Tribute to Enver Hoxha – on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of his death

Enver Hoxha

Enver Hoxha

Tribute to Enver Hoxha – on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of his death

by Gjon Bruçi, Gazeta DITA, April 11, 2025

April 11, 1985 – Albania held its breath, lowered its flag and put on mourning clothes. The Leader had died – the National Pride, the Renaissance figure of modern times, the greatest man in the history of the Albanians, Enver Hoxha.

But who was Enver Hoxha? A communist? A partisan? A commander? A commissar? A leader of the people? A strategist and reformer? A legend? Or a truth?

‘History is made by the masses, individuals play a particular role’ – so teaches the history of human society. But Enver Hoxha’s role in the 50-year era of the new and modern Albania was immense. He embodied, in a single person, the highest and most refined virtues of the Albanian, while at the same time being the most brilliant fulfiller of his people’s aspirations.

In two thousand years of the New Era, the Arbër people produced dozens and hundreds of giants of both intellect and the sword. Among them shone the Hero of the Nation Gjergj Kastrioti-Skanderbeg. He was granted many titles by the chanceries of the time, such as: ‘Prince of Arbër,’ ‘Iskander,’ ‘Knight of Christ,’ and others. But his people called him with simple words – ‘The Bravest’ and ‘The Leader.’

Five hundred years later, Arbër – now Albania – would once again have its Heroes of the pen and the rifle, of thought and action, of movement and revolution, who stood up for the homeland in its most critical moments. Among them, like a mountain eagle, rose the Glorious Leader Enver Hoxha. Time gave this National Hero dozens of titles too, but the people who loved him so deeply simply called him ‘The Commander’ and ‘The Man of the Land.’

Writing about Enver Hoxha on a memorial anniversary is as easy as it is difficult. It is easy, because his monumental deeds are still alive – not only in the minds and hearts of us, his contemporaries, but also because, despite the slander of the bourgeoisie and its mercenaries, they rise like mountains and shine like the sun across the Albanian horizons and beyond. At the same time, writing about Enver Hoxha is extremely difficult, because our writings, no matter how beautifully crafted, cannot capture – in either quantity or quality – the work and legacy of this Colossus of Communism, this Great Man of Albanianhood. That is why I will attempt to focus only on two or three of the most significant moments of our unforgettable Commander and Commissar – moments which, when viewed today through the lens of time and the events we are experiencing, take on multiplied value, a value that exceeds the dimensions of an ordinary leader’s life and work.

Enver Hoxha was the most authentic embodiment of the well-known Albanian expression ‘The Man of the Land.’ To earn this title requires many qualities and high virtues that set a person apart from ordinary people. Among other things, to be or become such a man, one must possess wisdom, bravery and the courage of true men. These qualities – along with many others – Enver Hoxha possessed to the highest degree.

It was the harsh winter of 1943. In the mountains of Çermenika, the General Staff of the National Liberation Army was in a critical situation. The routes leading to the free zones were blocked by snow and by German and Ballist forces. British General Davies, who was stationed as an ally near the General Staff, was terrified by the dire conditions. In a debate with Enver Hoxha, he urged him to halt the war and surrender:

‘Mr. Hoxha, you’re mistaken… you’ve lost the war… you’re surrounded… you have only two options: either be killed or surrender…’

Enver Hoxha, who had been trying to calm the British ally, exploded when he heard those defeatist words:

‘Who lost the war? Who should surrender? Never! You, Mr. General, are a defeatist and a capitulator. The Albanian partisans do not know defeat, let alone surrender. They know only resistance and victory!’

And it was Enver Hoxha’s unmatched courage – his absolute conviction in victory – that led the General Staff of the National Liberation Army out of that fierce German-Ballist siege, during that unforgettable cold of late December 1943.

