美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨網(wǎng)站：　　

http://www.revcom.us/socialistconstitution/index.html

http://www.revcom.us/socialistconstitution/index.html　　
　

美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨簡(jiǎn)介　　

目前美國(guó)有兩個(gè)共產(chǎn)黨：一個(gè)是美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨，一個(gè)是美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨。　　

“美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨”、“美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨”這兩個(gè)黨成立的背景以及路線、方針和政策都有明顯區(qū)別。　　

“美革共”被稱作美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)目前最大的“毛主義”組織。它是受我國(guó)“文革”影響成立的，黨刊名為《革命》（周報(bào)）。該組織的前身是1968年由美國(guó)一些青年學(xué)生在加利福尼亞州建立的“灣區(qū)革命聯(lián)盟”(BARU)。1971年，“灣區(qū)革命聯(lián)盟”召開(kāi)全國(guó)代表大會(huì)，改稱“革命聯(lián)盟”(RU)，1975年9月，“革命聯(lián)盟”又改稱“革命共產(chǎn)黨”(RCP)。該黨成立之初，有黨員近1000人，1977年最鼎盛時(shí)達(dá)到2000人左右。　　

 至今，該黨的指導(dǎo)思想一直沒(méi)有發(fā)生根本變化，仍然主張?jiān)诿绹?guó)發(fā)動(dòng)由工人階級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的暴力革命，通過(guò)武裝奪權(quán)來(lái)使美國(guó)走上社會(huì)主義道路。1978年前后，主要因?yàn)閷?duì)中國(guó)問(wèn)題看法上的分歧，“美革共”發(fā)生分裂，成員逐漸減少。到上世紀(jì)80年代末，黨員人數(shù)大約只有成立時(shí)的一半。根據(jù)有關(guān)資料，近年來(lái)，“美革共”的黨員有所增加，在20來(lái)個(gè)城市設(shè)有支部。該黨自建立后，總部一直設(shè)在芝加哥。現(xiàn)任領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人羅伯特·阿瓦基安，1943年出生，是該黨的創(chuàng)建人之一。 　　

容易與之相混淆的美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨則是在俄國(guó)十月革命和共產(chǎn)國(guó)際的影響下，于1919年9月1日成立的，至今已有90年歷史。其總部現(xiàn)設(shè)于紐約曼哈頓，現(xiàn)任領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人是薩繆爾·韋伯。　　

美共成立初期曾被美國(guó)政府宣布為非法，1923年合法化。上世紀(jì)三四十年代，美共在鋼鐵、紡織、煤礦等工業(yè)部門(mén)和農(nóng)業(yè)工人中領(lǐng)導(dǎo)大規(guī)模的群眾斗爭(zhēng)，積極支持黑人反對(duì)種族歧視的斗爭(zhēng)，大力動(dòng)員群眾支持和參加反法西斯戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，其力量一度得到比較大的發(fā)展。　　

1943年，蘇、美、英三國(guó)首腦會(huì)晤德黑蘭會(huì)議，美共總書(shū)記白勞德認(rèn)為世界已進(jìn)入資本主義與社會(huì)主義“長(zhǎng)期信任與合作”的時(shí)期，主張美共放棄自己的“成見(jiàn)”和“特殊利益”，實(shí)現(xiàn)包括大資產(chǎn)階級(jí)在內(nèi)的團(tuán)結(jié)，反對(duì)進(jìn)行革命。1944年5月，美共召開(kāi)十二大，根據(jù)白勞德的提議，通過(guò)了解散美共的決定。1945年4月，法國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人雅克·杜克洛撰文批判白勞德的錯(cuò)誤主張，在國(guó)際主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中產(chǎn)生很大影響。同年7月，美共召開(kāi)緊急代表大會(huì)，重組美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨，由威廉·福斯特任全國(guó)委員會(huì)主席。上世紀(jì)末，麥卡錫主義一度盛行，美共又被迫轉(zhuǎn)入“地下”。60年代后，美國(guó)政府放松了對(duì)美共的限制，美共活動(dòng)逐漸增多。至1984年，時(shí)任美共總書(shū)記葛斯·霍爾曾四度以“人民高于利潤(rùn)”的口號(hào)競(jìng)選美國(guó)總統(tǒng)。　　

中國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨成立初期，美共就曾積極聲援。抗日戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)時(shí)期，美共在國(guó)內(nèi)發(fā)動(dòng)了“不許干涉中國(guó)”的群眾運(yùn)動(dòng)，并派遣醫(yī)療隊(duì)援助中國(guó)革命根據(jù)地。國(guó)際共運(yùn)大論中，美共與中共的關(guān)系一度中斷；1988年6月，美共總書(shū)記霍爾率代表團(tuán)訪華，兩黨恢復(fù)交往。　　

“美革共”成立初期曾與中共關(guān)系非常密切，但兩黨在1978年斷絕往來(lái)。1979年初鄧小平訪美時(shí)，“美革共”還在黨主席阿瓦基安的帶領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，在華盛頓等地舉行反對(duì)鄧小平訪美的示威游行，甚至還組織過(guò)試圖暗殺鄧小平的恐怖活動(dòng)。阿瓦基安因此遭美國(guó)政府逮捕，后被驅(qū)逐出美國(guó)。前些年國(guó)內(nèi)出版的小說(shuō)《白宮突圍》曾提到此事，但作者也混淆了“美共”與“美革共”，錯(cuò)把美共主席葛斯．霍爾當(dāng)成暗殺鄧小平的策劃人。　　

當(dāng)前，“美革共”和美共的國(guó)內(nèi)政策有著明顯區(qū)別。比如，比如，在去年的美國(guó)總統(tǒng)選舉中，美共沒(méi)有提出自己的總統(tǒng)候選人，而是號(hào)召黨員及其支持者投奧巴馬一票；而“美革共”抵制總統(tǒng)選舉，在奧巴馬當(dāng)選后，則極力反對(duì)政府和各種改革措施，仍然繼續(xù)鼓吹暴力革命    （王保賢）　　

本月10日，激進(jìn)的美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨想出解決美國(guó)困境的新方法：那就是推翻政府，推行新憲法。規(guī)模不大的革命共產(chǎn)黨主動(dòng)聯(lián)系了媒體，公布了《北美新社會(huì)主義共和國(guó)憲章（草案）》。

同一天，革命共產(chǎn)黨在聲明中承諾，“新憲法”將扮演帶頭角色，“建立并帶領(lǐng)我們走向完全不同，更加美好的共產(chǎn)主義社會(huì)。”

美國(guó)極端保守的政治人物與媒體人士，常把民主黨總統(tǒng)奧巴馬的自由主義傾向，形容成社會(huì)主義或共產(chǎn)主義。但是，革命共產(chǎn)黨并不把奧巴馬視為革命同志。

“新憲法”稱：北美新社會(huì)主義共和國(guó)在是統(tǒng)一戰(zhàn)線在無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的戰(zhàn)略方向的延續(xù)，在新的社會(huì)，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)的利益相一致，作為一個(gè)階級(jí)，最根本和最大的意義，取消一切剝削，并通過(guò)遍布世界的革命斗爭(zhēng)實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)，共產(chǎn)主義原則的完美體現(xiàn)。社會(huì)主義新共和國(guó)在北美，像所有的國(guó)家，一個(gè)獨(dú)裁，專政，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)的形式，這意味著，在其本質(zhì)特征及其基本原理，結(jié)構(gòu)，體制和政治進(jìn)程中，它必須體現(xiàn)和服務(wù)其所有目標(biāo)的無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)，它的開(kāi)發(fā)是對(duì)資本主義的財(cái)富和資本主義社會(huì)的運(yùn)作積累的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)，其解放的條件，只能通過(guò)共產(chǎn)主義革命帶來(lái)的根本利益關(guān)系消滅剝削和壓迫，實(shí)現(xiàn)全人類的解放。

美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨被稱作美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)目前最大的“毛主義”組織。它是受中國(guó)“文革”影響成立的。該組織的前身是1968年由美國(guó)一些青年學(xué)生在加利福尼亞州建立的“灣區(qū)革命聯(lián)盟“。1971年，”灣區(qū)革命聯(lián)盟“召開(kāi)全國(guó)代表大會(huì)，改稱”革命聯(lián)盟“，1975年9月，”革命聯(lián)盟“又改稱”革命共產(chǎn)黨“。該黨成立之初，有黨員近1000人， 1977年最鼎盛時(shí)達(dá)到2000人左右。

至今，該黨的指導(dǎo)思想一直沒(méi)有發(fā)生根本變化，仍然主張?jiān)诿绹?guó)發(fā)動(dòng)由工人階級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的暴力革命，通過(guò)武裝奪權(quán)來(lái)使美國(guó)走上社會(huì)主義道路。1978年前后，主要因?yàn)閷?duì)中國(guó)問(wèn)題看法上的分歧，“美革共”發(fā)生分裂，成員逐漸減少。到上世紀(jì)80年代末，黨員人數(shù)大約只有成立時(shí)的一半。根據(jù)有關(guān)資料，近年來(lái)，“美革共”的黨員有所增加，在20來(lái)個(gè)城市設(shè)有支部。該黨自建立后，總部一直設(shè)在芝加哥。現(xiàn)任領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人羅伯特.阿瓦基安，1943年出生，是該黨的創(chuàng)建人之一。

據(jù)本博秦全耀回憶，早在上世紀(jì)文革時(shí)，中國(guó)的媒體就常常報(bào)道美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨。但老秦要提示一句美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨不是美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨。美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨當(dāng)時(shí)被罵成是修正主義。蘇東劇變使美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨跌入了低谷，但美共中央堅(jiān)持不改黨名，不變黨性，從組織和思想上保全了黨。美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨一直認(rèn)為社會(huì)主義建設(shè)要基于美國(guó)民主傳統(tǒng)之上，把民主作為社會(huì)主義的核心和本質(zhì)特征。在黨章修改前后美共圍繞“社會(huì)主義權(quán)利法案”的問(wèn)題展開(kāi)了非常活躍的討論。黨的主席韋伯提醒全黨不要把“社會(huì)主義權(quán)利法案”變成陳詞濫調(diào)，也不要把它變成新的頌歌。

美共究竟有多少黨員，美共沒(méi)有正式宣布，估計(jì)的數(shù)字很不相同，有的說(shuō)有1.5萬(wàn)人，有的說(shuō) 7000人左右，有的說(shuō)4000人左右，而有的則說(shuō)1500人，但無(wú)論哪個(gè)數(shù)字較準(zhǔn)確，對(duì)于美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨來(lái)說(shuō)，要想在美國(guó)社會(huì)中發(fā)揮重要作用并通過(guò)投票箱實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)主義，目前黨的力量還是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的。

美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨在上屆的美國(guó)總統(tǒng)選舉中，沒(méi)有提出自己的總統(tǒng)候選人，而是號(hào)召黨員及其支持者投奧巴馬一票，而美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨抵制總統(tǒng)選舉，在奧巴馬當(dāng)選后，則極力反對(duì)政府和各種改革措施，繼續(xù)鼓吹暴力革命。　　

美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨宣言　　

  網(wǎng)友：線專川上 翻譯　　

 昨晚無(wú)聊，突然想看早就下載了的RCP Manifesto，看的時(shí)候便嘗試著邊翻譯了一些，今晚亦如此。俺非翻譯或英語(yǔ)科班出生，翻譯此文純屬興趣，也想借此提高下自己的英文能力，貼出來(lái)就當(dāng)是鞭策自己。。。囧，話說(shuō)這也是俺天涯第一帖。------------------------------------------------
　　Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (RCP)美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨，是個(gè)比較左傾的馬克思主義政黨，網(wǎng)上能搜索到一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)相關(guān)信息。要注意的是RCP與美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨（CPUSA）是兩個(gè)不同的政黨。
　　-----------------------如下開(kāi)始------------------------
　　
　　共產(chǎn)主義：一個(gè)新時(shí)代的開(kāi)端
　　——美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨宣言
　　
　　2008年9月
　　
　　
　　 無(wú)論它向我們?cè)鯓有麚P(yáng)，這個(gè)我們身處的資本主義，這種絕大數(shù)人類的生活方式——生命在其中要么慢慢流逝，要么瞬間被吹散，并不代表最好的世界——也不代表唯一可能的世界。這些生命列車(chē)在其中行駛了數(shù)百年、數(shù)千年的生活方式——壓迫、痛苦、墮落、暴力、破壞、無(wú)知與迷信的神秘面紗，迫使絕大多數(shù)人類疲于奔命，身心遭受重創(chuàng)——絕不是這苦難人類的自身過(guò)錯(cuò)，不是某些不存在的一神或眾神們的“意志”，也不是某些不變的、不可改變的“人性”的結(jié)果。所有這些都是人類社會(huì)在剝削者和壓迫者的統(tǒng)治下，這種方式發(fā)展的表現(xiàn)和結(jié)果…但是，恰恰是這種發(fā)展將人類帶到了這樣一個(gè)臨界點(diǎn)——在這兒，過(guò)往數(shù)千年來(lái)的陳規(guī)亂俗都已不再有效；在這兒，一種完全不同的生活方式將成為可能：在世界各地，人類無(wú)論是個(gè)體還是群體，在彼此的交流之中，能夠拋開(kāi)傳統(tǒng)的沉重鎖鏈，窮盡其能，以一種前所未有的、甚至是無(wú)法完全想象的方式繁榮成長(zhǎng)。
　　
　　【備注：此處the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA譯為美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨，它與美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨有區(qū)別，美國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨為：CPUSA，全稱：the Communist Party USA。中間的god or gods理解為一神信仰和多神信仰的區(qū)別，不然沒(méi)必要這樣表達(dá)，g大些God才是上帝的意思。】
　　---------------------此段原文----------------------------
　　COMMUNISM:
　　THE BEGINNING OF A NEW STAGE
　　A Manifesto from
　　the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA
　　September 2008
　　
　　Despite what is constantly preached at us, this capitalist system we live under, this way of life that constantly drains away—or in an instant blows away—life for the great majority of humanity, does not represent the best possible world—nor the only possible world. The ways in which the daily train of life has, for centuries and millennia, caused the great majority of humanity to be weighed down, broken in body and spirit, by oppression, agony, degradation, violence and destruction, and the dark veil of ignorance and superstition, is not the fault of this suffering humanity—nor is this the “will” of some non-existent god or gods, or the result of some unchanging and unchangeable “human nature.” All this is the expression, and the result, of the way human society has developed up to this point under the domination of exploiters and oppressors...but that very development has brought humanity to the point where what has been, for thousands of years, no longer has to be—where a whole different way of life is possible in which human beings, individually and above all in their mutual interaction with each other, in all parts of the world, can throw off the heavy chains of tradition and rise to their full height and thrive in ways never before experienced, or even fully imagined. 　　

　　I. 漫長(zhǎng)的黑暗—和歷史性的突破
　　
　　 剝削性的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)關(guān)系，包括男人對(duì)女人成體系的統(tǒng)治，和將人類社會(huì)分割為彼此利益沖突的不同階級(jí)的分化行為，并不一直存在于人類之間。一直存在這樣種狀況：少數(shù)群體不僅壟斷了財(cái)富，而且也壟斷了生活資料，由此迫使更多的人以這種或那種方式成為自我需求的奴隸。同時(shí)，這些少數(shù)群體也壟斷了政治權(quán)利和施加剝削的工具，主宰了社會(huì)的智力和文化生活，迫使廣大的多數(shù)群體處于無(wú)知和順從的地位。這種狀況，并不一直是人類社會(huì)的一部分。只要人類繼續(xù)存在，這種人類間交互的方式也不可能注定保持下去。這些壓迫性的分化行為在數(shù)千年前產(chǎn)生，取代了公共社會(huì)的早期模式，早期的公共社會(huì)存在了數(shù)千年，是由相互有血緣關(guān)系的少數(shù)群體共同組成，他們共同擁有最重要的財(cái)產(chǎn)，相互協(xié)作，以滿足他們的生存需求并撫養(yǎng)后代。
　　
　　 早期公共社會(huì)的消亡，不是因?yàn)槟承┯小白匀粌A向”的人會(huì)去謀求高于他人的優(yōu)越地位，犧牲他人為己謀利；也不是因?yàn)橐恍┧^的男人必定征服女人或一個(gè)種族必定征服和掠奪其它種族的“基因預(yù)設(shè)”。毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，在早期的公共社會(huì)中，有時(shí)不同社會(huì)間會(huì)發(fā)生遭遇并不能調(diào)和矛盾，從而爆發(fā)沖突，但是這些社會(huì)并沒(méi)有展現(xiàn)出制度化的社會(huì)壓迫分化現(xiàn)象，而后者在今天，我們已經(jīng)不能再熟悉了。對(duì)于那些早期公共社會(huì)中的人來(lái)說(shuō)，妄圖成為他人主人，通過(guò)迫使他人工作謀求財(cái)富和權(quán)力的行為，是奇怪的和令人不能容忍的。確切的說(shuō)，社會(huì)分化和人們之間壓迫關(guān)系的出現(xiàn)，是由于人類與“外部”自然環(huán)境的交互方式發(fā)生了變化，以及尤其是維系人類生存的物質(zhì)生產(chǎn)、再生產(chǎn)和撫養(yǎng)后代等方式的變化。
　　
　　【備注：means to live仿造means of production譯為生產(chǎn)資料的模式，譯為“生活資料”；communal society譯為公共社會(huì)，不知是否妥當(dāng)，且將就如此。】
　　
　　------------------------如下原文---------------------
　　I.
　　The Long Darkness— and the Historic Breakthrough
　　
　　Exploitative economic and social relations, including the systematic domination of women by men and the division of human society into different classes with conflicting interests, have not always existed among human beings. A situation in which a small group monopolizes not only wealth but the very means to live, and thereby forces far greater numbers to slave under their command, in one form or another, while that small group also monopolizes political power and the means of enforcing this exploitation and dominates the intellectual and cultural life of society, condemning the vast majority to ignorance and subservience—this has not always been part of human society. Nor is this destined to remain the way human beings relate to each other, so long as human beings continue to exist. These oppressive divisions arose thousands of years ago, replacing early forms of communal society, which themselves had existed for thousands of years, and which were made up of relatively small groups of people holding in common their most important possessions and working cooperatively to meet their needs and to raise new generations.
　　
　　The break-up of these early communal societies was not due to some “natural inclination” of people to seek a superior position above others and to “get ahead” at the expense of others, nor to some supposed “genetic predisposition” of men to subjugate women or of one “race” of people to conquer and plunder other “races.” No doubt there were conflicts at times when people in early communal societies encountered each other and were not able to readily reconcile the differences between them, but these societies were not characterized by institutionalized oppressive divisions with which we are all too familiar today.
　　 To people in those communal societies the idea of some people within these societies establishing themselves as the masters over others, and seeking to acquire wealth and power by forcing others to work for them, would have seemed strange and outrageous. Rather, the emergence of class divisions and oppressive social relations among people was owing to changes in the ways human beings interacted with the “external” natural environment, and in particular changes in the ways these human beings carried out the production of the material requirements of life and the reproduction and rearing of new generations.
　　 　　　
 

