Could Communists have taken power post-WWII?

[Blanquist]

I mean in countries like France and Italy, where capitalism was discredited and CP's had large bodies of men under arms.

Did Stalin force them to support bourgeois governments and play a lead role in the stabilization of EuroCapitalism?

[Bostana]

Countries don't achieve Communism through war liberation. they must achieve their own revolution. The USSR's presence might have some small influence on that, yes.

[Tim Cornelis]

Countries don't achieve Communism through war liberation. they must achieve their own revolution. The USSR's presence might have some small influence on that, yes.

There was no USSR presence in either France or Italy, at least to my knowledge. They liberated Eastern Europe, not Southern, let alone Western Europe.

It is true that the Communist Party of France worked against revolutionary forces in 1968. And it is also true that the Communist Party of Italy (or whatever combination it was called) argued in favour of capitalism after World War II.

But one would need to know the influence and popularity of these parties to judge whether they "prevented" a revolution.

[Die Neue Zeit]

It is true that the Communist Party of France worked against revolutionary forces in 1968. And it is also true that the Communist Party of Italy (or whatever combination it was called) argued in favour of capitalism after World War II.

But one would need to know the influence and popularity of these parties to judge whether they "prevented" a revolution.

France didn't have a genuine revolutionary period for the working class in 1968, as I've argued in threads on 1968.

However, it could be argued that Italy had, despite the absence of Soviet forces, a revolutionary period for the working class and that, by extension, the Italian proto-Eurocoms sold out (as a possible mass party-movement of the Italian working class). It was no accident, also, that proportional representation was introduced in order to prevent them from gaining a parliamentary majority.

[ComradeOm]

But one would need to know the influence and popularity of these parties to judge whether they "prevented" a revolution.By 1944 the PCF and PCI were significant political actors with entrenched powerbases, real legitimacy and large areas under arms. This is reflected in the fact that both parties would go on to dominate the immediate post-war political landscape. However neither party was eager to consider revolution; Moscow's desires being for them to work to re-establish the bourgeois state and take their places within. Thus the PCF, for example, despite being the largest party in the Assembly of 1945 sought political coalitions rather than weigh up revolutionary options

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ In other words, the real sellout period of the PCF was indeed right after WWII, not in May 1968.

[ComradeOm]

The PCF 'sold out' in 1936 (or, more accurately, revealed the degree to which they had abandoned their remit) when it acted to curtail the wave of worker occupations of French factories; Thorez himself grumbling that workers should "know how to end a strike"

[Die Neue Zeit]

I don't know if 1936 was really a revolutionary period for the working class, though. Maybe it was somewhere in between 1945 and 1968.

[ComradeOm]

That depends on the degree to which you consider millions of workers seizing control of factories to be 'revolutionary'

[Die Neue Zeit]

If there was no political agenda, no political program, then how can it be revolutionary on the scale of Europe just before WWI?

[ComradeOm]

I don't understand (or frankly care) why you are making that comparison. In May/June 1936 a wave of 'political' strikes swept French industry and led to the mass occupation of factories across the country. Most people would consider that to be at the very least a sign of a large, militant and revolutionary proletariat

[Die Neue Zeit]

That's just like Occupy's problems today, though. Did the factory, ahem, occupations present political demands and such?

[Conscript]

Occupy isn't seizing factories, at least in America. They're camping in state-designated 'public space' as per their 'rights'. Doesn't sound very comparable to me.

Occupying factories is a quick way to confront the state, and I'm not talking riot cops here, which is the most Occupy wants to fight.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I didn't say they're the exact same thing. Occupying factories without a political agenda is a very quick way of conning and hoodwinking workers to taking power when they're not politically ready.

[Conscript]

The only 'political readiness' they need is an intention to seize all private property and transform it into common property in the new economy that exists between themselves. The political expertise and consciousness you're seeking will be a product of doing this.

But then I don't know what you mean by 'politically ready'.

[jookyle]

If we're talking about post-WWII, the American government had placed "former" Nazi's and members of Frano's ranks into positions of power in Italy and France in order to snuff out the popular socialist organizations that had been forming. In France it was so hard for them to squash the socialist movement that the American government made a deal with the mafia. If the United States allowed the French Connection to re-open(an opium trade route) under the control of the mafia, then the mafia would do what they can to eliminate the underground socialist movements in France. There were tons of socialist movements happening underground in these countries post-WWII, but America from the start of reconstruction was using everything they could use to squash the movements. As Henry Kissinger would say some years later, "We can't have them leading by good example"

This falls under what George Kennan(Secretary of State at the time) called the "Grand Area" plan of America. The Grand Area was a plan that stated that the entire world should be made to only help America interests. Mainly, the economic interests. Containment theory and the like came out of this.

[Zealot]

I love how you've already assumed that the reason the Communists didn't take power post-WWII is because Stalin "forced" the Communist parties to support Capitalism and bourgeois governments.

[Catma]

Has anybody read killing hope by William Blum? I haven't gotten through most of it myself so I'm not sure of the politics and such, but it does cover a decent amount of post-WWII US maneuvering.

Who can say what would have happened if there was a united effort against the capitalist forces? It seems that everybody was watching their own ass, and the capitalists (mostly the US) took 'em down one by one.

[gorillafuck]

I mean in countries like France and Italy, where capitalism was discredited and CP's had large bodies of men under arms.

Did Stalin force them to support bourgeois governments and play a lead role in the stabilization of EuroCapitalism?Stalin was clearly not opposed to the spread of stalinist socialism in Europe, considering that during his time the USSR oversaw it's spread into eastern europe and the blockade of berlin.

[Sasha]

the dutch establishment was certainly very scared that the communist would take over here after the war. Esp in the north the CP had huge support and plenty of arms given they made up the mayority of the armed resistance. So even before the war was finished they started undermining them even going so far as ordering the royalist resistance to betray communist resistance leaders to the nazi's (this is an episode commonly known as the velser affaire), after the war they agresively demobilised the resistance, Prince Bernhard tried to disband democracy and become authoritarian leader, they still refused to give those communist leaders who fought in spain to give back their citizenship and infiltrated the CP leadership to push for the most agressive pro-stalin line they could (as they rightly guessed that the dutch proletariat would be disgusted by that), still the danger of the CP taking over was only really gone after hungary '52.

sadly it seems i cant find a picture but straight after the liberation the amsterdam CP hoisted the hammer and sickle flag on the royal pallace on dam square :D

the same goes for italy and there it even went on a lot longer, already during the war the US and British military wanted not to be dependend on the partizan infrastructure for petrol and weapons suplies to the front etc so they reimported and reinstalled the maffia from the US (that in italy itself was quite efficiently wiped out by mussolini). Later this all escaleted of course in the whole Gladio/P2 affairs of the strategy of tension etc.