In 1946, at the Paris Peace Conference, the outcomes of the Second World War were being finalized. The great victors – the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and France – held the primary positions and were deciding the fate of nations. Little Albania, with fewer than one million inhabitants, arrived at this Conference with its head held high. Its contribution to the Anti-Fascist War, compared to its human and material capacity, was of the highest level. But neighbouring chauvinists refused to acknowledge this fact. The Greek representative at the Conference, Caldarisi, launched a storm of accusations against Albania, labelling it a collaborator of fascism in the attack against Greece. If these accusations were accepted as truth, then the territorial integrity of newly-liberated Albania would be called into question. As always, the great powers of the world had little concern for the fate of small countries and peoples. These could be traded among them, like gifts or relics exchanged at a simple celebration. Facing this potential threat to our country was Enver Hoxha. With unmatched courage, he declared at the Conference:

‘I solemnly declare that: Neither the Paris Conference, nor the Conference of the Four, nor any other Conference whatsoever, can take under consideration the borders of my country, within which there is not a single inch of foreign land… Let the whole world know that the Albanian people do not allow their borders and land to be discussed… The Albanian people have not sent their delegation to Paris to give an account, but to demand accountability from those who harmed them so greatly and whom they fought fiercely until the end!’

And after this historic declaration, Enver Hoxha walked out of the Conference proceedings, returning to the Homeland, to his people – from whom, like Antaeus, he drew endless strength and courage.

In November 1960, Enver Hoxha’s courage rose to legendary proportions. It was a moment of direct confrontation with a threat looming over the international communist movement and, at the same time, over socialist Albania. The clash was face-to-face with the leader of the vast state that made up one-sixth of the globe – the father of kukuruz (maize), Nikita Khrushchev. But this ‘Cyclops’ of the great Eurasian land, when confronted with Enver Hoxha in that bitter winter of the aged Kremlin, resembled the smallest copy of a Russian Matryoshka doll. The opposite was true for Enver Hoxha. His towering and expressive appearance matched perfectly the argument and truth he stood for, all accompanied by rare courage. This was because he came from Albania, where manhood is not measured by weight or position, but by resistance and bravery, by deeds and actions for the benefit of the nation. At the end of that fierce confrontation with Nikita Khrushchev, Enver Hoxha, with a loud and confident voice, would declare: ‘I defend the interests of my country!’

That phrase – delivered with Albanian fire and manliness, in front of Moscow’s treacherous leadership – needs no commentary. As history proved, the entire philosophy of Enver Hoxha’s life and work is encapsulated in that phrase: ‘I defend the interests of my country!’

For half a century, this ‘Man of the Land’ – like no one else in the old or modern history of the Albanians – defended and elevated Albania’s and his nation’s interests to the highest levels.

* * *

It cannot be said with certainty whether an era produces colossi, or whether colossi create an era. But in our case, we can declare without hesitation: Enver Hoxha created an era for Albania and the Albanian nation. An era that placed Albania on the map of the world, raising the Albanians and their country to the highest level of dignity as a nation!

The apologists of the bourgeoisie accuse us, the communists, of the ‘cult of personality’! But who created and continues to fuel the so-called ‘cult of personality’ for the leaders of the proletariat? It was – and still is – the dwarfs of history, starting from the bald Khrushchev to the confused, bearded, scarf-wrapped types of today, who, unable to climb the Great Mountain, spit at it from below – even though their spit only falls back on their own faces!

All the high epithets in the world would not be enough for Enver Hoxha, even if all the dictionaries of the world’s languages were combined. For nature has rarely crafted such a complete person – in stature and presence, in intellect and heart, in courage and bravery, in self-sacrifice and devotion, and above all in a monumental work for the benefit of his nation – as it did in Enver Hoxha.

The ‘cult of personality’? How laughable – and equally deceitful! For a priest said to have cured one or two blind people (surely with remedies unknown in ancient times), the Church and its propaganda perform canonization, and then raise a cult around him where thousands of believers pray. But for Enver Hoxha – who performed real, not imagined, miracles; who shifted history and created an era; who cured not one or two individuals of blindness, but three million Albanians; whose theoretical and practical work lifts not just two or three crippled men, but thousands and millions of proletarians across the world – we supposedly have no right to honour him with a cult?