　　3.
　　
　　 尤其是，一旦負(fù)責(zé)生產(chǎn)和再生產(chǎn)的組織開(kāi)始以這樣一種方式進(jìn)行運(yùn)作：個(gè)人，而非社會(huì)整體，開(kāi)始控制社會(huì)生產(chǎn)的盈余（盈余是指超出最低生存需要的那部分）；一旦人們或長(zhǎng)或短的長(zhǎng)期定居于某個(gè)地方，并在此土地上開(kāi)始農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)；漫長(zhǎng)的黑暗便降臨了。從此，人類便被分化為主人與奴隸，有權(quán)者與無(wú)權(quán)者，治人者和被治者，社會(huì)命運(yùn)的決策者和個(gè)人命運(yùn)的被決策者，即使這些決策者并不能發(fā)揮有效作用。
　　
　　 在大多數(shù)人類都處于黑暗之中的這數(shù)千年里，人們一直夢(mèng)想著一種不同的生活---在那兒，奴役、強(qiáng)奸、掠奪的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)、異化的一生、痛苦和絕望將不再構(gòu)成“人的條件”。這種對(duì)不同生活的渴望在各種形式的宗教幻想中得到體現(xiàn)---超脫凡世，皈依一神或諸神，神控制著人類的命運(yùn)，即使不是在此生，也會(huì)在來(lái)世獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)那些今生忍受無(wú)窮痛苦的人們。但在俗世，也反復(fù)有想真正改變世界的企圖出現(xiàn)，一直以來(lái)，在社會(huì)中、不同社會(huì)之間，反抗和起義、大規(guī)模的叛亂、武裝沖突、甚至革命此起彼伏，并被演化成為實(shí)現(xiàn)這種企圖的主要方式。帝國(guó)消亡了，君主制被廢除了，奴隸主和封建領(lǐng)主被推翻了。然而，數(shù)百數(shù)千年來(lái)，雖然許多人，情愿也好不情愿也罷，為這些斗爭(zhēng)犧牲了自己的生命，但是結(jié)果卻始終如一：一個(gè)剝削者、壓迫者集團(tuán)倒下了，另一個(gè)剝削者、壓迫者集團(tuán)又站立了起來(lái)---以這種或那種方式，一個(gè)少數(shù)人群體繼續(xù)壟斷了財(cái)富、政治權(quán)利、社會(huì)的智力和文化生活，繼續(xù)統(tǒng)治和壓迫絕大多數(shù)人，繼續(xù)投入與敵對(duì)國(guó)家和帝國(guó)的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)之中。
　　
　　【注：a lifetime of alienation中的alienation譯為“異化”，因?yàn)橛浀民R克思爺爺好像經(jīng)常提這個(gè)概念。】
　　
　　-------------------------原文----------------------
　　In particular, once the organization of this production and reproduction began to be carried out in such a way that individuals, instead of society as a whole, began to control the surplus produced by society, above and beyond what was necessary for mere survival, and especially once people settled more or less permanently on specific segments of land and began to carry out agricultural production on the land they settled, then the long night was ushered in, in which human beings have been divided into masters and slaves, the powerful and the powerless, those who rule and those who are ruled over, those whose role is decisive in determining the direction of society, and those whose destiny is shaped in this way, even while they have no effective role in determining that destiny.
　　
　　Throughout these thousands of years of darkness for the great majority of humanity, people have dreamed of a different life—where slavery, rape, wars of plunder, and a lifetime of alienation, agony, and despair would no longer constitute “the human condition.” This yearning for a different world has found expression in different forms of religious fantasy—looking beyond this world to a god or gods who supposedly control human destiny and who supposedly will, in some future existence, if not in this life, finally reward those who have endured endless suffering during their time on earth.
　　But there have also been repeated attempts to actually change things in this world. There have been revolts and uprisings, massive rebellions, armed conflicts, and even revolutions in which societies, and the relations between different societies, were transformed in major ways. Empires have fallen, monarchies have been abolished, slave owners and feudal lords have been overthrown. But for hundreds and thousands of years, while many people’s lives were sacrificed, willingly or unwillingly, in these struggles, the result was always that the rule of one group of exploiters and oppressors was replaced by that of another—in one form or another, a small part of society continued to monopolize wealth, political power, and intellectual and cultural life, dominating and oppressing the great majority and engaging repeatedly in wars with rival states and empires.
　　　　 　　
 

　　4.
　　
　　 所有這一切都沒(méi)有發(fā)生根本的變化---對(duì)于人類來(lái)說(shuō)，新的曙光從未浮現(xiàn)，盡管他們?yōu)榇艘恢痹跔奚投窢?zhēng)著…直到稍稍一百多年前，一些全新的事物出現(xiàn)了：站立起來(lái)的人們不僅實(shí)現(xiàn)了渴望，還擁有結(jié)束一切剝削與壓迫關(guān)系，結(jié)束人類在世界各角落中一切對(duì)抗性沖突的可能。1871年，在普法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間，在法國(guó)首都巴黎，長(zhǎng)期遭受剝削、貧苦不堪的勞動(dòng)人民站立起來(lái)，奪取了政權(quán)并且在人民內(nèi)部建立了一個(gè)全新的組織。這就是巴黎公社，雖然它僅僅只存在于法國(guó)的那一小塊土地，也只延續(xù)了短短的兩個(gè)月，但是它描繪了共產(chǎn)主義社會(huì)的雛形，在共產(chǎn)主義社會(huì)中，一切人民內(nèi)部之間的階級(jí)分化和壓迫將被最終消除。巴黎公社最后還是被舊秩序的力量所鎮(zhèn)壓，成千上萬(wàn)英勇的人們被屠殺，他們想要保存巴黎公社的努力最終化為泡影。但是，朝向新世界的第一步已經(jīng)邁開(kāi)了，道路已經(jīng)敞開(kāi)，方法業(yè)已顯現(xiàn)，只剩下飛馳的時(shí)間去實(shí)現(xiàn)。
　　
　　 即使在巴黎公社之前，一個(gè)沒(méi)有剝削和壓迫的全新世界的可能性，已經(jīng)被卡爾.馬克思和他同時(shí)代的合作者，共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的創(chuàng)始人弗里德里希.恩格斯所科學(xué)的證明。馬克思在巴黎公社革命數(shù)年前就說(shuō)過(guò)：
　　
　　 “一旦掌握了其內(nèi)在的關(guān)系，所有認(rèn)為現(xiàn)有狀況的存在是永恒必要的理論信仰，必將在實(shí)踐崩塌之前就已垮掉。”
　　
　　 這正是馬克思所做到的：他科學(xué)地挖掘和揭示的，不僅僅有資本主義制度的“內(nèi)在聯(lián)系”，當(dāng)時(shí)資本主義在歐洲已成為最重要的剝削形式并且逐漸殖民了世界上的大多數(shù)地方，還包括了資本主義與人類社會(huì)以前的所有制度之間的“內(nèi)在聯(lián)系”---通過(guò)這種闡述，馬克思告訴我們，無(wú)論是對(duì)于資本主義的延續(xù)，還是對(duì)于任何建立在少數(shù)人剝削與壓迫多數(shù)人這個(gè)基礎(chǔ)之上的社會(huì)的存在，都不是“永恒必要”的。這在人類對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)理解的歷史上是一個(gè)影響深遠(yuǎn)的突破，它為實(shí)踐一個(gè)世界范圍內(nèi)的歷史性突破，為人類社會(huì)以及全世界人們之間關(guān)系的前所未有的革命化，提供了堅(jiān)實(shí)的理論基礎(chǔ)。
　　
　　【注：俺水平有限，頭段最后一句if only fleetingly then比較糾結(jié)，暫且這么理解：if only為“要是…就好了”，then指the new world到來(lái)的那時(shí)，fleetingly表示時(shí)間飛快。如此理解的意思是：“要是能疾馳到這一天該多好”，似乎與前面不協(xié)調(diào)，因此全改意譯了。】
　　-----------------原文----------------------------------
　　
　　All this remained fundamentally unchanged—the light of a new day never appeared for the masses of humanity, despite all their sacrifice and struggle... Until, a little more than 100 years ago, something radically new emerged: people rising up who embodied not only the desire but the potential to put an end to all relations of exploitation and oppression and all destructive antagonistic conflicts among human beings, everywhere in the world. In 1871, amidst a war between “their” government and that of Germany, working people in the capital city of France, long exploited, impoverished, and degraded, rose up to seize power and established a new form of association among people. This was the Paris Commune, which existed only in that one part of France, and which lasted for only two short months, but which represented, in embryonic form, a communist society in which distinctions of class and oppressive divisions among people would be finally abolished. The Commune was crushed by the weight and force of the old order—with thousands slaughtered in a valiant but ultimately vain attempt to keep the Commune alive. But the first steps had been taken toward a new world, the path had been opened, the way shown, if only fleetingly then.
　　
　　Even before the events of the Paris Commune, the possibility of a radically new world, without exploitation and oppression, had been scientifically established through the work of Karl Marx, together with his contemporary and collaborator, Frederick Engels, the founders of the communist movement. As Marx himself put it, only a few years before the Commune:
　　
　　 "Once the inner connection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions breaks down before their collapse in practice.1 "
　　
　　And that is what Marx had done: He had scientifically excavated and brought to light not only the “inner connections” of the system of capitalism, which had become the dominant form of exploitation in Europe and was increasingly colonizing large parts of the world, but also the “inner connections” between capitalism and all previous forms of human society—and in so doing he had shown that there was no “permanent necessity” either for the continuation of capitalism or for the existence of any other society based on the exploitation and oppression of the many by the few. This was a profound breakthrough in human beings’ understanding of reality, which established the theoretical basis for a world-historic breakthrough in practice, for an unprecedented revolutionization of human society and the relations among people, all over the world.
　　 　　

　　5.
　　
　　 馬克思最根本的發(fā)現(xiàn)是，人類社會(huì)的性質(zhì)和社會(huì)中人們的關(guān)系，并不是由個(gè)體的觀念或意志所決定，無(wú)論這種個(gè)體是人還是某些荒誕的鬼神——而是由人們生產(chǎn)和再生產(chǎn)物質(zhì)資料以維持生活時(shí)所面臨的需求，以及人們借以群居在一起的方式，和人們滿足需求時(shí)所利用的生產(chǎn)資料所決定的。當(dāng)今世界，在尖端技術(shù)的幫助下，一些人逐漸從生產(chǎn)基本生活所需的進(jìn)程中剝離出來(lái)——這使得我們很容易忘記：如果生產(chǎn)活動(dòng)并非以滿足這些基本需求（食物、住房、交通等）為目的，如果人類社會(huì)不能繁衍自己的人口，那么生活將很快癱瘓，社會(huì)中所有的事物——只要一切正常它們便或多或少的被認(rèn)為是理所當(dāng)然的，將不再是可能的。穿透人類歷史發(fā)展和社會(huì)組織的厚厚軀殼，直達(dá)人類社會(huì)功能的最底層和關(guān)鍵核心，是馬克思的一個(gè)偉大成就和寶貴貢獻(xiàn)。
　　
　　 但是馬克思也指出，任何時(shí)候，無(wú)論人們利用什么樣的生產(chǎn)工具生產(chǎn)和再生產(chǎn)生活必需品——無(wú)論是何種生產(chǎn)力內(nèi)容（土地、原材料、技術(shù)——無(wú)論簡(jiǎn)單或是復(fù)雜、人們自身的知識(shí)和能力）——它都將根本上最終性的決定人們的組織方式、生產(chǎn)關(guān)系，以便最好的利用生產(chǎn)力。同樣，馬克思指出，這些生產(chǎn)關(guān)系與意志或個(gè)人的喜好無(wú)關(guān)，不管它們有多么強(qiáng)大，但生產(chǎn)關(guān)系必須也是必要，在任何時(shí)候都要基本符合生產(chǎn)力的性質(zhì)。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，如果將信息技術(shù)和相關(guān)的生產(chǎn)過(guò)程（它們?cè)诮裉斓默F(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)中是至關(guān)重要的）介紹到早期公共社會(huì)（由少數(shù)原始人群體組成，他們?cè)谂c其人口規(guī)模相匹配的大片土地上四處覓食和狩獵借以謀生），將會(huì)給那些社會(huì)帶來(lái)戲劇性的變化：他們?cè)械纳罘绞綄⒈淮蚱疲⑶野l(fā)生重大的轉(zhuǎn)折。又如，也不能將現(xiàn)代技術(shù)有效的利用于種植園農(nóng)業(yè)，種植園農(nóng)業(yè)，在種植園奴隸制期間，和1860年代南北戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)結(jié)束后奴隸獲得自由的將近一百年內(nèi)，一直都是美國(guó)南方式生活的主心骨。種植園農(nóng)業(yè)的特點(diǎn)是技術(shù)含量低，屬于勞動(dòng)異常密集型農(nóng)業(yè)，起先是大量的奴隸，而后是眾多的佃農(nóng)和雇農(nóng)：工作極為辛苦，日出而作，日落而息。事實(shí)上，直到二戰(zhàn)后，尤其是新農(nóng)業(yè)技術(shù)被引入到南部地區(qū)——特別是拖拉機(jī)、機(jī)械化種植和采棉機(jī)的逐漸增加——破壞了舊的種植園制度，驅(qū)使大量黑人（此前他們都被以這種或那種方式牢牢栓在土地上）離開(kāi)土地，進(jìn)入到北方和南方的城市中。而這又反過(guò)來(lái)構(gòu)成了一場(chǎng)抗?fàn)幍闹匾镔|(zhì)基礎(chǔ)，這場(chǎng)抗?fàn)幾罱K結(jié)束了美國(guó)的種族隔離制度和3K黨及其他白人至上主義者的公開(kāi)恐怖行為，通過(guò)巨大的犧牲和英雄主義，這張抗?fàn)幗o美國(guó)社會(huì)，特別是黑人地位帶來(lái)了極大的變化，盡管它沒(méi)有，也不能完全消除對(duì)黑人的壓迫，而這種壓迫過(guò)去一直是，今天依然是美國(guó)資本主義-帝國(guó)主義體系中一個(gè)不可或缺的基本組成部分。
　　
　　------------------------原文-------------------------
　　The most fundamental discovery that Marx made was that the character of human society, and the relations among people in society, is not determined by the ideas and the wills of individuals—either individual human beings or fantastical supernatural beings—but by the necessity people face in producing and reproducing the material requirements of life and the way in which people come together, and the means they utilize, to meet that necessity. In today’s world, with the highly sophisticated technology that exists—and, in particular, for those who are more removed from the actual process of producing the basic requirements of life—it can be easy to forget that, if the productive activity is not carried out to meet these basic requirements (food, shelter, transportation, and so on), and if human societies are not capable of reproducing their own populations, then life will soon come to a standstill, and all the things that go on in society, whose functioning is more or less taken for granted so long as things are proceeding “normally,” will no longer be possible. To penetrate beneath all the complex layers of human historical development and social organization to this underlying foundation and essential core of human social functioning was a great achievement and invaluable contribution of Marx.
　　
　　But Marx also showed that, at any given time, whatever the means are with which people carry out the production and reproduction of the material requirements of life—whatever is the character of the forces of production (the land and raw materials, the technology, whether simple or more complex, and the people themselves with their knowledge and abilities)—will basically and ultimately determine the way in which people are organized, the relations of production into which people enter, in order to best utilize the productive forces. Again, Marx showed that these relations of production are not a matter of the will, or the whims, of individuals, no matter how powerful, but must, of necessity, basically conform to the character of the productive forces at any given time. For example, if the information technology and related processes of production that are pivotal in today’s modern economies were introduced into societies made up of small groups of people foraging and hunting over large areas (relative to the size of their populations), which was the way of life in early communal societies, the introduction of this technology would bring about dramatic changes in the character of those societies: their way of life would be disrupted and changed in significant ways. Nor, for example, could modern technology be efficiently utilized in the plantation agriculture that was the backbone of the way of life in the southern United States, during the period of slavery and for nearly a hundred years after literal slavery was abolished through the Civil War in the 1860s. That plantation agriculture was marked by a low level of technology but very labor-intensive work carried out, first, by large numbers of slaves and then by sharecroppers and farm laborers: back-breaking toil from “can’t see in the morning till can’t see at night.” And in fact, in the period after World War 2 in particular, the introduction of new technology into southern agriculture—especially tractors and mechanized planting and picking machines, on an increasing scale—undermined the old plantation system and was a major impetus in driving many Black people, who had been formerly chained to the land in one form or another, off the land and into the cities of the North as well as the South.And this, in turn, constituted an important part of the material basis on which the struggle was waged to end legal segregation and open terror by the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists—a struggle which, through tremendous sacrifice and heroism, brought about very significant changes in U.S. society, and in the position of Black people in particular, even while it did not, and could not, put an end to the oppression of Black people, which has been, and today remains, an integral and essential element of the capitalist-imperialist system in the U.S.
　　 　　

