrying out of their social plans.

In the formation of their plans, they are conscious of caring chiefly for the interests of the working class, as being the most suffering class. Only from the point of view of being the most suffering class does the proletariat exist for them.

The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own surroundings, causes Socialists of this kind to consider themselves far superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without the distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class. For how can people when once they understand their system, fail to see in it the best possible plan of the best possible state of society?

Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social gospel.

Such fantastic pictures of future society, painted at a time when the proletariat is still in a very undeveloped state and has but a fantastic conception of its own position, correspond with the first instinctive yearnings of that class for a general reconstruction of society.

But these socialist and communist publications contain also a critical element. They attack every principle of existing society. Hence, they are full of the most valuable materials for the enlightenment of the working class. The practical measures proposed in them — such as the abolition of the distinction between town and country, of the family, of the carrying on of industries for the account of private individuals, and of the wage system, the proclamation of social harmony, the conversion of the function of the state into a more superintendence of production — all these proposals point solely to the disappearance of class antagonisms which were, at that time, only just cropping up, and which, in these publications, are recognized in their earliest indistinct and undefined forms only. These proposals, therefore, are of a purely utopian character.

The significance of critical-utopian socialism and communism bears an inverse relation to historical development. In proportion as the modern class struggle develops and takes definite shape, this fantastic standing apart from the contest, these fantastic attacks on it, lose all practical value and all theoretical justifications. Therefore, although the originators of these systems were, in many respects, revolutionary, their disciples have, in every case, formed mere reactionary sects. They hold fast by the original views of their masters, in opposition to the progressive historical development of the proletariat. They, therefore, endeavour, and that consistently, to deaden the class struggle and to reconcile the class antagonisms. They still dream of experimental realization of their social utopias, of founding isolated phalansteres, of establishing "Home Colonies", or setting up a "Little Icaria" — pocket editions of the New Jerusalem — and to realise all these castles in the air, they are compelled to appeal to the feelings and purses of the bourgeois. By degrees, they sink into the category of the reactionary conservative socialists depicted above, differing from these only by more systematic pedantry, and by their fanatical and superstitious belief in the miraculous effects of their social science.

They, therefore, violently oppose all political action on the part of the working class; such action, according to them, can only result from blind unbelief in the new gospel.

The Owenites in England, and the Fourierists in France, respectively, oppose the Chartists and the Réformistes.

Of the new theoretical works that Friedrich Engels published in the 1990s in defence and propaganda of Marxism, the work "The Development of Socialism from Utopia to Science" is of particular importance. Engels prepared the fourth German edition in 1891, checked its translation into English and wrote a special introduction for the English edition in 1892, with which he continued the fight against hostile, idealistic theories.

The term "historical materialism" should be emphasised, which Engels used here for the first time in the history of Marxism:

... "historical materialism to designate that view of the course of world history which sees the ultimate cause and the decisive motive force of all important historical events in the economic development of society, in the changes in the mode of production and exchange, in the resulting division of society into different classes and in the struggles of these classes among themselves." (MEW, Volume 22, page 298, German Edition)

The Comintern (SH) is proud to present "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" in 36 languages of the world on occasion of his 203rd Birthday. This is unique. Half the number, 17 languages, were added on occasion of today's anniversary !

Thus, take this great opportunity to study this one of Friedrich Engels' most important works!

It is both a sharp ideological weapon against today's Utopists of World Communismus and against today's enemies of Stalinism-Hoxhaism - the enemies of scientific world communism.

The then leader of world reaction in times of Robert Owen - the Duke of Metternich (a brutal Prussian militarist), with whom Owen incidentally met in Vienna, was also "enthusiastic" about Owen's ideas. However, Metternich's practical realisation of "Making humanity happy" naturally looked rather different from true humanity.

The Stalinist-Hoxhaist idea of world communism is not to be equated with the utopian idea of "world happiness" and world harmony after the class struggle will be already abolished. Owen tried to win over the rich, the personalities of the ruling classes for a world congress in order to create a better world together with them. That was of course utopian.

We Stalinist-Hoxhaists also want a world congress to eliminate all evil in the world, to create a better world. But we are not trying to convince the rulers, as Robert Owen tried to do for 50 years, but we see our task in convincing the world proletariat, because it is the only revolutionary class that can realise the dream of world communism.

The utopians did not understand that the elimination of the exploitation of people by people, which they were striving for, was only based on the revolutionary power of the working class. The co-operatives founded by Robert Owen failed within the framework of capitalism. They could only be realised with socialism under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Friedrich Engels said of Robert Owen's co-operative system:

Friedrich Engels characterised utopian socialism as an immature theory which corresponded to the immature class position of the early proletariat.

Lenin also assessed utopian socialism as "criticising, condemning and cursing capitalist society, dreaming of its destruction, fantasising about a better order and convincing the rich of the immorality of exploitation."

Despite all this, the founders of Marxism-Leninism recognised the achievements of utopian socialism and called the critical-utopian socialists of the early 19th century the most important minds among the pre-Marxist socialists.