Yes! Enver Hoxha fully deserves the cult. He is – and will remain – the cult of honourable Albanians. He is – and will remain – the cult of the members of the Communist Party and their supporters, because his majestic figure represents the true national ideals.

Our Albania today, as I wrote at the beginning of this piece, is without a Master of the House. A full 40 years without a master. And how can a house be without ‘its Master’? ‘See and write,’ says the people – and what is to be written is clear for all to see. In the absence of the ‘Master of the Hearth,’ the pack of wolves, along with the great she-wolf of capitalism, has overrun Albania and is tearing it apart without mercy – just as hyenas do in the dark!

On the eve of the March 22, 1992 elections – elections that marked the rise to power of the old bourgeoisie and its new offspring – the chairman of the Communist Party, the revolutionary poet Hysni Milloshi, made a call: ‘Albanian people, do not blindfold yourselves with a black cloth before the ballot box, because afterwards not even the cuckoo will be able to lament your fate!’ But the Albanian people, unfortunately, under the pressure of the horns and drums of ‘bourgeois democracy,’ did not heed the call of the chief communist of the time. With two fingers raised and their minds lowered, they cast their votes into the black bourgeois box – a box that for the past three and a half decades has darkened, and continues to darken, their lives in every aspect.

The Albanians must now remove this black cloth from their eyes. Three and a half decades are enough to understand that bourgeois democracy can bring nothing but the darkness into which the people have completely sunk. Until when will this continue? Has hope been lost for emerging into the light once again?

No! The Albanians will once again find the Master of the House – without whom the country, just like a family, cannot stand firm or move forward. It cannot be otherwise. History repeats itself. And in today’s world, this ‘repetition’ has a much shorter time span than in the past. Albania will soon give birth to the ‘Man’ who will lead it out of the tunnel of darkness – towards the true light!

(Translated by November Eighth Publishing House (Canada) from the Albanian original)

See also;

Enver Hoxha – Selected Works

Enver Hoxha – Speeches and articles

Enver Hoxha – Memoirs, Diary Selections and Compilations of Articles

Visiting Enver Hoxha’s grave in Tirana

People’s Socialist Republic of Albania

The Great Debate between Revolutionary China and the Revisionist Soviet Union

Mao Tse-tung and Enver Hoxha

Mao Tse-tung and Enver Hoxha

More on China …..

The Great Debate between Revolutionary China and the Revisionist Soviet Union

In just under three years after the death of Joseph Stalin (in March 1953) the Soviet Revisionists, under the leadership of Nikita Khrushchev, had enough confidence in their strength to be able to denounce Stalin (but basically all the revolutionary developments in Soviet society since the October Revolution of 1917) at a closed session of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union held in February 1956.

The calculated manner in which this denunciation was planned caused confusion in the International Communist Movement (obviously the aim) and allowed those cowards and social democrats who had been allowed to wheedle themselves into Communist Parties throughout the world to throw their hands up in horror and create even more confusion – with the result that the movement was weakened worldwide.

Khrushchev’s speech was just the start of the attack upon revolutionary Socialism, Marxism-Leninism and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The lack lustre defence of those principles by the majority of the Communist and Workers Parties throughout the world (or at least in the majority of their leadership and a not inconsiderable number of the members) only served to encourage the Soviet revisionists to go further in their destruction of socialism and the restoration of capitalism in the first workers and peasants socialist state. One of the victims of that development was Khrushchev himself who was thrown out when he had done what was needed at the time. He quickly reached his sell by date.

Only two parties in the position of holding state power were united on the struggle against the revisionists – the Communist Party of China and the Party of Labour of Albania. Below are pamphlets produced by the Chinese Party which record what was to become known as the ‘International Polemic’ – an ideological battle between revolutionaries and revisionists which pleased capitalism and imperialism but which, ultimately, made revolutionary forces throughout the world stronger in that the issues of what separated revolutionaries from the rest were clearly delineated.