　　6.
　　
　　 這闡明了另外一個(gè)由馬克思揭露的事實(shí)：在任何時(shí)候，現(xiàn)有生產(chǎn)關(guān)系的基礎(chǔ)上必將出現(xiàn)一個(gè)政治和思想的上層建筑——政治結(jié)構(gòu)、制度和程序，思維方式，以及文化——它們從根本上講，必須也將一定會(huì)，與現(xiàn)有生產(chǎn)關(guān)系保持一致，并且還會(huì)反過(guò)來(lái)維持和加強(qiáng)這種生產(chǎn)關(guān)系。馬克思進(jìn)一步說(shuō)明，自從生產(chǎn)力發(fā)生變化從而導(dǎo)致帶有征服和統(tǒng)治特性的生產(chǎn)關(guān)系出現(xiàn)之時(shí)，社會(huì)便已被分為不同的階級(jí)，不同階級(jí)在社會(huì)中的地位是由他們?cè)谏a(chǎn)過(guò)程中的角色所決定的。在階級(jí)分化的社會(huì)，是經(jīng)濟(jì)上占主導(dǎo)地位的階級(jí)壟斷和控制了主要的生產(chǎn)資料（技術(shù)、土地和原材料等），它們同時(shí)也統(tǒng)治了政治和思想的上層建筑。這種經(jīng)濟(jì)上的統(tǒng)治階級(jí)也必將壟斷政治權(quán)力。政治權(quán)力的壟斷體現(xiàn)在國(guó)家這個(gè)概念上——特別是政治鎮(zhèn)壓工具，包括警察和軍隊(duì)，司法制度和懲罰機(jī)構(gòu)，以及行政權(quán)——它給所謂的“合法”武裝力量的壟斷提供了一個(gè)集中的表達(dá)詞。同樣，社會(huì)中占主導(dǎo)地位的思維方式，包括文化中體現(xiàn)此思維方式的內(nèi)容，必將與統(tǒng)治階級(jí)的世界觀和利益保持一致（如同馬克思和恩格斯在《共產(chǎn)黨宣言》中所說(shuō)的那樣：只要社會(huì)被分化為不同階級(jí)，任何時(shí)代，占統(tǒng)治地位的思想總必然是統(tǒng)治階級(jí)的思想）。
　　
　　【備注：此處superstructure of politics and ideology中的ideology不直接譯為“意識(shí)形態(tài)”，而是譯為“思想”。貌似上層建筑分為政治上層建筑和思想上層建筑，思想上層建筑一般便是指意識(shí)形態(tài)，所以不好再譯為 意識(shí)形態(tài)的上層建筑】
　　------------------------原文-----------------------------
　　
　　This illustrates another crucial fact brought to light by Marx: On the foundation of the existing production relations at any given time, there will arise a superstructure of politics and ideology—political structures, institutions and processes, ways of thinking, and culture—which in a fundamental sense must and will correspond to, and in turn serve to maintain and reinforce, the existing production relations. And Marx further demonstrated, since the time that changes in the productive forces led to the emergence of production relations characterized by subjugation and domination, society has been divided into different classes, whose position in society is grounded in their differing roles in the process of production. In class-divided society, it is the economically dominant class—that group in society which monopolizes ownership and control of the major means of production (technology, land and raw materials, etc.)—which will also dominate the superstructure of politics and ideology. This economically dominant class will exercise a monopoly of political power. This monopoly of political power is embodied in the state—particularly the instruments of political suppression, including the police as well as the army, the legal system and penal institutions, as well as the executive power—and it assumes a concentrated expression in the monopoly of “l(fā)egitimate” armed force. So, too, the dominant ways of thinking that hold sway in society, including as this is expressed in the culture, will correspond to the outlook and interests of the dominant class (as Marx and Engels put it in the Communist Manifesto, so long as society is divided into classes, the ruling ideas of any age are ever the ideas of its ruling class).
　　
　　
　　7.
　　
　　 那么什么是根本基礎(chǔ)，什么又是社會(huì)變革的根本驅(qū)動(dòng)力？馬克思分析了如何通過(guò)人類的活動(dòng)與創(chuàng)新生產(chǎn)力進(jìn)而得到持續(xù)的發(fā)展，當(dāng)達(dá)到某一臨界點(diǎn)，新的生產(chǎn)力將與現(xiàn)存的生產(chǎn)關(guān)系，以及與生產(chǎn)關(guān)系相適應(yīng)的政治、思想上層建筑發(fā)生沖突。在這一點(diǎn)上，正如馬克思描繪的，現(xiàn)有的生產(chǎn)關(guān)系已經(jīng)在整體意義上成為新生產(chǎn)力的一種桎梏和枷鎖，當(dāng)這種情況發(fā)生時(shí)，必須進(jìn)行革命，從而徹底改變現(xiàn)有生產(chǎn)關(guān)系，使它與新生產(chǎn)力相一致，從而帶來(lái)一種新境況，在此中生產(chǎn)關(guān)系成為一種更適合生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展的形式。但是革命必須，也只能發(fā)生在上層建筑，通過(guò)推翻和瓦解舊政權(quán)獲取社會(huì)政治權(quán)利，建立新的國(guó)家政權(quán)，如此才能改變生產(chǎn)關(guān)系和上層建筑，使之與新統(tǒng)治階級(jí)的利益保持一致，從而能更充分的發(fā)揮和利用生產(chǎn)力。
　　
　　 當(dāng)然，革命是個(gè)極其復(fù)雜的過(guò)程，涉及到許多有不同看法和目的的人和群體，進(jìn)行這樣一場(chǎng)革命時(shí)他們或多或少會(huì)意識(shí)到生產(chǎn)力和生產(chǎn)關(guān)系之間存在的根本沖突，他們的認(rèn)知和進(jìn)步使得革命成為必要，并且積聚了使革命成為可能的動(dòng)力。但最終，這些沖突和動(dòng)力將影響到到底誰(shuí)能，誰(shuí)確實(shí)是采取了行動(dòng)，遵從了變革生產(chǎn)關(guān)系的需要，使之與生產(chǎn)力的發(fā)展相一致。這正是，例如，18世紀(jì)后期19世紀(jì)初法國(guó)最激進(jìn)的資產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命所發(fā)生的：眾多不同階級(jí)力量和社會(huì)團(tuán)體都參與了此次革命，但歸根到底，只有那股后來(lái)建立了資本主義制度（它取代了舊的封建制）的政治力量能夠奪取權(quán)力，根本的原因是：經(jīng)濟(jì)的變革和以經(jīng)濟(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的整個(gè)社會(huì)的變革，必須代表那種能使生產(chǎn)關(guān)系與生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展相一致的必要手段。
　　
　　----------------------原文-------------------------------
　　Then what is the fundamental basis, and what are the underlying, driving forces, of change in society? Marx analyzed how, through the activity and innovation of human beings, the productive forces are being continually developed, and at a certain point the new productive forces that have been developed will come into antagonism with the existing relations of production (and the superstructure of politics and ideology that corresponds to those production relations). At that point, as Marx characterized it, the existing production relations have become, in an overall sense, a fetter, a chain, on the productive forces; and when this situation emerges, a revolution must be carried out whose fundamental aim is to revolutionize the production relations, to bring them into line with the productive forces, to bring about a situation where the production relations are now more an appropriate form for the development of the productive forces, rather than a fetter on that development. Such a revolution will be driven forward by forces representing a class which embodies the potential for carrying out this transformation of the production relations, to bring them into line, essentially, with the way in which the productive forces have developed. But this revolution must, and can only, take place in the superstructure—in the struggle for political power over society, through the overthrow and dismantling of the old state power and the establishment of a new state power—which then makes possible the transformation of the production relations, as well as the superstructure itself, in line with the interests of the new ruling class and its ability to more fully unleash and utilize the productive forces.
　　
　　Of course, revolution is an extremely complex process, involving many different people and groups with a diversity of views and aims, and those who carry out such a revolution may be more or less conscious of what are the underlying contradictions—between the forces of production and the relations of production—whose development has established the need and given rise to the dynamics that make such a revolution possible, and necessary. But ultimately the influence of these contradictions and dynamics will bring to the fore those who can and do act essentially in accordance with the need to transform the production relations to bring them into line with the development of the productive forces. This is what happened, for example, in the French revolution of the late 18th century and early 19th century, the most radical of all bourgeois revolutions: Many different class forces and social groups took part in that revolution, but in the final analysis it was political forces who proceeded to establish the capitalist system, in place of the old feudal system, who were able to entrench themselves in power, fundamentally because this transformation of the economy, and of the society as a whole on that foundation, represented the necessary means for bringing the relations of production into line with the way in which the productive forces had developed.
　　 　　　　
 

　　8.
　　
　　 美國(guó)的南北戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)也為了馬克思的一些基本原則和方法提供了良好的闡述，馬克思發(fā)展出這些基本原則和方法用來(lái)解釋人類歷史發(fā)展的規(guī)律。這場(chǎng)內(nèi)戰(zhàn)從根本上是由于兩種不同生產(chǎn)模式（分別代表了兩種不同的生產(chǎn)關(guān)系：資本主義和奴隸制）之間發(fā)生相互沖突，進(jìn)而不能在同一個(gè)國(guó)家共存。內(nèi)戰(zhàn)的結(jié)果是，伴隨著勝利，資產(chǎn)階級(jí)進(jìn)入了南方，奴隸制被廢除，資本主義制度在全國(guó)范圍內(nèi)的占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位——即便如此，在經(jīng)歷短暫的戰(zhàn)后重建后，南方原有土地貴族和興起中的資本家也重新被納入到這個(gè)國(guó)家的統(tǒng)治階級(jí)之中，并且實(shí)際上，它們還對(duì)統(tǒng)治階級(jí)產(chǎn)生了巨大的影響，先前解放了的奴隸們?cè)俅伪唤y(tǒng)治，遭受到的剝削和壓迫并不比奴隸制時(shí)要低（在奴隸制被依法正式廢除后很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間內(nèi)，實(shí)際奴役還繼續(xù)以某種形式存在著，尤其是在南方）。
　　
　　 從這些歷史事例中，我們可以看到給社會(huì)帶來(lái)實(shí)質(zhì)性變化的革命如何最終還是導(dǎo)致了一個(gè)新的剝削階級(jí)的產(chǎn)生，這種模式不斷重復(fù)，廣大被壓迫的人民在這些革命中犧牲（或者被犧牲）自己（例如，南北戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間，由于北方允許他們?nèi)刖常?0萬(wàn)農(nóng)奴紛紛逃往北方，他們的死亡率要大大高于那些聯(lián)邦軍中農(nóng)奴的死亡率），但歸根結(jié)底，還是由剝削者，舊的或新的，收割了這些犧牲換來(lái)的果實(shí)。自階級(jí)分化、剝削階級(jí)占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位成為人類社會(huì)一種特性以來(lái)，這種現(xiàn)象便成為一個(gè)慣例。這一切都是可能的…直到現(xiàn)在。
　　
　　----------------------原文---------------------
　　
　　The American Civil War also provides an illustration of the basic principles and methods that Marx developed and applied to human historical development. This Civil War came about fundamentally as a result of the fact that two different modes of production—characterized by different systems of production relations: capitalism and slavery—had come into antagonistic conflict with each other, and could no longer co-exist within the same country. And the result of this Civil War was that, with the victory of the capitalist class, centered in the North, the slave system was abolished and the capitalist system became dominant in the country as a whole—even though, especially after a brief period of Reconstruction following the Civil War, the southern landowning aristocracy and developing capitalists in the South were re-integrated into the ruling class of the country as a whole, and in fact have had a major influence within that ruling class, while the former slaves were subjugated once again, in forms of exploitation and oppression hardly less onerous than slavery (and some forms of actual slavery continued to exist, particularly in the South, long after slavery was legally and formally abolished).
　　
　　From these historical examples, it can be seen how, in the revolutions that have brought about qualitative changes in society but have nevertheless only led to the establishment of a new exploiting class in the dominant position, the pattern has repeated itself that the masses of oppressed people sacrifice (or are sacrificed) in these revolutions (for example, 200,000 former slaves fought on the side of the North in the U.S. Civil War, once they were allowed to do so, and they died in much greater percentages than others in the Union army) yet, in the final analysis, exploiters of the masses, new or old, reap the fruits of this sacrifice. This is the way it has been since the time that class divisions, and domination by exploiting classes, have emerged in and have characterized human society. This was all that was possible...Until now. 　　

　　9.
　　
　　 馬克思揭示的最重要、最具有解放性的事情是：人類社會(huì)的發(fā)展，作為一種動(dòng)力（由他揭示的）的結(jié)果，正一直導(dǎo)向一個(gè)可能存在的完全不同于如今的世界。我們已經(jīng)到達(dá)這樣一種狀態(tài)，通過(guò)各種復(fù)雜的發(fā)展（我們可以利用最基本的術(shù)語(yǔ)勾畫(huà)出它），現(xiàn)存的生產(chǎn)力，有可能創(chuàng)造并不斷增加豐富的物質(zhì)財(cái)富，使之在根本上為全人類所共享，以滿足世界各地人民的物質(zhì)需要，同時(shí)它還可以不斷的為每一個(gè)人提供豐富的智力和文化生活。這不僅是因?yàn)榧夹g(shù)已發(fā)展到使這一切都可實(shí)現(xiàn)的地步，也是由于這些技術(shù)能夠——實(shí)際上是必須——為大多數(shù)群體所共同利用。馬克思揭露了主導(dǎo)世界的資本主義制度的最基本的矛盾（它是人類社會(huì)的巨大成本和危險(xiǎn)）：社會(huì)化生產(chǎn)方式與生產(chǎn)過(guò)程、產(chǎn)品都被少數(shù)資本家控制和私人占有的事實(shí)之間的矛盾。就像我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨章所強(qiáng)調(diào)的：
　　
　　 “當(dāng)今世界，物質(zhì)的生產(chǎn)和產(chǎn)品的分配，完全由大量在高度協(xié)調(diào)化網(wǎng)絡(luò)中集體工作的勞動(dòng)者所執(zhí)行。這整個(gè)生產(chǎn)和分配過(guò)程的基礎(chǔ)是無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)，一個(gè)不擁有任何東西的全球性階級(jí)，然而他們創(chuàng)造了大量的社會(huì)生產(chǎn)力。這些大量的生產(chǎn)力本可以使人類不僅僅能滿足每個(gè)人的基本需要，還能創(chuàng)建一個(gè)擁有全新社會(huì)關(guān)系和價(jià)值觀的新型社會(huì)…這樣的社會(huì)中，所有的人都能真正一起享受充分的繁榮。”
　　
　　----------------------------原文-------------------------
　　
　　The most significant, and liberating, thing that Marx brought to light is that the development of human society, as a result of the dynamics which he unearthed, has led to a situation where a radically different world is possible. We have reached the point where, through all the complex development that has only been sketched out here in very basic terms, the productive forces now exist which make it possible to create, and to continually expand, an abundance which, in fundamental terms, can be shared among humanity as a whole and utilized to meet the material needs of people everywhere, while also providing for an ever-enriched intellectual and cultural life for everyone. It is not only that the technology has developed which makes this possible in a general sense, but also that this technology can be—and in fact must be—used by large groups of people working cooperatively. Marx revealed the fundamental contradiction of the capitalist system which dominates the world today, at such great cost and with such great peril for humanity: the contradiction between the socialized way in which production is carried out, and the fact that this process of production, and what it produces, is controlled and appropriated privately, by a small number of capitalists. As the Constitution of our Party emphasizes:
　　
　　
　　 [I]n today’s world the production of things, and the distribution of the things produced, is overwhelmingly carried out by large numbers of people who work collectively and are organized in highly coordinated networks. At the foundation of this whole process is the proletariat, an international class which owns nothing, yet has created and works these massive socialized productive forces. These tremendous productive powers could enable humanity to not only meet the basic needs of every person on the planet, but to build a new society, with a whole different set of social relations and values...a society where all people could truly and fully flourish together.
　
　　10.
　　
　　 通過(guò)革命的手段消除資本主義的基本矛盾，消除將人類分割為剝削者和被剝削者、統(tǒng)治者和被統(tǒng)治者的社會(huì)分化現(xiàn)象，是共產(chǎn)主義革命的目的。這種革命與無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)的根本利益是相一致的，它是在社會(huì)化生產(chǎn)中資產(chǎn)階級(jí)占據(jù)統(tǒng)治和剝削地位的條件下進(jìn)行的，它將使生產(chǎn)關(guān)系與生產(chǎn)力再次保持一致，并進(jìn)一步釋放生產(chǎn)力，包括人們自身。但是，不像以前那些通過(guò)革命實(shí)現(xiàn)自身利益的階級(jí)，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命的目的不是簡(jiǎn)單地使自己或代表人在社會(huì)中取得執(zhí)政地位，它的目的是消滅將社會(huì)分割為不同階級(jí)的社會(huì)分化現(xiàn)象，鏟除一切壓迫關(guān)系，進(jìn)而消除所有使得一部分人借以統(tǒng)治和壓迫另一部分人的制度和制度工具。正如馬克思的簡(jiǎn)潔概括，這種革命的目標(biāo)是——只有當(dāng)革命成功的那刻才可作結(jié)論——“四個(gè)全”：所有階級(jí)差別全部被廢除；所有產(chǎn)生階級(jí)差別的生產(chǎn)關(guān)系全部被廢除；所有與這些生產(chǎn)關(guān)系相一致的社會(huì)關(guān)系全部被廢除；所有反應(yīng)這些社會(huì)關(guān)系的觀念全部被革命化。馬克思同樣簡(jiǎn)潔卻有力的抓住了這種革命的本質(zhì)：無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)只有解放了全人類才能最后解放自己。
　　
　　 這也是為什么共產(chǎn)主義革命代表了人類社會(huì)最本質(zhì)也是最有解放意義的革命。
　　
　　------------------------原文-------------------------
　　To achieve this—to resolve, through revolutionary means, the fundamental contradiction of capitalism, and to move beyond the division of human beings into exploiters and exploited, rulers and ruled—is the aim of the communist revolution. This is a revolution that corresponds to the most fundamental interests of the proletariat, which carries out, under conditions of capitalist domination and exploitation, socialized production and which embodies the potential to bring the relations of production into line with the productive forces, and to further unleash those productive forces, including the people themselves. But, unlike all previous classes which have carried out a revolution in their interests, the revolutionary proletariat does not aim simply to establish itself and its political representatives in the ruling position in society; it aims to move beyond the division of society into classes, to uproot all oppressive relations, and with that to eliminate all institutions and instruments through which one part of society dominates and suppresses others. As Marx succinctly summarized it, this revolution aims for—and will be concluded only once it has achieved—what have come to be called the “4 Alls”: the abolition of all class distinctions, of all the production relations on which those class distinctions rest, of all the social relations that correspond to those production relations, and the revolutionizing of all the ideas that correspond to those social relations. Marx also succinctly and powerfully captured the essence of this in emphasizing that the proletariat can emancipate itself only by emancipating all humanity.
　　
　　All this is why the communist revolution represents the most radical, and truly liberating, revolution in human history.
　　 　　