Today, there are quite a few forces, especially among the petty bourgeoisie, who are trying to build on the ideas of utopian socialism and transfer the old model to the new era of globalisation. These petty-bourgeois forces come in particular from those countries in which the dominance of capitalism had not yet matured before globalisation. These are in particular countries where Maoism had gained a foothold and where the democratic revolution is favoured as a substitute for the socialist revolution.

Within the limited framework of capitalist conditions, no revolutionary idea can be realised in practice without hindrance. Sooner or later, under such circumstances, revolutionary ideas run the risk of sinking into the opportunist swamp and being swallowed up by the counter-revolution.

And so, in the 1840s, Robert Owen also withdrew from the labour movement, in which he had called for the 8-hour day and the improvement of the Factory Legislation , for example.

Then, at the time of the Chartist movement, Robert Owen even openly opposed the political class struggle of the working class. He rejected the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat for socialism and instead propagated reformism and the maintenance of the capitalist order.

Despite all this, it was Friedrich Engels who paid tribute to the work of Robert Owen when he emphasised that

"all social movements, all real progress made in England in the interests of the workers"

were associated with the name of Robert Owens.

Friedrich Engels is the precursor and herald of the world socialist revolution after Karl Marx and before Lenin.

Long live the 203rd Birthday of Frederick Engels, the 2nd Classic of Marxism-Leninism!

Long live the invincible teachings of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Enver Hoxha!

Long live the armed world socialist revolution and armed dictatorship of world proletariat!

Long live world socialism and world communism!

Long live the Comintern (SH)!

Wolfgang Eggers

28. 11. 2023

* * *

Is the struggle of Marx and Engels against utopian socialism to be continued directly by us Stalinist-Hoxhaists today?

Those who do not believe in world communism consequently do not believe in the world communist party.

That's why they call us Stalinist-Hoxhaists just "Dream Dancers".

We will prove to them in the daily class struggle that we are anything but utopians and dreamers, but that we consistently represent the fundamental interests of the revolutionary world proletariat - today and in the future.

For the neo-revisionists in the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world camp, the idea of world communism is mere lip service [lip service, as we know, commits us to nothing]. Expressions of sympathy serve them only as an entrance ticket to our world revolutionary movement, to ridicule us in the movement and to isolate us and label us as "dreamers".

In truth, they do not believe in the idea of world communism at all and direct all of Marx and Engels' criticism of utopian communism at that time against us Stalinist-Hoxhaists today. This counter-revolutionary method in the revolutionary world camp has been known for as long as Marxism has existed. The neo-revisionists are trying to fight the proletarian ideology of today with the proletarian ideology of the past. The neo-revisionists seize the proletarian ideology in order to "prove" with it that we are supposedly not only "fanatics" and "dogmatists", but also "utopians of world communism". At the same time, they consider world communism to be practically unfeasible. Thus they propagate the renunciation of the Communist International. Those who do not believe in world communism also do not believe in the world communist party.

Is the struggle against neo-revisionism sufficient in the question of the ideological struggle against utopian world socialism?

Of course not.

What is the difference between rightist opportunism and "leftist" opportunism in the question of the struggle against utopian wiorld socialism ?

The rightist opportunists deny this struggle openly, while the "leftist" opportunists oppose us covered behind a "Stalinist-Hoxhaist" mask.

The first ones attack us frontally and the second ones try to stab their knife into our back.

Just as in principle in all questions of class struggle, Stalinism-Hoxhaism teaches the two-front struggle, thus also the struggle against "left" opportunism in the question of utopian world socialism. The "left" opportunism in the question of utopian world socialism consists in the fact that the Stalinist-Hoxhaist theory of world socialism is not questioned, but its realisation in the concrete situation is either declared impossible or wrong. These "left" forces accuse the party of turning away in practice from the principles, first in this or that question, and then in all questions. These are mostly comrades who have problems putting theory into practice at all and blame the party for their personal weaknesses. They "uphold" the principles, but do nothing or too little to apply them correctly and consequently in the tough daily class struggle. To be in favour of the struggle against utopian world socialism in words, but to question or even hinder this struggle in practice, that is the essence of "left" opportunism.

As far as the correct attitude to the two-front struggle is concerned, Stalinism-Hoxhaism teaches that the ideological (political and organisational) two-front struggle does not fall from the sky, but that it is preceded by slight deviations at the beginning and serious ones later on. Deviations can be overcome in the party through criticism and self-criticism, but opportunism, be it right-wing or "left-wing" opportunism, can only be defeated through a consistent Bolshevik purification process. Opportunism has to have never any place in our party.

Deviations are avoidable and can be remedied within the party, but opportunism must never be permitted in the party.

Opportunism is an ideology of the bourgeoisie that serves to destroy world proletarian ideology, world proletarian politics and world proletarian organisation.

Therefore, if the deviations are not corrected "on a small scale" in time and thoroughly enough, this can lead to the existential question of the party "on a large scale". The two-front struggle often begins on the ideological front with right-wing deviations and on the political-organisational front with "left-wing" deviations. However, there is no general recipe for action here. The party must always be vigilant and must never take deviations lightly, however small their influence would seem to be ever initially assessed.

The danger of deviations or opportunism must neither be tolerated nor underestimated (but also