In China this ideological struggle was further developed during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution of 1966-76 – initiated by Chairman Mao Tse-tung as the only opportunity for the workers and peasants to remain in control of the society they had been building since 1949. This debate was also carried on in the pages of the magazines produced at the time, principally the weekly political and informative magazine Peking Review but also in China Reconstructs and China Pictorial.

The standpoint of the Party of Labour of Albania can be read in the many documents they produced from the 1950s onwards (into the 1980s) as well as the pages of the monthly, theoretical magazine Albania Today and the writings of the Albanian leader, Enver Hoxha.

Prelude

The Historical Experience of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, the response of the CPC to Khrushchev’s ‘Secret Speech’ at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956. Published in Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily] on April 5, 1956.

The Historical Experience of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, annotated.

More on the Historical Experience of the Proletarian Dictatorship, a summary of a discussion at an enlarged meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China focusing on the question of Stalin, which appeared in Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily] on December 29, 1956. (London: CPGB, 1957), 32 pages.

Collections of Early Documents

In Refutation of Modern Revisionism, 7 major editorials and articles from May-June 1958. (Peking: FLP, 1958), 102 pages. Consists of the following documents:

  • Resolution on the Moscow Meetings of Representatives of Communist and Workers’ Parties, adopted May 23, 1958 by the 2nd Session of the 8th National Congress of the CCP.
  • Modern Revisionism Must Be Repudiated, Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily] editorial of May 5, 1958.
  • Modern Revisionism Must Be Fought To The End, Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily] editorial of June 4, 1958.
  • Yugoslav Revisionism — Product of Imperialist Policy, by Chen Po-ta, Hongqi [Red Flag], June 1, 1958 issue.
  • Yugoslav Revisionism Is Just What U.S. Imperialism Needs, by Kang Sheng, Renmin Ribao, June 14, 1958. In Refutation of Modern Revisionism’s Reactionary Theory of the State, by Wang Chia-hsiang, Hongqi, June 16, 1958 issue.
  • The More They Try to Hide, the More They are Exposed — On Tito’s Speech of June 15, by Renmin Ribao Commentator, June 26, 1958.

Whence the Differences? a large book containing most of the early English language articles and pamphlets in the condemnation of revisionism that were published in China. [This new title is on the photographic reprint of the volume done by New Era publishers in Bath, England around 1970. The original edition published in China is entitled Workers of All Countries, Unite, Oppose Our Common Enemy! (Peking: FLP, 1963)], 402 pages. Consists of the following documents:

Workers of All Countries, Unite, Oppose our Common Enemy!, Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily] editorial, Dec. 15, 1962.

The Differences Between Comrade Togliatti and Us, Renmin Ribao editorial, Dec. 31, 1962. Leninism and Modern Revisionism, Hongqi [Red Flag] editorial, No. 1, 1963.

Let Us Unite on the Basis of the Moscow Declaration and the Moscow Statement, Renmin Ribao editorial, Jan. 27, 1963.

Whence the Differences? — A Reply to Thorez and Other Comrades, Renmin Ribao editorial, Feb. 27, 1963.

More on the Differences Between Comrade Togliatti and Us, by the editorial department of Hongqi, Nos. 3-4, 1963.

  • I. Introduction
  • II. The nature of the present great debate among communists
  • III. Contradictions in the contemporary world
  • IV. War and peace
  • V. The state and revolution
  • VI. Despise the enemy strategically, take him seriously tactically
  • VII. A struggle on two fronts
  • VIII. Workers of all countries, unite!

A Comment on the Statement of the Communist Party of the U.S.A., Renmin Ribao editorial, March 8, 1963.

A Mirror for Revisionists, Renmin Ribao editorial, March 9, 1963.

Documents of the Communist Party of China, The Great Debate, Volume 1, 1956-1963, Foreign Languages Press, Paris, 2021, 560 pages.