　　11.
　　
　　 在研究了大量歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)后，馬克思得出了自己的結(jié)論，馬克思指出了他深刻認(rèn)識(shí)到的一點(diǎn)：歷史的確是由人民創(chuàng)造的，但他們并沒(méi)能按照自己希望的方式創(chuàng)造。他們依照當(dāng)時(shí)的物質(zhì)條件基礎(chǔ)創(chuàng)造了歷史——尤其是最基本的經(jīng)濟(jì)條件和經(jīng)濟(jì)關(guān)系——這些都是他們從上一代那繼承而來(lái)的，變化的可能途徑就隱藏在這些條件的矛盾特性之中。正如美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨主席鮑勃•艾沃肯在“革命起來(lái)，解放全人類”（Part 1）中說(shuō)指出的：
　　
　　 “我們?cè)诖丝梢杂米匀唤绲倪M(jìn)化論做個(gè)比喻。Ardea Skybreak在其關(guān)于進(jìn)化論的書(shū)中反復(fù)強(qiáng)調(diào)的一點(diǎn)是，在進(jìn)化過(guò)程中，進(jìn)化只能給那些已經(jīng)存在變化基礎(chǔ)的東西帶來(lái)變化…自然界中的進(jìn)化通過(guò)現(xiàn)實(shí)和現(xiàn)有限制（或者換句話說(shuō)，現(xiàn)有必要性）中已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)的相關(guān)變化得以實(shí)現(xiàn)，而且也只能如此。”
　　
　　 這為一些人提出的某些問(wèn)題提供了根本的答案，這些問(wèn)題包括：你是誰(shuí)啊，你憑什么說(shuō)社會(huì)可以如此如此的組織起來(lái)？你們共產(chǎn)主義者有什么權(quán)力規(guī)定什么改變是可能的，并且按照某種方式進(jìn)行？這些問(wèn)題本質(zhì)上是錯(cuò)誤的，代表了對(duì)人類歷史發(fā)展動(dòng)力和人類社會(huì)（廣泛意義上還包括物質(zhì)世界）中變革的可能途徑的一個(gè)根本誤解。這相當(dāng)于問(wèn)為什么鳥(niǎo)類不能生鱷魚(yú)，或者問(wèn)為什么人類不能繁衍可以飛翔的后代，他們可以在一瞬間，輕輕一跳便可飛躍高高的大樓，擁有可以穿透固體的X-光般的眼力——并且想知道：你是誰(shuí)啊？憑什么規(guī)定繁衍要如此進(jìn)行？你是誰(shuí)啊，憑什么說(shuō)人類后代擁有某種特質(zhì)而不是另外一種？這其實(shí)不關(guān)“你是誰(shuí)”什么事，而與物質(zhì)現(xiàn)實(shí)和隱藏其中的矛盾的可變性有關(guān)。這里的問(wèn)題是雙重的：
　　
　　-----------------------------原文--------------------------
　　In surveying the immense historical experience that went into the conclusions he drew, Marx pointed to the profound understanding that indeed people make history, but they do not make it in any way they wish. They make it on the basis of the material conditions—and in particular the underlying economic conditions and relations—which they have inherited from previous generations, and the possible pathways of change that reside within the contradictory nature of these conditions. As Bob Avakian, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, has pointed out in “Making Revolution and Emancipating Humanity” (Part 1):
　　
　　"We can make an analogy here to evolution in the natural world. One of the points that is repeatedly stressed in the book on evolution by Ardea Skybreak is that the process of evolution can only bring about changes on the basis of what already exists…. Evolution in the natural world comes about, and can only come about, through changes that arise on the basis of, and in relation to, the existing reality and the existing constraints (or, to put it another way, the existing necessity)."
　　
　　This provides the basic answer to those who raise: Who are you to say how society can be organized, what right do you communists have to dictate what change is possible and how it should come about? These questions are essentially misplaced and represent a fundamental misunderstanding of the dynamics of historical development—and the possible pathways of change—in human society as well as in the material world more generally. This is akin to asking why birds cannot give birth to crocodiles—or why human beings cannot produce offspring that are capable of flying around the earth, on their own, in an instant, leaping tall buildings in a single bound, and having x-ray vision that can see through solid objects—and demanding to know: Who are you to dictate what can come about through reproduction, who are you to say that human offspring will have particular characteristics and not others? It is not a matter of “who are you” but of what the material reality is and what possibilities for change actually lie within the—contradictory—character of that material reality. The point here is twofold:

　　12.
　　
　　 在人類歷史上，物質(zhì)條件第一次達(dá)到這種階段，可以使統(tǒng)治關(guān)系、壓迫和剝削的最終廢除成為可能；指導(dǎo)完成這一斗爭(zhēng)目標(biāo)的理論認(rèn)識(shí)也已與物質(zhì)現(xiàn)實(shí)基礎(chǔ)，和使此成為可能的歷史發(fā)展規(guī)律完成銜接。
　　
　　 同時(shí)，這個(gè)世界歷史性的人類社會(huì)關(guān)系變革，只能基于實(shí)際的物質(zhì)條件和隱匿其中的矛盾向上出發(fā)，它打開(kāi)了這個(gè)可能性，但同時(shí)也體現(xiàn)了實(shí)現(xiàn)這一根本性社會(huì)變革所將遭遇到的阻礙；它要求對(duì)這些矛盾動(dòng)力和組織團(tuán)體里的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力有科學(xué)性的認(rèn)識(shí)和解決方法，（組織團(tuán)體是以這種科學(xué)方法和方式為基礎(chǔ)建立起來(lái)的）——以進(jìn)行艱巨而復(fù)雜的斗爭(zhēng)，通過(guò)向全世界各地推行共產(chǎn)主義實(shí)現(xiàn)這一變革。
　　
　　---------------------原文----------------------------
　　For the first time in the history of humanity, the material conditions have come into being that make possible the final abolition of relations of domination, oppression, and exploitation; and the theoretical understanding to guide the struggle toward that goal has been brought into being on the basis of drawing from the material reality, and its historical development, that has brought this possibility into being.
　　
　　At the same time, this world-historic transformation of human social relations can only come about on the basis of proceeding from the actual material conditions and the contradictions that characterize them, which open up this possibility but which also embody obstacles to the achievement of this radical social transformation; and it requires a scientific understanding of and approach to these contradictory dynamics—and the leadership of an organized group of people that is grounded in this scientific method and approach—in order to carry through the complex and arduous struggle to achieve this transformation through the advance to communism throughout the world.

　　13.
　　
　　II.
　　共產(chǎn)主義革命的第一階段
　　
　　 巴黎公社是人類第一次嘗試去丈量人類解放的高度，它也是人類對(duì)未來(lái)的一個(gè)預(yù)示，但是它缺乏必要的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，也沒(méi)有得到必要的科學(xué)指導(dǎo)以便抵御舊秩序不可避免的反革命沖擊，從而在社會(huì)的各個(gè)領(lǐng)域：經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會(huì)、政治、文化和思想里進(jìn)行徹底的變革。一些不是以科學(xué)觀點(diǎn)和科學(xué)方法，而是以浪漫主義觀點(diǎn)看待巴黎公社革命的人喜歡引述說(shuō)，失敗的原因是有組織的先鋒隊(duì)缺乏強(qiáng)有力的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，不能以科學(xué)的馬克思主義基本觀點(diǎn)團(tuán)結(jié)在一起（這本來(lái)可以成為巴黎公社的一個(gè)優(yōu)點(diǎn)）。但事實(shí)是，這只是巴黎公社眾多弱勢(shì)之一，也只是導(dǎo)致其短暫存在便最終失敗的眾多因素之一。領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力的缺失，和試圖立即實(shí)施那些會(huì)根本上消除任何制度化領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的措施的行為，是巴黎公社不能有效抵御舊有勢(shì)力反撲的主要原因，這些有組織的剝削者和壓迫者發(fā)誓要鏟除巴黎公社，并確保共產(chǎn)主義的幽靈永不再現(xiàn)。尤其如馬克思所指出的，巴黎公社的公社社員們沒(méi)有乘熱打鐵拿下凡爾賽城這個(gè)臨近的反革命據(jù)點(diǎn)，此后一旦反革命勢(shì)力積聚了力量，他們便反攻巴黎，將死亡風(fēng)暴吹到了巴黎公社，導(dǎo)致成千上萬(wàn)最堅(jiān)定的革命戰(zhàn)士在戰(zhàn)斗中被屠殺。
　　
　　 但排除巴黎公社革命失敗后的直接后果，在相當(dāng)大程度上，從它的缺點(diǎn)和局限上看，現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題是：如果巴黎公社成功擊敗了反革命力量的反攻，并且存活了下來(lái)，那么它將隨即面對(duì)更為艱巨的挑戰(zhàn)：重組和改造整個(gè)社會(huì)，這不僅僅局限于首都巴黎（在這兒它輝煌的占據(jù)過(guò)權(quán)力，但持續(xù)時(shí)間太短）。它將不得不在這個(gè)仍主要由小農(nóng)（農(nóng)民）組成的國(guó)度里，建立一個(gè)全新不同的經(jīng)濟(jì)：社會(huì)主義經(jīng)濟(jì)；它將不得不克服深刻的、傳統(tǒng)思維里根深蒂固的不平等和壓迫，尤其是幾千年來(lái)一直套在婦女身上的鎖鏈。在這里，巴黎公社的弱點(diǎn)和局限再次被顯現(xiàn)：婦女在巴黎公社的創(chuàng)建和保衛(wèi)過(guò)程中擔(dān)當(dāng)了至關(guān)重要的角色，發(fā)揮了英勇的作用，但是盡管如此，她們還是在巴黎公社中處于從屬地位。
　　
　　---------------------------原文---------------------
　　II.
　　The First Stage of Communist Revolution
　　The Paris Commune was a first great attempt to scale the heights of human emancipation, and it was a harbinger of the future, but it lacked the necessary leadership and was not guided by the necessary scientific understanding to be able to withstand the inevitable counter-revolutionary onslaughts of the forces of the old order and then to carry out a thoroughgoing transformation of society, in all spheres: economic, social, political, cultural, and ideological. Some who approach the experience of the Commune with a romanticized, instead of a scientific, outlook and method like to cite the lack of an organized vanguard leadership, unified on the basis of a scientific, Marxist viewpoint, as one of the virtues of the Commune. But the fact is that this was one of its greatest weaknesses and one of the main factors contributing to its defeat, after only a very short period of existence. The lack of such a leadership—and the attempt to immediately implement measures which would essentially eliminate any institutionalized leadership—is one of the main reasons why the Commune did not sufficiently suppress organized forces which were determined to wipe out the Commune and to ensure that the specter of communist revolution—so terrible from the standpoint of exploiters and oppressors—would never rise again. In particular, as Marx pointed out, the Communards failed to march immediately on the stronghold of the counter-revolution, in the nearby city of Versailles; and so the counter-revolution was able to gather its strength, march on Paris, and deliver the death-blow to the Commune, slaughtering thousands of its most determined fighters in the process.
　　
　　But beyond the immediate consequences that flowed, to a significant degree, from the shortcomings and limitations of the Paris Commune, the reality is this: Had the Commune defeated the attacks of the counter-revolution and survived, it would then have faced the even greater challenge of reorganizing and transforming the whole society, and not just the capital of Paris, where it held power for a brilliant but all too brief period. It would have had to create a radically new and different economy, a socialist economy, in a country still made up largely of small farmers (peasants), and it would have had to overcome profound and tradition-steeped inequality and oppression, in particular the chains that have bound women for thousands of years. And here again the weaknesses and limitations of the Commune stand out: Women played a vital and heroic role in the creation of the Commune and the fight to defend it, but they were nonetheless maintained in a subordinate position within the Commune.
　　 　　　
 

　　14.
　　
　　 在巴黎公社失敗不到50年后，在帝國(guó)主義之間的第一次世界大戰(zhàn)期間，一場(chǎng)更猛烈、更深刻的革命變革在當(dāng)時(shí)的俄羅斯帝國(guó)爆發(fā)。這場(chǎng)革命推翻了沙皇（俄羅斯帝國(guó)世襲君主）的統(tǒng)治，隨后又推翻了資產(chǎn)階級(jí)，他們?cè)噲D跨入沙皇被推翻后的“權(quán)力真空”，攫取社會(huì)的控制權(quán)。通過(guò)這場(chǎng)由列寧領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的革命，蘇聯(lián)成為世界上第一個(gè)社會(huì)主義國(guó)家，盡管列寧本人在1924年去世，但此后的數(shù)十年間，蘇聯(lián)一直在進(jìn)行著社會(huì)主義改造，在此期間，蘇聯(lián)遭遇了國(guó)內(nèi)外反革命勢(shì)力的殘酷威脅和反復(fù)攻擊，包括納粹德國(guó)在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)期間對(duì)它的大規(guī)模入侵，這場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)奪去了2000萬(wàn)蘇聯(lián)公民的生命，并對(duì)它造成了巨大的破壞。
　　
　　 在領(lǐng)導(dǎo)俄國(guó)革命時(shí)，在踏出奪取和鞏固政權(quán)并走上社會(huì)主義變革之路的第一步時(shí)，列寧在馬克思取得科學(xué)突破的基礎(chǔ)上往前更進(jìn)了一步，繼續(xù)發(fā)展鮮活的馬克思主義科學(xué)。他從巴黎公社，還有其它人類社會(huì)歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)，乃至更廣闊范圍上的自然界那汲取教訓(xùn)。非常重要的一點(diǎn)是，列寧系統(tǒng)化了如下的認(rèn)識(shí)：為了使人民大眾不斷覺(jué)醒起來(lái)進(jìn)而推翻資產(chǎn)階級(jí)統(tǒng)治，實(shí)施根本的社會(huì)變革，朝著在世界范圍內(nèi)實(shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義的終極目標(biāo)前進(jìn)，一個(gè)具有先鋒作用的共產(chǎn)主義政黨是非常必要的。
　　
　　 列寧也利用和發(fā)展了馬克思在總結(jié)巴黎公社慘痛教訓(xùn)時(shí)所得出的認(rèn)識(shí)：在進(jìn)行共產(chǎn)主義革命之時(shí)，是不能去利用舊有的國(guó)家機(jī)器（它們是服務(wù)于資本主義制度的）；必須打破和摧毀這個(gè)國(guó)家并代之以一個(gè)新的國(guó)度：在現(xiàn)實(shí)中有資產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政的地方，有必要建立起屬于正日益上升的革命階級(jí)的政治統(tǒng)治，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政，作為一種完全不同的國(guó)家形態(tài)，將使越來(lái)越多的人民大眾進(jìn)入到社會(huì)革命變革的進(jìn)程之中。這種革命專政是必要的，列寧強(qiáng)調(diào)，他總結(jié)出兩個(gè)原因：
　　
　　 1）、防止剝削者——舊的和新的，國(guó)內(nèi)的和國(guó)外的——破壞和淹沒(méi)人民大眾建立一個(gè)全新社會(huì)和世界，并實(shí)現(xiàn)馬克思所說(shuō)的“四個(gè)全”成就的抗?fàn)帯?BR>　　
　　-------------------原文——————————
　　In less than 50 years after the defeat of the Paris Commune, beginning in the midst of the first world war among imperialists, a much more sweeping and deep-going revolutionary transformation was carried out in what had been the Russian empire. This revolution overthrew the Tsar (Russian monarch) who was the hereditary ruler of this empire, and then overthrew the capitalist class which attempted to step into the “vacuum of power” and seize control of society once the Tsar had been toppled. Through this revolution, which was led by V.I. Lenin, the Soviet Union was brought into being as the world’s first socialist state; and although Lenin himself died in 1924, for several decades after that socialist transformation was carried out in the Soviet Union, even as it faced relentless threats and repeated attacks from counter-revolutionary forces, inside and outside the country, including the massive invasion of the Soviet Union by the imperialist Nazi Germany during World War 2, which cost the lives of more than 20 million Soviet citizens and brought great destruction to the country.
　　
　　In leading the Russian revolution, in its first great step of seizing and consolidating political power and embarking on the road of socialist transformation, Lenin proceeded on the basis of the scientific breakthroughs that Marx had achieved, and he continued to develop that living science of Marxism. He drew important lessons from the Paris Commune, as well as from the historical experience of human society, and the natural world, more broadly. Of great importance, Lenin systematized the understanding that a vanguard communist party was essential in order to enable the masses of people to wage an increasingly conscious struggle to overthrow the rule of the capitalists and then carry out the radical transformation of society toward the ultimate goal of communism, worldwide.
　　
　　Lenin also applied and developed the understanding forged by Marx, on the basis of summing up the bitter lessons of the Paris Commune, that in carrying out the communist revolution, it is not possible to lay hold of the ready-made machinery of the old state, which served the capitalist system; it is necessary to smash and dismantle that state and replace it with a new state: In place of what is in reality the dictatorship of the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie), it is necessary to establish the political rule of the rising, revolutionary class, the dictatorship of the proletariat, as a radically different kind of state, which will increasingly involve the masses of people in carrying forward the revolutionary transformation of society. This revolutionary dictatorship is necessary, Lenin emphasized, for two basic reasons:
　　
　　1) To prevent exploiters—old and new, within the country and in other parts of the world—from defeating and drowning in blood the struggle of masses of people to bring a radically new society, and world, into being, to advance toward the achievement of the “4 Alls.” 　　