The Documents of the Great Debate, Volume 1, February 1956 – June 1963, Antararashtriya Prakashan, Saharanpur, India, 2005, 430 pages.

The Documents of the Great Debate, Volume 2, February 1956 – June 1963, Antararashtriya Prakashan, Saharanpur, India, 2005, 368 pages.

The Documents of the Great Debate, Volume 3, February 1956 – June 1963, Antararashtriya Prakashan, Saharanpur, India, 2005, 298 pages.

Individual Early Pamphlets

Long Live Leninism, (Peking: FLP, 1960) Consists of three parts:

  • Long Live Leninism!, by the Editorial Department of Hongqi.
  • Forward Along the Path of the Great Lenin!, by the Editorial Department of Renmin Ribao.
  • Unite Under Lenin’s Revolutionary Banner, by Lu Ting-yi. 58 pages

The Struggle Between Two Lines at the Moscow World Congress of Women, six statements, articles and reports. (Peking: FLP, 1963), 70 pages. [Our apologies for the darkened paper in the copy scanned, though it is still quite legible.]

The Truth About How the Leaders of the CPSU have Allied Themselves with India against China, by the Editorial Department of Renimin Ribao [People’s Daily], Nov. 2, 1963, and including an article reprinted from Pravda as an appendix. (Peking: FLP, 1963), 60 pages.

Formal Inter-Party Letters

A Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement: The Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in Reply to the Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union of March 30, 1963, June 14, 1963, (Peking: FLP, 1963), 124 pages. Includes as appendices 3 letters from the the CC of the CPSU (Feb. 21, 1963; March 9, 1963; and March 30, 1963). This is one of the most important and most famous documents in the entire history of the world Communist movement.

Seven Letters Exchanged Between the Central Committees of the Communist Party of China and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, (Peking: FLP, 1964), 84 pages. Includes 4 letters from the CC of the CCP in 1964 (Feb. 20; Feb. 27; Feb. 29; and May 7) and 3 letters from the CC of the CPSU (Nov. 29, 1963; Feb. 22, 1964; and March 7, 1964).

Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in Reply to the Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Dated June 15, 1964, July 28, 1964, (Peking: FLP, 1964), 60 pages. (Includes the CPSU letter being responded to.)

Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in Reply to the Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Dated July 30, 1964, August 30, 1964, (Peking: FLP, 1964), 24 pages. (Includes the CPSU letter being responded to.)

Letter of Reply Dated March 22, 1966 of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, (Peking: FLP, 1966), 16 pages. (Includes the CPSU letter of Feb. 24, 1966 being responded to.)

The Polemic on the General Line of the International Communist Movement

The Polemic on the General Line of the International Communist Movement published in Peking by the Foreign Languages Press in 1965, 604 pages.

Individual articles in this collection, most of which are Comments on the Open Letter of the Central Committee of the CPSU, and are jointly written by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao and Hongqi, are also available here in individual pamphlet form:

Documents of the Communist Party of China, The Great Debate, Volumes I and II. 1956-1964, Foreign Languages Press, Paris, 2022, 1,154 pages.

Other Pamphlets from the Great Debate

A Comment on the March Moscow Meeting, by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao and Hongqi, March 23, 1965, 42 pages.

A Great Victory for Leninism – In Commemoration of the 95th Anniversary of the Birth of Lenin, Hongqi [Red Flag] editorial, #4, 1965. (Peking: FLP, 1965), 19 pages.

Carry the Struggle Against Khrushchov Revisionism Through to the End – On the Occasion of the Second Anniversary of the Publication of ‘A Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement’, by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao (People’s Daily) and Hongqi [Red Flag], June 14, 1965, 24 pages. [Our apologies; we were unable to remove part of the underlining in this pamphlet.]

Refutation of the New Leaders of the CPSU on ‘United Action’, by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao and Hongqi, Nov. 11, 1965, 44 pages.

The Leaders of the CPSU are Betrayers of the Declaration and Statement, by the editorial department of Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily], Dec. 20, 1965, 16 pages.

Confessions Concerning the Line of Soviet-U.S. Collaboration Pursued by the New Leaders of the CPSU, by Commentator in Hongqi [Red Flag], Feb. 11, 1966, (Peking: FLP, 1966), 24 pages.

Some Questions Concerning Modern Revisionist Literature in the Soviet Union, by Hsiang Hung and Wei Ning. Also includes Selected Statements by Sholokhov, the Renegade Author, compiled by Chang Chun, and The True Features of the Renegade Sholokhov, by Tsai Hui. (Peking: FLP, 1966), 72 pages.

Smash the Big U.S.-Soviet Conspiracy! by Observer of Renmin Ribao, Feb. 20, 1967, about collusion and joint attempts by the U.S. and the Soviet Union to end the revolutionary war in south Vietnam. (Peking: FLP, 1967), 22 pages.

Advance Along the Road Opened Up by the October Socialist Revolution: In Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao, Hongqi and Jiefangjun Bao [Liberation Army Daily], Nov. 6, 1967, 40 pages. Includes also Comrade Lin Piao’s Speech at the Peking Rally Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the October Revolution, Nov. 6, 1967.

How the Soviet Revisionists Carry Out All-Round Restoration of Capitalism in the U.S.S.R., reference material from articles in Renmin Ribao and from Hsinhua News Agency, (Peking: FLP, 1968), 88 pages.

Total Bankruptcy of Soviet Modern Revisionism, six articles including two speeches by Chou En-lai, August-September 1968. (Peking: FLP, 1968), 92 pages.

Ugly Performance of Self-Exposure, by Chung Jen, originally published in Chinese in Renmin Ribao, August 14, 1969. (Peking: FLP, 1969), 24 pages.

An Outspoken Revelation, Hsinhua News Agency, April 16, 1970 dispatch. (Peking: FLP, 1970),  22 pages.

Leninism or Social-Imperialism? – In Commemoration of the Centenary of the Birth of the Great Lenin, by the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao, Hongqi and Jiefangjun Bao, April 22, 1970, 78 pages.

Cheap Propaganda, 5 commentaries by Hsinhua Correspondent about hypocritical calls by the Soviet Union for disarmament, August-December 1973, 40 pages. (Peking: FLP, 1974)

Ghost of Confucius, Fond Dream of the New Tsars, 3 commentaries by mass criticism groups and by a Hsinhua correspondent. (Peking: FLP, 1974), 49 pages.

Ugly Features of Soviet Social-Imperialism, a collection of articles from 1973-1975 exposing the Soviet Union as an imperialist power and international exploiter. (Peking: FLP, 1976), 96 pages. Includes:

  • The Superpower Label for Soviet Revisionism Cannot be Removed, by Fan Hsiao
  • The Brezhnev Clique is Following in Hitler’s Footsteps, commentary by Hsinhua Correspondent
  • A Black Line Running Through Two Dynasties — on the new tsars justifying old tsars’ aggression and expansion, commentary by Hsinhua Correspondent
  • Soviet Union — Superpower and Super-Exploiter, commentary by Hsinhua Correspondent
  • C.M.E.A. — Soviet Revisionism’s Instrument for Neo-Colonialism, commentary by Hsinhua Correspondent
  • Sinister Programme of Neo-Colonialism — Soviet revisionists’ vicious motives in peddling theory of ‘international division of labour’ in Third World, by Chai Chang
  • Honey on Lips, Murder in Heart — Social-imperialist nature of Soviet revisionists’ ‘military aid’ to Egypt exposed, by Fan Hsiu-chu and Chung Tung
  • Where is the ‘Dawn of Peace and Co-operation’?, by Mei Ou
  • Warsaw Treaty Organization — Soviet Social-Imperialism’s Tool for Aggression, by Ming Sung
  • Essence of Soviet Revisionists’ ‘All-Europe Economic Co-operation’, by Cheng Wei-min
  • Outright Deceit, Ulterior Motives — On Soviet revisionists peddling ‘Asian collective security system’ in Southeast Asia, commentary by Hsinhua Correspondent
  • Repulse Wolf at Front Gate, Guard Against Tiger at Back Door, by Jen Ku-ping

Social Imperialism: The Soviet Union Today, a collection of articles from Peking Review from 1975-1976, 148 pages. (Berkeley: Yenan Books, 1977).