　　15.
　　
　　 2）、保證人民的每一份權(quán)力，即使不平等現(xiàn)象在不同程度上，在社會(huì)主義向共產(chǎn)主義過(guò)渡的不同階段，依然存在于人民不同階層之間。與此同時(shí)，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政的目的是繼續(xù)鏟除，并最終超越這樣的社會(huì)不平等現(xiàn)象，進(jìn)而在全世界范圍內(nèi)達(dá)到這樣一點(diǎn)：那兒，壓迫性的社會(huì)分化將不再存在，國(guó)家，作為法律和權(quán)力實(shí)施的制度化工具，將不再是必要的，而國(guó)家本身也將被人民的自我管理所取代，沒(méi)有階級(jí)差別和社會(huì)對(duì)立。
　　
　　 再次引述我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨章前沿所說(shuō)的：
　　
　　 “人類社會(huì)以前所有的國(guó)家一直都在拓展和保護(hù)剝削關(guān)系：他們一直都是剝削階級(jí)占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位，并且一直保護(hù)自己避免任何對(duì)這種關(guān)系的根本性改變。無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政，相反，目的是國(guó)家本身的最終廢除，一切階級(jí)差別的廢除，一切導(dǎo)致剝削與壓迫，導(dǎo)致人們之間反復(fù)出現(xiàn)破壞性沖突的的對(duì)立社會(huì)關(guān)系的廢除。而且，為了繼續(xù)朝這一目標(biāo)前進(jìn)，無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政必須越來(lái)越多的吸取社會(huì)不同階層中的民眾，讓他們有意義地加入將社會(huì)不斷往前推進(jìn)，進(jìn)而在全世界實(shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義偉大目標(biāo)的進(jìn)程當(dāng)中。”
　　
　　 在列寧領(lǐng)導(dǎo)這個(gè)新蘇維埃國(guó)家的短短數(shù)年間，他領(lǐng)導(dǎo)了經(jīng)濟(jì)、包括整個(gè)社會(huì)的轉(zhuǎn)型，并且給世界各地的革命斗爭(zhēng)提供理論指導(dǎo)和積極的支持。但是，隨著他在1924年病逝，在那個(gè)被力量強(qiáng)大的帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家和其它反動(dòng)國(guó)家占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位的罪惡世界里，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)這一進(jìn)程繼續(xù)往前的挑戰(zhàn)落到其它的蘇聯(lián)共產(chǎn)黨人頭上，尤其是約瑟夫.斯大林，他成為蘇共新的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人。這是歷史上一個(gè)前所未有的經(jīng)歷：幾十年來(lái)，經(jīng)濟(jì)以及廣泛的社會(huì)關(guān)系——包括男女之間的社會(huì)關(guān)系、不同民族之間的關(guān)系，政治體制，社會(huì)文化和人民大眾的世界觀都發(fā)生了深刻的變化。在各個(gè)領(lǐng)域，人民的生活水平都有了顯著的改善，包括醫(yī)療、住房、教育和掃盲。但更為重要的是，剝削和古老傳統(tǒng)的重?fù)?dān)開(kāi)始從人民大眾身上解除。生活和社會(huì)的各個(gè)領(lǐng)域都取得了巨大的成就，但同時(shí)可以預(yù)料的是，這兒也有許多很現(xiàn)實(shí)的局限、缺點(diǎn)和錯(cuò)誤——其中一些歸因于數(shù)十年來(lái)蘇聯(lián)一直是世界上唯一的社會(huì)主義國(guó)家（直到二戰(zhàn)后），另外一些歸因于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)該進(jìn)程的那些人的世界觀、方法和手段出現(xiàn)了問(wèn)題，尤其是斯大林。依照必要的歷史論觀點(diǎn)，應(yīng)用科學(xué)的、唯物的和辯證的方法和手段，并反對(duì)那種看起來(lái)毫無(wú)休止的對(duì)社會(huì)主義和共產(chǎn)主義的曲解和誹謗，社會(huì)主義在蘇聯(lián)的歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)清晰的表明它依舊是非常積極的，盡管也有一些不容否認(rèn)的消極影響——所有這一切我們都要深刻學(xué)習(xí)和吸取教訓(xùn)。
　　
　　--------------------------原文---------------------
　　2) To guarantee the rights of the people at every point, even with the inequalities that will remain, to varying degrees, between different sections of the people during various phases of the socialist transition to communism, at the same time as the goal of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to continue to uproot and eventually move beyond such social inequalities and to reach the point, throughout the world, where oppressive social divisions can no longer arise, and the state, as an institutionalized instrument of enforcement of laws and of rights, will no longer be necessary, and the state itself will be replaced by the self-administration by the people, without class distinctions and social antagonisms.
　　
　　To quote once again from the Preamble to the Constitution of our Party:
　　
　　All previous states have served the extension and defense of relations of exploitation; they have enforced the domination of exploiting classes, and have fortified themselves against any fundamental changes in these relations. The dictatorship of the proletariat, by contrast, aims at the eventual abolition of the state itself, with the abolition of class distinctions and all antagonistic social relations leading to exploitation, oppression, and the constant regeneration of destructive conflicts among people. And, in order to continue advancing toward that objective, the dictatorship of the proletariat must increasingly draw the masses of people, from many different sections of society, into meaningful involvement in the process of running society and carrying forward the advance toward the ultimate goal of communism throughout the world.
　　
　　In the few short years during which Lenin headed the new Soviet state, he led it in embarking on the transformation of the economy, and the society as a whole, and in giving theoretical guidance and active support to the revolutionary struggle throughout the world. But, with the death of Lenin in 1924, the challenge of leading this process forward, in a hostile world dominated by powerful imperialist countries and other reactionary states, fell to others in the Soviet Communist Party, and in particular to Joseph Stalin, who emerged as the leader of the Soviet Communist Party. This was an unprecedented historical experience: For several decades, the economy as well as social relations broadly—including the relations between women and men, as well as between different nationalities—and the political institutions and the culture of the society and the worldview of masses of people underwent profound changes. The standard of living of the people improved greatly and in all spheres, including health care, housing, education, and literacy. But more than that, the burden of exploitation and the weight of age-old tradition began to be lifted from the masses of people. There were great achievements in all spheres of life and society, but not surprisingly also very real limitations, shortcomings, and errors—some of them owing to the situation the Soviet Union found itself in, as the world’s only socialist state for several decades (until after World War 2), and some of it owing to problems in the outlook, approach, and method of those leading this process, in particular Stalin. With the necessary historical perspective, and the application of a scientific, materialist and dialectical, approach and method—and in opposition to the seemingly endless emission of distortions and slanders spewed forth against socialism and communism—the conclusion can, and must, be clearly drawn that the historical experience of socialism in the Soviet Union (and even more so in China, after socialism was established there) was decidedly positive, even with undeniable negative aspects—all of which must be deeply learned from.
　
　　16.
　　
　　 毛~澤東領(lǐng)導(dǎo)了中國(guó)二十多年來(lái)的革命斗爭(zhēng)，在1949年中華人民共和國(guó)建立之時(shí)，這一革命的第一階段達(dá)到了高潮。理解這一點(diǎn)非常重要，必須要記住：傳統(tǒng)的觀點(diǎn)上，包括共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)本身的觀點(diǎn)，在中國(guó)這樣一個(gè)國(guó)家，通過(guò)革命達(dá)到社會(huì)主義并成為世界范圍內(nèi)為最終實(shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義而進(jìn)行的斗爭(zhēng)的一部分，是不可能的，可就是在毛澤東的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，中國(guó)采用了這樣的方式（并獲得了成功）。這不僅僅因?yàn)橹袊?guó)是一個(gè)落后的、擁有大量農(nóng)民的國(guó)家（這點(diǎn)與1917年革命時(shí)的俄羅斯相像），還因?yàn)橹袊?guó)本身不是一個(gè)資本主義國(guó)家；它被其它資本主義-帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家所控制，中國(guó)的經(jīng)濟(jì)和整個(gè)社會(huì)都屈從于外國(guó)帝國(guó)主義的統(tǒng)治和它們資本積累的需要。也因?yàn)槿绱耍I(lǐng)導(dǎo)的中國(guó)革命并沒(méi)有立即走向社會(huì)主義，而是建立了一個(gè)廣泛的統(tǒng)一戰(zhàn)線，反對(duì)帝國(guó)主義和封建主義（和與帝國(guó)主義、封建主義都有聯(lián)系的官僚資本主義）；這場(chǎng)革命并非立足于城市，依靠那兒少量的工人階級(jí)，而是扎根于廣大農(nóng)村地區(qū)的農(nóng)民階層，通過(guò)打一場(chǎng)長(zhǎng)期的革命戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，從農(nóng)村包圍城市，并最終打敗了盤(pán)踞于城市之中的反動(dòng)勢(shì)力，在全國(guó)內(nèi)贏得了政權(quán)，進(jìn)而完成了這場(chǎng)革命的第一個(gè)階段，并向社會(huì)主義道路敞開(kāi)了懷抱。
　　
　　 然而，正如毛本人所強(qiáng)調(diào)的，雖然革命取得了重要的歷史性勝利，但這還只是漫漫征途的第一步。挑戰(zhàn)馬上就出現(xiàn)，是繼續(xù)向前走上社會(huì)主義道路，還是（停滯不前）甚至革命的初步勝利都可能失去——這個(gè)國(guó)家將再次處于剝削階級(jí)和外國(guó)帝國(guó)主義列強(qiáng)的統(tǒng)治之下。但這還不是全部的挑戰(zhàn)：在建設(shè)社會(huì)主義經(jīng)濟(jì)的過(guò)程中，在社會(huì)其他領(lǐng)域也發(fā)生相應(yīng)變化的過(guò)程中，在毛總結(jié)此初級(jí)階段經(jīng)驗(yàn)的過(guò)程中，他越來(lái)越意識(shí)到，有必要發(fā)展一種不同于“蘇聯(lián)模式”的新方法來(lái)進(jìn)行社會(huì)主義改造。毛這樣的方法，給基層人民和各地方政府賦予了更多的主動(dòng)權(quán)，首先，它對(duì)技術(shù)不夠重視——雖然毛認(rèn)為先進(jìn)技術(shù)的發(fā)展是非常重要的——但是，這種方法首先專注的（也是最專注的）是人民大眾的自覺(jué)行為。這些在“抓革命促生產(chǎn)”這條口號(hào)中得到了集中展現(xiàn)，它為經(jīng)濟(jì)建設(shè)提供了基本的指導(dǎo)方針，在這種方式下經(jīng)濟(jì)建設(shè)將促使社會(huì)繼續(xù)在社會(huì)主義道路上不斷前進(jìn)，相互加強(qiáng)生產(chǎn)關(guān)系和政治、思想上層建筑的革命性變革。
　　
　　------------------------原文------------------
　　It was Mao Tsetung who led the revolutionary struggle in China over several decades, culminating in the victory of the first stage of this revolution with the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. To understand the immense importance of this, it is necessary to keep in mind that conventional wisdom, including within the communist movement, held that, in a country like China, a revolution could not be made that would lead to socialism and become part of the worldwide struggle aiming for the ultimate goal of communism, in the way this was actually done with Mao’s leadership. It was not only that China was a backward, largely peasant country (this had been true of Russia as well, at the time of the 1917 revolution there), but China was not a capitalist country itself; it was dominated by other, capitalist-imperialist countries, and the economy and the society overall in China were bent to the imperatives of foreign imperialist domination and capitalist accumulation serving those imperialists. Along with that, the revolution Mao led in China did not immediately aim for socialism but instead built a broad united front against imperialism and feudalism (and bureaucratic capital linked to imperialism and feudalism); and this revolution was carried out not by centering it in the cities, among the small working class there, but through waging a protracted revolutionary war, based among the peasantry in the vast countryside, surrounding the cities from the countryside and then finally defeating the reactionary forces in their strongholds in the cities and winning power throughout the country, completing the first stage of this revolution and opening the road to socialism.
　　
　　Yet, as Mao himself emphasized, as important and historic as this victory was, it was still only the first step in a long march. The challenge had to be immediately faced of moving forward on the socialist road, or even the initial victories of the revolution would be lost—the country would come under the domination of exploiting classes and of foreign imperialist powers once again. But that was not all: As the process of building a socialist economy and carrying out corresponding changes in the other spheres of society was undertaken, and as Mao summed up this initial experience, he increasingly came to the realization that it was necessary to develop a different approach to socialist transformation than the “model” of what had been done in the Soviet Union. Mao’s approach to this gave more initiative to people on the basic levels and to the local areas, and above all it put emphasis not so much on technology—although the development of more advanced technology was recognized by Mao as very important—but, first and foremost, on the conscious initiative of the masses of people. This became concentrated in the slogan grasp revolution and promote production, which provided the basic guideline for carrying out economic construction in a way that would strengthen the basis for the continued advance on the socialist road and would be mutually reinforcing with the revolutionary transformation of the production relations and the political and ideological superstructure.

　　
　　17.
　　
　　 所有的這些都與毛~澤東對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義革命事業(yè)所作的最重要和決定性的貢獻(xiàn)相關(guān)，或者本身就是這些貢獻(xiàn)發(fā)展進(jìn)程中的一部分，這些貢獻(xiàn)包括：在無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政下朝共產(chǎn)主義目標(biāo)繼續(xù)革命的理論，以及領(lǐng)導(dǎo)了將此理論轉(zhuǎn)化為強(qiáng)大的人民大眾革命運(yùn)動(dòng)，這場(chǎng)革命運(yùn)動(dòng)始于1960年代中期，延續(xù)了十年，即“文化大革命”。毛再次打破了共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的“公認(rèn)看法”，作出了個(gè)開(kāi)創(chuàng)性的分析：在整個(gè)社會(huì)主義階段，始終有可以導(dǎo)致社會(huì)主義革命失敗的物質(zhì)條件存在。經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)內(nèi)部的矛盾，上層建筑內(nèi)部的矛盾，充當(dāng)基礎(chǔ)和上層建筑的不同社會(huì)主義國(guó)家之間關(guān)系上的矛盾，還有任何時(shí)候來(lái)自于帝國(guó)主義和反動(dòng)勢(shì)力國(guó)家的影響、壓力和赤裸裸的攻擊，都會(huì)在一個(gè)社會(huì)主義國(guó)家內(nèi)部制造階級(jí)差別和階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)；這些矛盾會(huì)不斷導(dǎo)致一個(gè)國(guó)家在社會(huì)主義道路與資本主義道路之間徘徊，更具體的說(shuō)，就是這些矛盾會(huì)反復(fù)的在社會(huì)主義內(nèi)部制造出一個(gè)有抱負(fù)的資產(chǎn)階級(jí)，他們會(huì)集中出現(xiàn)在共產(chǎn)黨內(nèi)部，尤其是他們中最高級(jí)別的人，他們以共產(chǎn)主義之名采納修正主義路線和正常，在實(shí)際上擁抱帝國(guó)主義，并致使所有事物回到資本主義。毛將這些修正主義者稱為“走資本主義道路的當(dāng)權(quán)派”，他將共產(chǎn)主義與修正主義之間的斗爭(zhēng)，確定為上層建筑中走社會(huì)主義道路派和走資派之間矛盾和斗爭(zhēng)的集中表現(xiàn)。毛認(rèn)識(shí)到，并強(qiáng)調(diào)：只要這些物質(zhì)條件和與之對(duì)應(yīng)的思想依就存在，就不能保證革命不會(huì)倒退，資本主義不能復(fù)辟，沒(méi)有容易和簡(jiǎn)單的手段可以阻止這些發(fā)生，也沒(méi)有其它解決方案，除了繼續(xù)革命，直到最終，隨著革命在全世界的推進(jìn)，它會(huì)根除和消滅一切社會(huì)不平等和導(dǎo)致這種危險(xiǎn)產(chǎn)生的資本主義殘余。
　　
　　 再次，很難夸大這個(gè)由毛提出的理論分析的重要性——對(duì)于是否，以及為什么在社會(huì)主義社會(huì)有資本主義復(fù)辟的危險(xiǎn)這樣的問(wèn)題，該理論清除了大量的混亂認(rèn)識(shí)；在發(fā)動(dòng)大眾繼續(xù)在社會(huì)主義道路上前行，反對(duì)修正主義勢(shì)力（它們的目的與行為正導(dǎo)致資本主義的復(fù)辟）的運(yùn)動(dòng)上，該理論提供了基本的理論指導(dǎo)。中國(guó)的文化大革命活生生的體現(xiàn)了這樣一個(gè)規(guī)模龐大的革命動(dòng)員運(yùn)動(dòng)，數(shù)以億計(jì)的人一起辯論和爭(zhēng)斗著那些對(duì)社會(huì)發(fā)展方向和世界革命有決定性影響的問(wèn)題。十年來(lái)，這種大規(guī)模的運(yùn)動(dòng)成功的阻擋了那些資本主義復(fù)辟勢(shì)力（包括一些中共高級(jí)官員，比如xxx），使之處于防守地位。但是在1976年毛去世后不久，----(敏感內(nèi)容刪除)-------——并在中國(guó)恢復(fù)了資本主義制度。這一切都不幸地，活生生的演示了毛所指出的那種危險(xiǎn)，而這種危險(xiǎn)的根基毛也曾深刻的分析過(guò)。
　　
　　--------------------------原文---------------------------
　　All this was related to, and part of the process of development of, Mao’s most important and decisive contribution to the cause of communist revolution: the theory of continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, toward the final goal of communism, and Mao’s leadership in translating this theory into a powerful revolutionary movement of masses of people, during the course of the Cultural Revolution in China, for a decade beginning in the mid-1960s. Breaking once again with the “received wisdom” of the communist movement, Mao made the pathbreaking analysis that throughout the socialist period there would remain the material conditions that would pose the danger of defeat for the socialist revolution. Contradictions within the economic base, in the superstructure, and in the relation between base and superstructure of the socialist countries themselves, as well as the influence, pressure, and outright attacks from the remaining imperialist and reactionary states at any given time, would give rise to class differences and class struggle within a socialist country; these contradictions would constantly pose the possibility of society being led on either the socialist or the capitalist road, and more specifically would repeatedly regenerate an aspiring bourgeois class, within socialist society itself, which would find its most concentrated expression among those within the Communist Party, and particularly at its highest levels, who adopted revisionist lines and policies, which in the name of communism would actually accommodate to imperialism and lead things back to capitalism. Mao identified these revisionists as “people in authority taking the capitalist road,” and he pinpointed the struggle between communism and revisionism as the concentrated expression, in the superstructure, of the contradiction and struggle in socialist society between the socialist road and the capitalist road. Mao recognized, and emphasized, that so long as these material conditions and their ideological reflections existed, there could be no guarantee against the reversal of the revolution and the restoration of capitalism, no simple and easy means of preventing this, no solution other than to continue the revolution to restrict and finally, together with the advance of the revolution throughout the world, uproot and eliminate the social inequalities and other vestiges of capitalism that gave rise to this danger.
　　
　　Again, it is hard to overstate the importance of this theoretical analysis by Mao—which cleared up a great deal of confusion as to whether, and why, there was a danger of capitalist restoration in socialist society, and which provided fundamental guidance in mobilizing masses to advance on the socialist road in opposition to revisionist forces whose orientation and actions were leading precisely toward such a capitalist restoration. The Cultural Revolution in China was the living embodiment of such a mass revolutionary mobilization, in which tens and hundreds of millions of people debated and struggled over questions bearing decisively on the direction of society and of the world revolution. For ten years, this mass upsurge succeeded in holding back, and putting on the defensive, the forces of capitalist restoration, including high officials in the Chinese Communist Party such as xxx. But shortly after the death of Mao in 1976, -------------------. This was, unfortunately, a living demonstration of the very danger that Mao had so sharply pointed to, and whose basis he had so penetratingly analyzed.
　　 　　

　　18.
　　
　　III.
　　一個(gè)階段的終結(jié)——以及從這些歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)中，我們要吸取什么，拋棄什么。
　　
　　
　　 隨著修~正主義在C~的政變和資本主義的復(fù)辟，以及20年前修正主義勢(shì)力在蘇聯(lián)的抬頭，共產(chǎn)主義革命的第一階段走向了終結(jié)。就像我們?cè)诿绹?guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨的黨章中以一種基本且簡(jiǎn)單的語(yǔ)言所說(shuō)的：“自革命無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)在一些國(guó)家取得政權(quán)以來(lái)，已經(jīng)過(guò)去數(shù)十年了，但是今天，無(wú)論他們貼的是什么樣的標(biāo)簽，這世界上已經(jīng)沒(méi)有社會(huì)主義國(guó)家了。”
　　
　　 更嚴(yán)重的是，社會(huì)主義和共產(chǎn)主義事業(yè)的這種挫折和蘇聯(lián)（其實(shí)很久以前它就不再是個(gè)社會(huì)主義國(guó)家了）的滅亡，已經(jīng)在發(fā)動(dòng)勢(shì)力中激起了鯊魚(yú)般的狂喜和癲狂，這些反動(dòng)勢(shì)力，一直以來(lái)對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義革命和對(duì)他們代表的那個(gè)社會(huì)的根本變革恨之入骨，他們不斷反復(fù)的，利用任何可能的手段，去打擊和破壞這種革命。他們變本加厲的使盡渾身解數(shù)栽贓共產(chǎn)主義和自由變革，以無(wú)情的意識(shí)形態(tài)上的攻擊去扭曲和誹謗這種革命，以企圖永遠(yuǎn)壓制革命的爆發(fā)；他們宣傳資本主義制度的勝利是不可逆的；他們將那個(gè)實(shí)現(xiàn)完全不同的、更好的世界的夢(mèng)想——具體指世界范圍內(nèi)的共產(chǎn)主義革命，描述為一個(gè)噩夢(mèng)；他們將這個(gè)真實(shí)的、無(wú)窮噩夢(mèng)般的現(xiàn)行體制，粉飾為人類的最高可能形式。
　　
　　--------------------------原文---------------------- 　　

作者：線專川上　回復(fù)日期：2010-03-04　22:17:24　　　
 回復(fù) 　　
 

　　事實(shí)證明上段的原文貼不了~~~
　　
　　19.
　　
　　 想象一下，堅(jiān)信神創(chuàng)論的基督教原教旨主義者攫取了政權(quán)，在科學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)里和整個(gè)社會(huì)中，持續(xù)打壓進(jìn)化論的知識(shí)。想象一下，他們居然處死和監(jiān)禁那些堅(jiān)持向大眾教授進(jìn)化論知識(shí)的最杰出的科學(xué)家和教育家，他們藐視和辱罵眾所周知的進(jìn)化論知識(shí)，譴責(zé)和嘲弄后者是一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤和危險(xiǎn)的理論，這只是因?yàn)楹笳哌`背了圣經(jīng)創(chuàng)始故事的所謂“真理”、（作為）“自然法”的宗教觀念和“神靈保佑的秩序”。繼續(xù)思考類似情況，想象一下，許多知識(shí)“當(dāng)局”以及后頭的跟風(fēng)者，像個(gè)小丑一樣蹦跳著：“相信進(jìn)化論是一個(gè)證據(jù)充分的科學(xué)和迫使其他人相信與此的行為，不僅僅是幼稚的，也是種犯罪。”他們?nèi)绱诵Q，“我們現(xiàn)在可以看到這是一個(gè)‘公理’，沒(méi)有人會(huì)質(zhì)疑它（那我們?yōu)槭裁促|(zhì)問(wèn)？），進(jìn)化論只是代表了一種世界觀，它將給人類帶來(lái)災(zāi)難性的后果。我們會(huì)被那些信誓旦旦宣傳此觀點(diǎn)的人卷入其中。我們可以認(rèn)識(shí)到：一切現(xiàn)存事物，或者曾經(jīng)存在過(guò)的事物，沒(méi)有（造物主這個(gè)）‘智能設(shè)計(jì)師’的指引，都不能存在。”最后，再想象在這種境況下，在投降和譴責(zé)的合奏下，甚至許多更有見(jiàn)識(shí)的人都最終迷失了方向，士氣低落，被迫限于沉默（本來(lái)無(wú)論是逆來(lái)順受還是大聲喊出，他們都不會(huì)沉陷于此）。
　　
　　【最后一大句翻譯比較糾結(jié)】
　　
　　Imagine a situation in which Christian fundamentalist creationists have seized power, in the academies of science and in society overall, and have proceeded to suppress knowledge of evolution. Imagine that they go so far as to execute and imprison the most prominent scientists and educators who had insisted on teaching evolution and bringing knowledge of this to the public, and they heap scorn and abuse on the well-established scientific fact of evolution, denouncing and ridiculing it as a flawed and dangerous theory which runs counter to well-known “truth” of the biblical creation story and to religious notions of “natural law” and the “divinely ordained order.” And, to continue the analogy, imagine that in this situation many intellectual “authorities,” and others following in their wake, jump on the bandwagon: “It was not only naïve but criminal to believe that evolution was a well-documented scientific theory, and to force that belief on people,” they declare. “Now we can see that it is ‘common wisdom,’ which no one questions (so why should we?), that evolution embodies a worldview and leads to actions that are disastrous for human beings. We were taken in by the arrogant assurance of those who propagated this notion. We can see that everything that exists, or has existed, could not have come into being without the guiding hand of an ‘intelligent designer.’” And, finally, imagine that in this situation, even many of those who once knew better become disoriented and demoralized, cowed into silence where they do not join in, meekly or loudly, in the chorus of capitulation and denunciation.
　　 　　

　　20.
　　
　　 社會(huì)主義暫時(shí)的失敗和共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段的結(jié)束有其自身的表現(xiàn)特征，以及與其相對(duì)應(yīng)的后果。與其它事情一道，它降低了人們的視野和理想：即使那些一度有希望看得更高、更遠(yuǎn)的人，在短期內(nèi)，都接受了這樣一種觀點(diǎn)——實(shí)際上或至少可預(yù)見(jiàn)的將來(lái)內(nèi)——現(xiàn)行帝國(guó)主義和其他剝削者的統(tǒng)治都是不可替代的。人們所能達(dá)到的最大期盼和目標(biāo)也只是在此種制度的框架內(nèi)做一些次要的調(diào)整。另外的想法——尤其是引導(dǎo)一場(chǎng)打破現(xiàn)行體制，建立一個(gè)根本不同的共產(chǎn)主義世界的企圖——是不現(xiàn)實(shí)的，也必將招致災(zāi)難性的后果。
　　
　　 同時(shí)，在由社會(huì)主義的傾覆和隨后共產(chǎn)主義的挫折所制造的“真空”中，伴隨著帝國(guó)主義持續(xù)并不斷加強(qiáng)的掠奪行為，伴隨著全世界數(shù)十億人民遭受到的動(dòng)蕩、混亂和壓迫，宗教原教旨主義的勢(shì)力得到了極大的增強(qiáng)，他們?cè)谑澜绺鞯匕切┰馐軌浩茸顬閲?yán)重的人群中，不斷有組織的出現(xiàn)。帝國(guó)主義強(qiáng)盜、民眾屠夫和狂熱的原教旨主義者——前者勢(shì)力更大，危害也更大，并對(duì)后者產(chǎn)生進(jìn)一步刺激，都代表了（人類社會(huì)中）最黑暗的陰暗面和奴役與無(wú)知的枷鎖，它們即使相互對(duì)立，也會(huì)增加各自的罪惡。
　　
　　 但是所有這一切都沒(méi)有消除掉這樣一些現(xiàn)實(shí)：世界在這個(gè)資本主義-帝國(guó)主義制度統(tǒng)治下，大多數(shù)人都處于日常恐怖之中的現(xiàn)實(shí)——或者，共產(chǎn)主義實(shí)際能夠帶領(lǐng)人類實(shí)現(xiàn)突破，并在共產(chǎn)主義革命道路上繼續(xù)前行的現(xiàn)實(shí)。
　　
　　-----------------------原文-------------------------
　　The temporary defeat of socialism and the end of the first stage of the communist revolution has had many features and consequences that are analogous to such a situation. Among other things, it has led to lowered sights and low dreams: Even among many people who once would have known better and would have striven higher, it has led, in the short run, to acceptance of the idea that—in reality and at least for the foreseeable future—there can be no alternative to the world as it is, under the domination of imperialism and other exploiters. That the most one can hope for and work for are some secondary adjustments within the framework of accommodation to this system. That anything else—and especially the attempt to bring about a revolutionary rupture out of the confines of this system, aiming toward a radically different, communist world—is unrealistic and is bound to bring disaster.
　　At the same time, in the “vacuum” created by the reversal of socialism and accompanying setbacks for communism, and with the continuing, and even heightening, depredations carried out by imperialism—with all the upheaval, chaos, and oppression this means for literally billions of people throughout the world—there has been a significant growth of religious fundamentalism and its organized expression in many parts of the world, including among the desperately oppressed. Imperialist marauders and mass murderers, and fanatical religious fundamentalists—the former more powerful and doing greater harm, and in so doing giving further impetus to the latter, but both representing a dark veil, and very real chains, of enslavement and enforced ignorance, reinforcing each other even when they oppose each other.
　　But all this has not done away with reality: the reality of how the world is, under the domination of this capitalist-imperialist system and the daily horror this involves for the great majority of humanity—or the reality of what communism actually represents for humanity and the possibility of making new breakthroughs and advances on the road of communist revolution.
　　 　　

　　21.
　　
　　 當(dāng)我們以科學(xué)的觀點(diǎn)和方法審視第一批社會(huì)主義國(guó)家和共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段的豐富經(jīng)驗(yàn)時(shí)，我們可以發(fā)現(xiàn)，問(wèn)題并不像我們一直以來(lái)所遭受的指責(zé)那樣：共產(chǎn)主義革命試圖推翻資本主義的行為，是一種尋求克服（人類本身）一些不變特質(zhì)的徒勞行徑，這些不變特質(zhì)導(dǎo)致人們把追求個(gè)人利益作為“底線”動(dòng)機(jī)，而這種根本性的動(dòng)機(jī)必然是推動(dòng)人類社會(huì)發(fā)展的指導(dǎo)性原則。共產(chǎn)主義革命違背了這種“人性”，進(jìn)而將人類社會(huì)拖入災(zāi)難之中，使人們成為暴政的犧牲品。這種指責(zé)的問(wèn)題在于——隨著采取共產(chǎn)主義觀點(diǎn)的人們的主動(dòng)性越來(lái)越強(qiáng)，共產(chǎn)主義革命將會(huì)在社會(huì)環(huán)境和人民大眾中誘發(fā)出深刻的變化——革命不再是發(fā)生在真空之中，不再認(rèn)為人民大眾是白板一塊而是條件的產(chǎn)物，人民已經(jīng)脫離了舊社會(huì)，雖然留有舊社會(huì)的一些“胎記”（這些都是數(shù)千多年來(lái)的傳統(tǒng)和人與人間已理性化的壓迫關(guān)系的產(chǎn)物）。通過(guò)這些革命而建立的新的社會(huì)主義社會(huì)，會(huì)一直存在于這個(gè)依然由帝國(guó)主義占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位的世界（帝國(guó)主義在經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治和軍事上依舊擁有非常強(qiáng)大的力量）。
　　
　　 由于馬克思和列寧對(duì)這些（共產(chǎn)主義）基本術(shù)語(yǔ)的充分理解，已經(jīng)毛對(duì)此更充分的挖掘和解釋，社會(huì)主義本身并不是終結(jié)，而是通向共產(chǎn)主義的過(guò)渡階段，共產(chǎn)主義不能單獨(dú)在這個(gè)或那個(gè)國(guó)家實(shí)現(xiàn)，它只能在世界范圍內(nèi)統(tǒng)一實(shí)現(xiàn)，前提是世界各地所有的反動(dòng)統(tǒng)治階級(jí)都被推翻，所有的剝削和壓迫關(guān)系都被消滅。在社會(huì)主義過(guò)渡的整個(gè)階段，由于反動(dòng)國(guó)家依舊繼續(xù)存在，并隨時(shí)會(huì)包圍和威脅社會(huì)主義國(guó)家，由于在生產(chǎn)關(guān)系、社會(huì)關(guān)系、政治和思想的上層結(jié)構(gòu)以及文化上的舊社會(huì)殘余在社會(huì)主義的繼續(xù)存在，甚至在社會(huì)主義最終通向共產(chǎn)主義的前進(jìn)道路上，雖然會(huì)不斷限制和改變它們的屬性，這些殘余還會(huì)存在…由于這一切，過(guò)去的勢(shì)力依舊有可能沒(méi)有消亡，并仍然強(qiáng)大，可能會(huì)奪回社會(huì)的控制權(quán)并使之倒退到原來(lái)。簡(jiǎn)而言之，因?yàn)檫@些因素，在整個(gè)社會(huì)主義過(guò)渡階段，資本主義復(fù)辟的危險(xiǎn)會(huì)繼續(xù)存在，只有通過(guò)在社會(huì)主義內(nèi)部繼續(xù)革命才能阻止這種危險(xiǎn)的發(fā)生，同時(shí)，這種繼續(xù)革命作為共產(chǎn)主義革命在全世界興起的一部分，它也會(huì)積極支持和促進(jìn)這個(gè)進(jìn)程。
　　
　　-----------------------------原文----------------------
　　When we examine, with a scientific outlook and method, the rich experience of the first socialist countries and the first stage of the communist revolution overall, we can see that the problem is not, as has been constantly drummed at us, that the communist revolution, in attempting to do away with capitalism, was seeking in vain to overcome some unchangeable trait that causes people to pursue selfish ends as their “bottom line” motivation, a motivation which must be the guiding and driving principle of human society, lest it violate “human nature” and thereby plunge society into catastrophe and subject the people to tyranny. The problem has been that—while it has brought about profound changes, in circumstances and in people, as a result of the increasingly conscious initiative of people taking up the communist viewpoint—this revolution has taken place not in a vacuum, and with people as a “blank slate,” but as conditions and people have emerged out of the old society and with the “birthmarks” of that society (and of thousands of years of tradition embodying and rationalizing oppressive relations among people). And the new socialist societies that have been brought into being through these revolutions have existed in a world still dominated by imperialism, with its still very formidable power—economically, politically, and militarily.
　　As Marx and Lenin understood in basic terms—and as Mao discovered and explained much more fully—socialism is not an end in itself: it is not yet communism but is the transition to communism which can be achieved not in this or that country by itself, but only on a world scale, with the overthrow of all reactionary ruling classes and the abolition of all exploitative and oppressive relations everywhere. And during this entire period of socialist transition, because of the fact that reactionary states will continue to exist and for some time will encircle and threaten socialist states which are brought into being; and because of the vestiges of the old society—in the production relations, the social relations, and in the superstructure of politics, ideology, and culture—which still exist within socialist society itself, even as the advance on the socialist road leads to restricting these vestiges and transforming important aspects of them in the direction of the final goal of communism...because of all this, there remains the possibility that the hand of the past, not yet dead and still powerful, can seize hold of society and drag it back. In short, for these reasons, the danger of capitalist restoration continues to exist throughout the socialist transition period, and this can be combated and defeated only by continuing the revolution, within the socialist country itself, and doing so as part of and while actively supporting and promoting the communist revolution throughout the world.
　　 　　

　　22.
　　
　　 社會(huì)主義的傾覆和實(shí)際意義上資本主義在蘇聯(lián)和中國(guó)的復(fù)辟，并不代表“革命會(huì)虎毒食子”...并不代表一旦掌握權(quán)利后“陰謀的共產(chǎn)主義革命者將變成集權(quán)主義暴君”…并不代表“官僚主義的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者，終身攬權(quán)，扼殺和窒息（資產(chǎn)階級(jí)式）民族”…它也不是“永遠(yuǎn)等級(jí)森嚴(yán)的社會(huì)組織不可避免的結(jié)局”…也不屬于任何其它根本性錯(cuò)誤的不科學(xué)的觀念（它們最近一直被用來(lái)反復(fù)攻擊共產(chǎn)主義）。那些直接導(dǎo)致蘇聯(lián)和中國(guó)革命失敗的人，實(shí)際上是那些在革命黨內(nèi)和國(guó)家里擔(dān)任高職位的人，但他們不是一些為自身利益而瘋狂追逐權(quán)力的難辨認(rèn)的、無(wú)階級(jí)的官僚權(quán)力集團(tuán)。按照毛給他們的定性，他們是“走資本主義道路”的當(dāng)權(quán)派。他們不是共產(chǎn)主義的代表，而是資本主義的代表，尤其是那些未被徹底清除和超越的資本主義殘余的代表——這些殘余既不能在短期內(nèi)清除和超越，也不能只在這個(gè)或那個(gè)特別的社會(huì)主義國(guó)家內(nèi)部清除和超越。
　　
　　-------------------------原文------------------------------
　　The reversal of socialism and what is in fact the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and China was not a matter of “the revolution eating its own children”...of “conspiratorial communist revolutionists turning into totalitarian tyrants” once they have power...of “bureaucratic leaders, entrenched in power for life, stifling and suffocating (bourgeois) democracy”...it was not “the inevitable result of perpetuating hierarchal organization of society”...or any of the other fundamentally erroneous and unscientific notions which are so ceaselessly propagated these days in attacking communism. Those who directly brought about the defeat of the revolution in the Soviet Union and in China were in fact people with high positions in the revolutionary party and state, but they were not some group of faceless, and classless, bureaucrats, mad for power for its own sake. They were, as Mao characterized them, people in authority taking the capitalist road. They were representatives not of communism but of capitalism, and in particular the vestiges of capitalism that had not yet been thoroughly uprooted and surpassed—and could not be in the short term and within the confines of one or another particular socialist country.
　　 　　

　　23.
　　
　　 這些修正主義者往往是黨內(nèi)和國(guó)家中高級(jí)別官員這一事實(shí)，并不是共產(chǎn)主義或者共產(chǎn)主義革命以及發(fā)展到現(xiàn)階段的社會(huì)主義的基本缺陷。它也不代表（我們）需要另一種完全不同的手段和模式來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)一個(gè)截然不同的世界。這些社會(huì)主義的傾覆有更深層次的原因，它們與對(duì)社會(huì)，尤其是對(duì)社會(huì)主義是通向共產(chǎn)主義的過(guò)渡階段這一事實(shí)的科學(xué)共產(chǎn)主義理解相一致：它們主要隱含在那些從舊社會(huì)中保留下來(lái)的矛盾之中，舊社會(huì)雖然已經(jīng)被推翻，但是它的一些特質(zhì)和影響依舊未被完全根除。這些矛盾，包括腦力勞動(dòng)與體力勞動(dòng)之間的矛盾（它與社會(huì)階級(jí)分化現(xiàn)象密切關(guān)聯(lián)，且本身已構(gòu)成這種分化的一部分），和剝削階級(jí)統(tǒng)治下社會(huì)的深刻分化——一方面，這些矛盾使得組織一支共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)成為必要，不僅用來(lái)推翻資本主義制度，而且繼續(xù)推進(jìn)社會(huì)主義內(nèi)部的變革；另一方面，這些矛盾同時(shí)又促發(fā)了革命被一些在先鋒隊(duì)中處于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位的人出賣(mài)和顛覆的危險(xiǎn)。考慮到人類社會(huì)真實(shí)的歷史發(fā)展進(jìn)程和變革的可能道路（這種變革已經(jīng)發(fā)生，它相當(dāng)于自然界中的進(jìn)化，令人想到限制與改變之間的關(guān)系），（社會(huì)）實(shí)際替代的問(wèn)題——在這個(gè)現(xiàn)實(shí)的世界中，如果實(shí)際上我們已經(jīng)開(kāi)始從根本上去改變這個(gè)世界，為的是根除和消滅一切剝削和壓迫——并不是有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)權(quán)與沒(méi)有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)權(quán)的問(wèn)題，不是民主與不民主的問(wèn)題，也不是獨(dú)裁與不獨(dú)裁的問(wèn)題；而是社會(huì)主義道路與資本主義道路的問(wèn)題，是將事物引導(dǎo)到某方向或另一方向上領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力本身的問(wèn)題，是民主和集權(quán)本身的特性——它們服務(wù)并促進(jìn)于某種或另一種（社會(huì)）制度，要么加強(qiáng)和延續(xù)剝削與壓迫，要么消除剝削與壓迫，由此，最終一旦隨著共產(chǎn)主義革命在全世界的勝利，物質(zhì)和思想條件達(dá)到了那種狀態(tài)，對(duì)黨和國(guó)家而言，先鋒隊(duì)可以不再需要。
　　
　　------------------------原文------------------------
　　The fact that these revisionists were high-ranking officials in the party and state apparatus does not reveal some fundamental flaw in communism or in the communist revolution and socialist society as it has taken shape up to this point. It does not point to the need to find a whole other means and model for bringing about a radically different world. The causes of these reversals of socialism lie deeper, and they are consistent with a scientific communist understanding of society, and in particular of socialism as a transition from capitalism to communism: They reside in the contradictions that are, in significant aspects, carried forward from the old society which has been overthrown but whose features and influences have not yet been entirely transformed. These contradictions—including that between mental and manual labor, which is bound up with the division of society into classes and has itself constituted an integral and profound division in all societies ruled by exploiting classes—both give rise to the need for an organized communist vanguard to lead the revolution, not only in overthrowing the capitalist system but then in continuing the revolution in socialist society, and at the same time give rise to the danger of the revolution being betrayed and reversed by people who hold leadership positions within that vanguard. Given the actual historical development of human society and the possible pathways of change this has now opened up (recall the analogy to evolution in the natural world and the relation there between constraint and change), the question—the actual alternatives, in the real world, if we are in fact setting out to radically change this world, so as to uproot and abolish exploitation and oppression—is not leadership vs. no leadership, democracy vs. no democracy, dictatorship or no dictatorship; it is the socialist road or the capitalist road, leadership which takes things in one direction or the other, democracy—and dictatorship—which is in the service of and furthers one kind of system or the other, toward the reinforcement and perpetuation of exploitation and oppression or toward their eventual elimination, and with that, finally, the elimination of the need for a vanguard party or a state, once the material and ideological conditions that make that possible have been brought into being with the triumph of the communist revolution throughout the world.
　　 　　　
 