The Soviet Union Under the New Tsars, by Wei Chi, 100 pages.

Documents from Parties and Individuals in Other Countries Critising Soviet Revisionism (Published in China)

Raise Higher the Revolutionary Banner of Marxism-Leninism, 3 articles by the Korean People’s Worker’s Party from 1962 and 1963 opposing revisionism, 44 pages. [Note: Our apologies for the condition of the pamphlet we scanned, which was literally falling apart. We scanned it in color to increase the contrast of the black print with the yellowed pages.] (Peking: FLP, 1963)

Certain International Questions Affecting Malaya, from the Malayan Monitor, Jan. 31, 1963. (Peking: FLP, 1963), 24 pages.

Reply to Khrushchov – Resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Brazil, including the abridged text of the resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Brazil of July 27, 1963, and also the article The Great Theory of Marxism-Leninism is Bound to Triumph on Our Continent, by José Duarte, originally from the Brazilian journal A Classe Operária, Aug. 16-31, 1963. (Peking: FLP, 1964), 32 pages.

Statement of Ten Central Committee Members of the Ceylon Communist Party, October 27, 1963. Also includes To All Marxist-Leninists Inside the Ceylon Communist Party (Nov. 17, 1963). (Peking: FLP, 1964), 44 pages.

‘Theory’ and Practice of the Modern Revisionists, by Jacques Grippa, Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belgium, a speech delivered at the Higher Party School fo the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on June 10, 1964. (Peking: FLP, 1965), 60 pages. [Note: Although Grippa initially supported China during the Sino-Soviet Split, he then began to oppose China during the GPCR, and in 1968 actually gave a speech in support of Liu Shaoqi!]

Malayan People’s Experience Refutes Revisionist Fallacies – Sixteenth Anniversary of the Malayan People’s Armed Struggle, June 30, 1964, 24 pages. (Peking: FLP, 1965)

On the Intrinsic Nature of N.S. Khrushchov’s Peaceful Co-Existence Line, an article by Observer in Akahata, organ of the Communist Party of Japan, Nov. 22, 1964. (Peking: FLP, 1965), 62 pages.

On Interventions in and Subversive Activities Against the Democratic Movements of Our Country and Our Party by the CPSU Leadership and the Institutions and Organizations Under its Guidance, an article in Akahata, organ of the Communist Party of Japan, June 22, 1965. (Peking: FLP, 1966), 54 pages.

Border Disputes and Military Confrontations and Incidents Between China and the U.S.S.R.

Down With the New Tsars! a collection of statements and articles condemning the incursion of military forces of the revisionist Soviet Union onto China’s Chenpao Island in the Wusuli River in Heilungkiang Province. (Peking: FLP, 1969), 78 pages.

Down With the New Tsars! – Soviet Revisionists’ Anti-China Atrocities on the Heilung and Wusuli Rivers, photo-filled pamphlet, (Peking: FLP, 1969), 76 pages.

Statement of the Government of the People’s Republic of China (May 24, 1969), regarding the border dispute with the Soviet Union. Also includes the Note of the Hsinhua News Agency on the Publication of the Full Text of the Soviet Government’s Statement of March 29 (May 24, 1969). (Peking: FLP, 1969), 48 pages.

Statement of the Government of the People’s Republic of China (October 7, 1969), regarding the border dispute with the Soviet Union. Also includes the Document of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the PRC—Refutation of the Soviet Government’s Statement of June 13, 1969 (Oct. 8, 1969), (Peking: FLP, 1974), 2nd printing, 40 pages.

More on China …..