　　24.
　　
　　 在此總結(jié)一下：共產(chǎn)主義革命的第一階段往前邁出了一大步，并取得了難以置信的、鼓舞人心的成就，它克服了它所面對(duì)的諸多阻礙，它引導(dǎo)社會(huì)朝一個(gè)全新世界前行，在那兒，所有的剝削和壓迫關(guān)系都被最終消除，人們享有全新的自由，并且以一種人類歷史上前所未有的自覺(jué)、自愿精神，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)社會(huì)組織，繼續(xù)全世界范圍內(nèi)的社會(huì)變革。但并不奇怪的是，無(wú)論是在那些革命領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者所采取的實(shí)際步驟中，還是在他們創(chuàng)建的新社會(huì)里，或是在他們的理念和方法上，這一階段都存在著許多重大缺陷和實(shí)際錯(cuò)誤，有時(shí)甚至是非常嚴(yán)重。這些缺陷和錯(cuò)誤并不是這共產(chǎn)主義革命初次嘗試失敗的根本原因，但是它們的確加速了這種失敗，甚至是失敗的次要因素；除去這些，第一階段的整個(gè)經(jīng)歷，連同它鼓舞人心的成就和非常真實(shí)的，有時(shí)是非常嚴(yán)重的，甚至完全是次要因素的錯(cuò)誤和缺陷，我們都要進(jìn)行深刻而全面的總結(jié)，以便在我們必須面對(duì)的新形勢(shì)下繼續(xù)推進(jìn)共產(chǎn)主義革命，并且這次做得更好。
　　
　　--------------------------原文----------------------
　　In sum on this point: The first stage of the communist revolution went a long way, and achieved incredibly inspiring things, in fighting to overcome the very real obstacles it faced and to advance toward a world where all relations of exploitation and oppression would be finally eliminated and people would enjoy a whole new dimension of freedom and would undertake the organization and continuing transformation of society, throughout the world, with a conscious and voluntary initiative unprecedented in human history. But, not surprisingly, there were also significant shortcomings and real errors, sometimes very serious ones, both in the practical steps that were taken by those leading these revolutions and the new societies they brought forth, and in their conceptions and methods. These shortcomings and errors were not the cause of the defeats of the initial attempts at communist revolution, but they did contribute, even if secondarily, to that defeat; and, beyond that, this whole experience of the first stage—with both its truly inspiring achievements and its very real, at times very serious, even if overall secondary, errors and shortcomings—must be learned from deeply and all-sidedly, in order to carry forward the communist revolution in the new situation that has to be confronted, and to do even better this time.
　　 　　

　　25.
　　
　　IV. 新的挑戰(zhàn)，和新的整合
　　
　　 1976年后修正主義勢(shì)力不僅繼續(xù)標(biāo)榜為共產(chǎn)主義者，而且還更具體的自稱為毛澤東革命路線和革命遺產(chǎn)的繼承者。在這種形勢(shì)下，全世界共產(chǎn)主義者真正要做的是保持批判的精神和方法，對(duì)實(shí)際發(fā)生的事情極其原因做出客觀的、科學(xué)的分析，并且清晰地區(qū)分共產(chǎn)主義與資本主義、馬克思主義與修正主義，尤其是當(dāng)這集中體現(xiàn)在那些具體而又復(fù)雜的情況下。在如今的情勢(shì)下，這點(diǎn)并不容易做到，世界上那些將毛領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下的中國(guó)視為一種革命模式和燈塔的共產(chǎn)主義者中的大多數(shù)人都做不到這點(diǎn)，并且他們還盲目的追隨中國(guó)那些新的修正主義統(tǒng)治者，從而使革命道路陷入泥沼之中，或以某些其它種形式放棄了共產(chǎn)主義革命的世界觀和目標(biāo)。為了響應(yīng)（革命的）偉大的需要，為了拒絕順應(yīng)中國(guó)也已發(fā)生的一切（它以共產(chǎn)主義之名行資本主義之實(shí)，它劫持了革命中國(guó)和毛澤東在世界革命者和共產(chǎn)主義者中的偉大威望，它也造成了我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨內(nèi)部的大分裂），鮑勃•艾沃肯承擔(dān)了科學(xué)分析中國(guó)所發(fā)生的一切及此中原因的使命，并努力解釋（中國(guó)）修正主義政變和資本主義復(fù)辟發(fā)生的緣由。由此，他對(duì)毛進(jìn)一步發(fā)展共產(chǎn)主義革命科學(xué)和戰(zhàn)略時(shí)所用的方法做了系統(tǒng)性的說(shuō)明。在世界范圍內(nèi)毛澤東主義者處于迷惘、士氣低落、混亂之際，在共產(chǎn)主義在中國(guó)陷落之后，以及在這種陷落對(duì)世界各地的革命和共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)帶來(lái)破壞性影響的情況下，艾沃肯的工作具有重要的作用，它為重組現(xiàn)有共產(chǎn)主義者奠定了思想上和政治上的基礎(chǔ)。
　　
　　 但是現(xiàn)在需要更多的闡釋，在全面領(lǐng)導(dǎo)我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨之外，鮑勃•艾沃肯在過(guò)去30多年中，一直在對(duì)國(guó)際共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)本身和實(shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義革命的戰(zhàn)略方針進(jìn)行深入的科學(xué)分析。這項(xiàng)工作的結(jié)果是一個(gè)新的整合，是革命理論框架的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展。
　　
　　-------------------原文----------------------
　　IV.
　　The New Challenges, and the New Synthesis
　　
　　When the revisionists seized power in China in 1976 and moved to restore capitalism, for a certain period of time they not only continued to pose as communists in a general sense but more specifically claimed to be the continuators of Mao’s revolutionary line and legacy. In this situation, what communists around the world really needed to do was to maintain a critical spirit and approach, make an objective, scientific analysis of what had actually happened, and why, and clearly distinguish communism from capitalism, Marxism from revisionism, as this found concentrated expression in those concrete and complex circumstances. This was not easy to do at the time, and the majority of the communists in the world who had looked to Mao’s China as a revolutionary model and beacon failed to do this, and so either themselves blindly tailed the new revisionist rulers of China and took the path into the swamp, or in some other form abandoned the outlook and objectives of the communist revolution. Responding to the great need, refusing to go along with what had happened in China simply because it was done in the name of communism and by hijacking the great prestige that revolutionary China and Mao rightly enjoyed among revolutionaries and communists throughout the world—and at the cost of a major split within our own Party—Bob Avakian undertook the task of making a scientific analysis of what had happened in China, and why, and then fought for the understanding that indeed a revisionist coup and restoration of capitalism had taken place. And along with that, he brought forward a systematic presentation of the ways in which Mao had further developed the science and strategy of communist revolution.9 In a time of great disorientation, demoralization, and disarray in the ranks of the “Maoists” around the world, this work of Avakian’s played a crucial role in establishing the ideological and political basis for the regrouping of the remaining communists after the loss of China and the devastating effects of this on the revolutionary and communist movement throughout the world.
　　
　　But even greater needs now presented themselves. While providing overall leadership to our Party, Bob Avakian has, over the past 30 years, continued to deepen a scientific analysis of the experience of the international communist movement and the strategic approach to communist revolution. The result of this work has been the emergence of a new synthesis, a further development of the theoretical framework for carrying forward this revolution.
　　 　　

　　26.
　　
　　 如我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨章所指，世界今天的形勢(shì)——包括共產(chǎn)主義革命第一波風(fēng)潮的失敗——實(shí)際上“再次表明共產(chǎn)主義的偉大需要。”如下：
　　
　　 “雖然目前世界上沒(méi)有一個(gè)社會(huì)主義國(guó)家，但存在著社會(huì)主義革命的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，并有豐富的經(jīng)由社會(huì)主義革命第一波風(fēng)潮發(fā)展起來(lái)的革命的科學(xué)理論。但是這些共產(chǎn)主義革命理論和實(shí)踐需要進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，以滿足這種情況的挑戰(zhàn)——科學(xué)的解釋社會(huì)主義革命第一波風(fēng)潮的整個(gè)經(jīng)歷和正在發(fā)生巨大變化的世界所隱含的戰(zhàn)略意義，并從中汲取教訓(xùn)。
　　
　　 鮑勃•艾沃肯已經(jīng)承擔(dān)了這項(xiàng)責(zé)任，并且發(fā)展了一套共產(chǎn)主義工作、方式和方法體系，來(lái)響應(yīng)這些偉大的需要和挑戰(zhàn)。”
　　
　　 這套共產(chǎn)主義工作、方式和方法體系以及這個(gè)由鮑勃•艾沃肯發(fā)展起來(lái)的新整合所做的，與馬克思在共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)初始階段時(shí)所做的相類似——在新形勢(shì)下，在共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段結(jié)束之后，為革命的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展建立起一套理論框架。但是今天，這種新整合并不是強(qiáng)調(diào)要“回到繪圖板”，返回到最初點(diǎn)，仿佛既要拋棄共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)和社會(huì)主義，又要拋棄第一波共產(chǎn)主義革命風(fēng)潮中發(fā)展起來(lái)的“豐富的革命科學(xué)理論內(nèi)容”。這將是一個(gè)不科學(xué)的、實(shí)際上是反動(dòng)的方法。相反，我們需要的——也是鮑勃•艾沃肯所做的¬——以過(guò)去所有的理論和實(shí)踐為基礎(chǔ)，吸取積極的和消極的教訓(xùn)，將它們提高到一個(gè)新的、更高水平的整合狀態(tài)。
　　
　　-----------------------原文--------------------
　　As our Party’s Constitution points out, the situation in the world today—including the defeat of the initial wave of communist revolution—actually “poses, anew, the great need for communism.” And:
　　
　　“While there are no socialist states in the world, there is the experience of socialist revolutions and there is the rich body of revolutionary, scientific theory that developed through the first wave of socialist revolutions to build on. But the theory and practice of communist revolution requires advances to meet the challenges of this situation—to scientifically address, and draw the necessary lessons from, the overall experience of this first wave of socialist revolution and the strategic implications of the vast changes taking place in the world.
　　
　　Bob Avakian has taken on this responsibility, and has developed a communist body of work and method and approach that responds to these great needs and challenges.”
　　
　　In this body of work and method and approach, in the new synthesis brought forward by Bob Avakian, there is an analogy to what was done by Marx at the beginning of the communist movement—establishing in the new conditions that exist, after the end of the first stage of the communist revolution, a theoretical framework for the renewed advance of that revolution. But today, and with this new synthesis, it is most emphatically not a matter of “back to the drawing board,” as if what is called for is throwing out both the historical experience of the communist movement and the socialist societies it brought into being and “the rich body of revolutionary scientific theory” that developed through this first wave. That would represent an unscientific, and in fact a reactionary, approach. Rather, what is required—and what Avakian has undertaken—is building on all that has gone before, theoretically and practically, drawing the positive and the negative lessons from this, and raising this to a new, higher level of synthesis.
　　 　　

　　27.
　　
　　 對(duì)這個(gè)新的整合，我們黨其它的介紹文件及出版物提供了更廣泛、更系統(tǒng)化的討論。在此，我們只簡(jiǎn)略的概括下它的一些主要要素。
　　
　　 從哲學(xué)和方法論的方面來(lái)說(shuō)，這種新整合，在真正意義上從馬克思主義學(xué)說(shuō)的科學(xué)根基上對(duì)它重新進(jìn)行充分的打磨。這種整合也學(xué)習(xí)了自馬克思時(shí)代以來(lái)的豐富歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)，堅(jiān)持已被證明是根本性正確的共產(chǎn)主義的基本目的和根本原則，批評(píng)和拋棄那些已被證明是錯(cuò)誤或不再適應(yīng)的方面，將共產(chǎn)主義更加充分、更加堅(jiān)固地建立在科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)之上。
　　
　　 在人類社會(huì)向共產(chǎn)主義歷史性發(fā)展的原始構(gòu)想中，甚至包括馬克思的構(gòu)想中，都有這樣一種趨勢(shì)——雖然這種趨勢(shì)肯定是非常次要的——朝著狹隘的、線性的觀點(diǎn)發(fā)展。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，在“否定之否定”這個(gè)概念中，就體現(xiàn)出這種趨勢(shì)，“否定之否定”的觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為事物總是按照這樣一種方式進(jìn)行發(fā)展：一個(gè)特定的事物被另一事物否定，反過(guò)來(lái)，這另一事物又將導(dǎo)致進(jìn)一步的否定和整合，這種否定和整合體現(xiàn)了以前（被否定）事物的要素，但這種體現(xiàn)是在更高層面上。這種“否定之否定”概念來(lái)源于黑格爾的哲學(xué)體系，而黑格爾的哲學(xué)對(duì)馬克思（包括恩格斯）產(chǎn)生了重大的影響，然而，從根本上說(shuō)，他們修改了黑格爾的辯證法觀點(diǎn)并將唯物主義基礎(chǔ)覆蓋在其上面，黑格爾的辯證法本身就體現(xiàn)了哲學(xué)上的唯心主義，它認(rèn)為歷史本質(zhì)上是由一連串“（絕對(duì)）觀念”組成的。就像鮑勃.艾沃肯所指出的，“否定之否定”可以導(dǎo)致“不可避免主義”——仿佛一些事物注定要被另外的事物以一種特定的方式所否定，走向幾乎是預(yù)設(shè)的整合。當(dāng)將此概念應(yīng)用到人類歷史發(fā)展上去，它就以這樣一種方式瀕于簡(jiǎn)單的公式化了——就像是在臆想：原始無(wú)階級(jí)（公共）社會(huì)被階級(jí)社會(huì)否定，反過(guò)來(lái)，階級(jí)社會(huì)又將被再次浮現(xiàn)的無(wú)階級(jí)社會(huì)所否定，只不過(guò)隨著共產(chǎn)主義在全世界的實(shí)現(xiàn)，它有了更高的基礎(chǔ)——“簡(jiǎn)單化”本來(lái)極端復(fù)雜和多樣化的人類社會(huì)歷史發(fā)展的傾向，朝向“封閉系統(tǒng)”和“不可避免主義”的傾向，已經(jīng)越來(lái)越明顯，也越來(lái)越成問(wèn)題。
　　
　　---------------------原文-------------------------
　　Other presentations and publications by our Party have provided a more extensive and systematic discussion of this new synthesis.10 Here we will briefly characterize some of its main elements.
　　
　　» In terms of philosophy and method, this new synthesis is, in a meaningful sense, regrounding Marxism more fully in its scientific roots. It also involves learning from the rich historical experience since the time of Marx, upholding the fundamental objectives and principles of communism, which have been shown to be fundamentally correct, criticizing and discarding aspects that have been shown to be incorrect, or no longer applicable, and establishing communism even more fully and firmly on a scientific foundation.
　　
　　In the original conception of human society’s historical development toward communism, even as formulated by Marx, there was a tendency—although this tendency was definitely very secondary—toward a somewhat narrow and linear view. This was manifested, for example, in the concept of the “negation of the negation” (the view that things proceed in such a way that a particular thing is negated by another thing, which in turn leads to a further negation and a synthesis which embodies elements of the previous things, but now on a higher level). This concept was taken over from the philosophical system of Hegel, whose philosophy exerted a significant influence on Marx (and Engels), even while, in a fundamental sense, they recast and placed on a materialist foundation Hegel’s view of dialectics, which was itself marked by philosophical idealism (the view that history consists in essence of the unfolding of the Idea). As Bob Avakian has argued, the “negation of the negation” can tend in the direction of “inevitable-ism”—as if something is bound to be negated by another thing in a particular way, leading to what is almost a predetermined synthesis. And when applied to the historical sweep of human society, in such a way that it verges on being simplistically formulaic—as in the construct: primitive classless (communal) society was negated by class society, which in turn will be negated by the emergence once again of classless society, but now on a higher foundation, with the achievement of communism throughout the world—the tendency toward reductionism with regard to the extremely complex and variegated historical development of human society, the tendency toward a “closed system” and toward “inevitable-ism,” become more pronounced and more problematical.

　　28.
　　
　　 再次，這是馬克思主義在其基礎(chǔ)上的一個(gè)次要缺陷，就像鮑勃.艾沃肯所指出的：“馬克思主義、科學(xué)共產(chǎn)主義，并不體現(xiàn)，實(shí)際上是拒絕，任何形式的目的論——那樣一種觀念：有一些意愿或目的，由于其自身特性或歷史原因，是被（注定）賦予的。”但是，這種（目的論）傾向在共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的發(fā)展中被充分的自我宣揚(yáng)出來(lái)了，尤其令人注意的是，它對(duì)斯大林的思想產(chǎn)生了負(fù)面的影響，反過(guò)來(lái)，通過(guò)斯大林它又影響到了毛澤東的哲學(xué)觀點(diǎn)，即使毛澤東以一些重要的方法拒絕和打破了斯大林這種朝向“粗魯?shù)摹焙蜋C(jī)械化的，有點(diǎn)形而上學(xué)的唯物主義傾向。鮑勃•艾沃肯新的整合是毛澤東觀點(diǎn)與斯大林決裂的延續(xù)，但同時(shí)更進(jìn)一步剔除掉了一些毛本人依舊被影響（斯大林）到的部分方法，盡管與斯大林領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下的共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的一些主導(dǎo)思想相比，這些只是次要的。
　　
　　-----------------------原文---------------------------
　　Again, this was a secondary shortcoming in Marxism, at its foundation (as Bob Avakian has also argued: “Marxism, scientific communism, does not embody, but in fact rejects, any teleological...notion that there is some kind of will or purpose with which nature, or history, is endowed”11 ). But tendencies of this kind asserted themselves more fully with the development of the communist movement and were particularly noticeable, and exerted a negative effect, in the thinking of Stalin, who in turn influenced Mao’s philosophical views, even while Mao rejected and ruptured in significant ways with Stalin’s tendencies toward “woodenness” and mechanical, somewhat metaphysical, materialism. The new synthesis of Bob Avakian’s embodies a continuation of Mao’s ruptures with Stalin but also in some aspects a rupture beyond the ways in which Mao himself was influenced, even though secondarily, by what had become the dominant mode of thinking in the communist movement under the leadership of Stalin.

　　29.
　　
　　 國(guó)際主義。在上世紀(jì)80年代初，鮑勃.艾沃肯在其著作《征服世界》中對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)史上許多錯(cuò)誤傾向提出了廣泛的批判，尤其是其中的民族主義傾向——將某特定國(guó)家的革命斗爭(zhēng)脫離出，甚至是超越出整個(gè)世界的共產(chǎn)主義革命斗爭(zhēng)。他研究了這種傾向在蘇聯(lián)和中國(guó)（當(dāng)它們還是社會(huì)主義國(guó)家時(shí)）發(fā)生的方式，以及它們更廣泛意義上對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的影響，包括對(duì)有時(shí)看起來(lái)非常明顯的那種舉動(dòng)的影響，在這種舉動(dòng)中，其它國(guó)家的革命斗爭(zhēng)依附于現(xiàn)存社會(huì)主義國(guó)家的需要，先是蘇聯(lián)，后是中國(guó)。伴隨這一點(diǎn)，鮑勃.艾沃肯進(jìn)一步分析了國(guó)際主義的物質(zhì)基礎(chǔ)——為什么在最終和整體意義上，即使是對(duì)于那些具體國(guó)家的革命來(lái)說(shuō)，世界性的舞臺(tái)也是最具決定性的，尤其是在這個(gè)資本帝國(guó)主義充當(dāng)全球性剝削體制的時(shí)代，以及該如何將這種認(rèn)識(shí)嵌入到在某些國(guó)家（同時(shí)也是世界范圍內(nèi)）實(shí)現(xiàn)革命的方法之中。
　　
　　 國(guó)際主義自共產(chǎn)主義觀點(diǎn)建立以來(lái)一直都是它的基本原則，鮑勃.艾沃肯總結(jié)了使這個(gè)基本原則在共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)史上屢屢走向妥協(xié)的那些方式，他強(qiáng)化了一系列的理論基礎(chǔ)，從而克服了這種與國(guó)際主義分離的傾向，以一種更徹底的國(guó)際主義方式推進(jìn)共產(chǎn)主義革命。
　　
　　-----------------原文----------------------
　　» Internationalism. In the early 1980s, in the work Conquer the World?,12 Bob Avakian made an extensive critique of erroneous tendencies in the history of the communist movement, and in particular the tendency toward nationalism—toward separating off the revolutionary struggle in a particular country from, and even raising it above, the overall world revolutionary struggle for communism. He examined ways in which this tendency had manifested itself in both the Soviet Union and China, when they were socialist countries, and the influence this exerted on the communist movement more broadly, including in the sometimes pronounced moves to subordinate the revolutionary struggle in other countries to the needs of the existing socialist state (first the Soviet Union, and then later China). Along with this, Avakian made a further analysis of the material basis for internationalism—why, in an ultimate and overall sense, the world arena is most decisive, even in terms of revolution in any particular country, especially in this era of capitalist imperialism as a world system of exploitation, and how this understanding must be incorporated into the approach to revolution, in particular countries as well as on a world scale.
　　
　　While internationalism has always been a fundamental principle of communism since its very founding, Avakian both summed up ways in which this principle had been incorrectly compromised in the history of the communist movement, and he strengthened the theoretical foundation for waging the struggle to overcome such departures from internationalism and to carry forward the communist revolution in a more thoroughly internationalist way.

　　30.
　　
　　 論無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政與作為共產(chǎn)主義過(guò)渡階段的社會(huì)主義的性質(zhì)。毛澤東對(duì)社會(huì)主義作為共產(chǎn)主義過(guò)渡階段這一見(jiàn)解的本質(zhì)，和伴隨這種過(guò)渡的矛盾與斗爭(zhēng)，以及這種矛盾與斗爭(zhēng)的解決（在這個(gè)或那個(gè)方向上，它們決定著革命是朝向共產(chǎn)主義前進(jìn)，還是被拖回到資本主義）都有著偉大的理解和認(rèn)知，通過(guò)深刻學(xué)習(xí)、堅(jiān)定支持和宣揚(yáng)毛澤東這種見(jiàn)解，鮑勃.艾沃肯認(rèn)識(shí)到并強(qiáng)調(diào)了異議的重要性，社會(huì)主義社會(huì)需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造出更多的智慧火花，藝術(shù)上需要更多的積極性與創(chuàng)造性。他批評(píng)了走向“物化”無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)和在社會(huì)中產(chǎn)生其它剝削（或者曾經(jīng)是剝削）群體的傾向——它將這些群體中個(gè)別的人看作為“個(gè)人”，視為無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)（將無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)當(dāng)為一種階級(jí)）更大利益的代表者，視為革命斗爭(zhēng)（它在最廣泛意義上符合了無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)根本利益）的代表者。這種傾向經(jīng)常伴隨著狹隘的、務(wù)實(shí)主義的和實(shí)證主義的世界觀與行為方式——它限定了什么是相關(guān)的，什么可以被確定（宣稱）為是真的，什么可以被確定為直接經(jīng)驗(yàn)和斗爭(zhēng)（通過(guò)此所有的民眾都涉入其中），什么可以被確定為是社會(huì)主義國(guó)家及其執(zhí)政黨的短期目標(biāo)（在任何時(shí)候）。這個(gè)反過(guò)來(lái)又與朝向“階級(jí)真理”的傾向走到一起，這種“階級(jí)真理”的傾向在蘇聯(lián)和中國(guó)（當(dāng)他倆還是社會(huì)主義國(guó)家時(shí)）身上體現(xiàn)得清晰無(wú)疑，實(shí)際上，所謂的“階級(jí)真理”與以下的科學(xué)認(rèn)識(shí)相違背：真理是客觀的，不隨不同階級(jí)的利益而變化，也不依靠于那些追求真理的階級(jí)的世界觀而存在。共產(chǎn)主義科學(xué)世界觀和方法論，如果作為一種有生命力的科學(xué)而不是教條被正確的采納和應(yīng)用，必將在總體上，為真理的實(shí)現(xiàn)提供最符合的、最系統(tǒng)化的和最全面的手段，但這與說(shuō)真理本身具有某種階級(jí)屬性不是一回事，同樣，認(rèn)為共產(chǎn)主義者以其某種特質(zhì)必定能實(shí)現(xiàn)真理，而其他不應(yīng)用、甚至是反對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義世界觀和方法論的人肯定不能實(shí)現(xiàn)真理的觀點(diǎn)也是不科學(xué)的。“階級(jí)真理”這種觀點(diǎn)，在共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中以不同的形式不同程度的存在著，它屬于還原主義和庸俗唯物論，違背了實(shí)際上科學(xué)的辯證唯物主義世界觀和方法論。
　　
　　--------------------------原文--------------------------
　　» On the character of the dictatorship of the proletariat and socialist society as a transition to communism. While deeply immersing himself in, learning from, firmly upholding, and propagating Mao’s great insights into the nature of socialist society as a transition to communism—and the contradictions and struggles which mark this transition and whose resolution, in one or another direction, are decisive in terms of whether the advance is carried forward to communism, or things are dragged backward to capitalism—Bob Avakian has recognized and emphasized the need for a greater role for dissent, a greater fostering of intellectual ferment, and more scope for initiative and creativity in the arts in socialist society. He has criticized the tendency toward a “reification” of the proletariat and other exploited (or formerly exploited) groups in society—a tendency which regards particular people in these groups, as individuals, as representative of the larger interests of the proletariat as a class and the revolutionary struggle that corresponds to the fundamental interests of the proletariat, in the largest sense. This has often been accompanied by narrow, pragmatic, and positivist outlooks and approaches—which restrict what is relevant, or what can be determined (or is declared) to be true, to what relates to immediate experiences and struggles in which the masses of people are involved, and to the immediate objectives of the socialist state and its leading party, at any given time. This, in turn, has gone along with tendencies—which were a marked element in the Soviet Union but also in China when it was socialist—toward the notion of “class truth,” which in fact is opposed to the scientific understanding that truth is objective, does not vary in accordance with differing class interests, and is not dependent on which class outlook one brings to the pursuit of the truth. The scientific outlook and method of communism—if it is correctly taken up and applied, as a living science and not as a dogma—provides, in an overall sense, the most consistent, systematic, and comprehensive means for arriving at the truth, but that is not the same thing as saying that truth itself has a class character, or that communists are bound to arrive at the truth with regard to particular phenomena, while people who do not apply, or who even oppose, the communist outlook and method are not capable of arriving at important truths. Such views of “class truth,” which have existed to varying degrees and in various forms in the communist movement, are reductionist and vulgar materialist and run counter to the actual scientific viewpoint and method of dialectical materialism.
　　 　　

　　31.
　　
　　 作為新整合的一個(gè)相關(guān)部分，鮑勃.艾沃肯批評(píng)了共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中對(duì)知識(shí)分子片面的看法——將知識(shí)分子視為麻煩，并沒(méi)有充分認(rèn)識(shí)到他們?cè)趯?shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義進(jìn)程中可能的重要作用，通過(guò)此，社會(huì)上所有的人將對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)有更深的了解，將獲得更強(qiáng)的能力，越來(lái)越主動(dòng)的投入到改造現(xiàn)實(shí)以便實(shí)現(xiàn)共產(chǎn)主義的斗爭(zhēng)之中。
　　
　　 再次，就像我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨章中所解釋的：
　　
　　 “這種新的整合也對(duì)知識(shí)分子和藝術(shù)家們?cè)谡麄€(gè)（共產(chǎn)主義）進(jìn)程中的重要作用有了更深的理解，他們?cè)谧穼ぷ约阂曇暗耐瑫r(shí)，也貢獻(xiàn)了自己的意見(jiàn)以產(chǎn)生更廣泛的發(fā)酵作用——所有這些，再次，對(duì)更豐富（共產(chǎn)主義）進(jìn)程的獲得都是必需的。”
　　
　　 “簡(jiǎn)而言之，在這個(gè)由鮑勃.艾沃肯發(fā)展起來(lái)的新整合中，必須有一個(gè)充滿一定彈性、堅(jiān)實(shí)的核心觀念。它首先是一種能以很廣泛方式得到應(yīng)用的方法論和行為方式…清晰掌握這核心觀念的兩個(gè)方面（堅(jiān)實(shí)的核心和一定的彈性）以及它們的內(nèi)在關(guān)系，對(duì)在所有領(lǐng)域里理解和改造現(xiàn)實(shí)來(lái)說(shuō)是非常必要的，對(duì)在人類社會(huì)中發(fā)起革命性變革是非常關(guān)鍵的…”
　　
　　---------------------原文----------------------
　　As a related part of the new synthesis, Bob Avakian has criticized a one-sided view in the communist movement toward intellectuals—toward seeing them only as a problem, and failing to give full recognition to the ways in which they can contribute to the rich process through which the people in society overall will come to a deeper understanding of reality and a heightened ability to carry out an increasingly conscious struggle to transform reality in the direction of communism.
　　
　　Again, as the Constitution of our Party explains:
　　
　　This new synthesis also involves a greater appreciation of the important role of intellectuals and artists in this whole process, both pursuing their own visions and contributing their ideas to this broader ferment—all, again, necessary to get a much richer process going....
　　
　　In short, in this new synthesis as developed by Bob Avakian, there must be a solid core, with a lot of elasticity. This is, first of all, a method and approach that applies in a very broad way.... A clear grasp of both aspects of this [both solid core and elasticity], and their inter-relation, is necessary in understanding and transforming reality, in all its spheres, and is crucial to making revolutionary transformations in human society....
　　 　　

　　32.
　　
　　 “應(yīng)用到社會(huì)主義社會(huì)，這種包含一個(gè)堅(jiān)實(shí)核心并帶有一定彈性的方法論，需要一個(gè)統(tǒng)籌性的并帶有延展性的核心，以便滿足無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政和繼續(xù)社會(huì)主義革命（作為通向共產(chǎn)主義的世界性斗爭(zhēng)的一部分）的需要，并且它也決心克服所有挫折，繼續(xù)引導(dǎo)這個(gè)斗爭(zhēng)。同時(shí)，在社會(huì)主義中，一定會(huì)有許多不同的人和不同的傾向，他們將社會(huì)引向不同的方向——所有這些最終都會(huì)有助于獲得真相，和達(dá)到共產(chǎn)主義。這種情況總是一種激烈狀態(tài)存在的，包容這一切不同的人和不同的傾向（它們?nèi)詫⒃趶V泛意義上引導(dǎo)社會(huì)朝向共產(chǎn)主義）時(shí)所遇到的困難，就像鮑勃.艾沃肯所說(shuō)的，類似于反復(fù)的將某件東西拉到快肢解的邊緣而又不能使之肢解。所有這一切都是困難的，卻是必須的，也是我們要迎接的一個(gè)過(guò)程。”
　　
　　 作為這一切統(tǒng)一的主題，鮑勃.艾沃肯強(qiáng)調(diào)了“人類解放者”的方向：只有在人民大眾都自覺(jué)參與的情況下，革命才能被執(zhí)行，革命不是報(bào)復(fù)，也不是某個(gè)狹隘框架里位置的變化（最后的成為最前的，最前的成為最后的），而是整個(gè)世界的變革，從此沒(méi)有誰(shuí)是第一，誰(shuí)是最后；推翻現(xiàn)行體制，建立無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政和在這些條件下繼續(xù)革命，都是為了消除一切壓迫性的社會(huì)分化和人與人間的剝削關(guān)系，并向人類歷史上一個(gè)全新的時(shí)代積極前進(jìn)。
　　
　　--------------------------原文----------------------
　　Applied to socialist society, this approach of solid core with a lot of elasticity includes the need for a leading, and expanding, core that is clear on the need for the dictatorship of the proletariat and the aim of continuing socialist revolution as part of the world struggle for communism, and is determined to continue carrying forward this struggle, through all the twists and turns. At the same time, there will necessarily be many different people and trends in socialist society pulling in many different directions—and all of this can ultimately contribute to the process of getting at the truth and getting to communism. This will be intense at times, and the difficulty of embracing all this—while still leading the whole process broadly in the direction of communism—will be something like going, as Avakian has put it, to the brink of being drawn and quartered—and repeatedly. All this is difficult, but necessary and a process to welcome.
　　
　　As a unifying theme in all this, Avakian has stressed the orientation of “emancipators of humanity”: the revolution that must be carried out, and in which the masses must be the conscious driving force, is not about revenge nor about changes of position within a narrow framework (“the last shall be first, and the first become last”) but is about transforming the entire world so that there will no longer be people who are “first” and others who are “l(fā)ast”; the overthrow of the present system, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the continuation of the revolution in those conditions is all for the purpose and toward the aim of abolishing all oppressive divisions and exploitative relations among human beings and advancing to a whole new era in human history.
　

　　33.
　　
　　 革命的戰(zhàn)略方針。鮑勃.艾沃肯新的整合優(yōu)化了共產(chǎn)主義理論，豐富了列寧提出的人民大眾需要提高共產(chǎn)主義覺(jué)悟的基本認(rèn)識(shí)，列寧認(rèn)為人民大眾要提要共產(chǎn)主義覺(jué)悟，除了依靠自身的直接經(jīng)驗(yàn)和斗爭(zhēng)，還要全方位的揭露資本主義-帝國(guó)主義制度的本質(zhì)和特性，明確確立共產(chǎn)主義的信念、目標(biāo)、世界觀和方法論，所有這些，都是由一個(gè)有組織的先鋒隊(duì)以一種系統(tǒng)化的、全方位的方式引導(dǎo)給大眾，將任何時(shí)候發(fā)生的斗爭(zhēng)轉(zhuǎn)化為或引導(dǎo)為革命的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)，同時(shí)也“在大眾面前說(shuō)明”革命的一些基本事項(xiàng)和問(wèn)題，并使大家都參與其中以找出合適的方法解決這些矛盾，繼續(xù)推動(dòng)革命斗爭(zhēng)。在鮑勃.艾沃肯的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，在帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家進(jìn)行革命的基本戰(zhàn)略方針已經(jīng)制定下來(lái)，并正繼續(xù)往前得到進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，在這種戰(zhàn)略方針的指導(dǎo)下，我們將加快（同時(shí)也在等待）革命形勢(shì)的發(fā)展，促使革命群眾數(shù)百萬(wàn)數(shù)百萬(wàn)的不斷出現(xiàn)，然后當(dāng)這一天最終到來(lái)的時(shí)，我們有能力在那種情況下去斗爭(zhēng)并贏得革命，奪取政權(quán)。（關(guān)于這方面內(nèi)容，請(qǐng)參閱《革命與共產(chǎn)主義：基礎(chǔ)與戰(zhàn)略方針》革命宣傳冊(cè)，2008）
　　
　　 這一切對(duì)于那些爭(zhēng)辯說(shuō)革命不可能發(fā)生在帝國(guó)主義的人來(lái)說(shuō)，對(duì)于那種堅(jiān)持在革命目標(biāo)和共產(chǎn)主義世界觀上，共產(chǎn)主義的理論與實(shí)踐只能專注于改革和“解決”群眾切身問(wèn)題的觀點(diǎn)來(lái)說(shuō)，都是鮮活的反駁。后一種觀點(diǎn)，在現(xiàn)實(shí)中，只要它影響到人民大眾，必將把他們引導(dǎo)到偏離（共產(chǎn)主義的）方向上去，使他們與現(xiàn)行剝削制度一道進(jìn)入一團(tuán)死氣的死胡同，走向滅亡。
　　
　　 對(duì)在如美國(guó)這樣的帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家里進(jìn)行革命，新整合已經(jīng)進(jìn)一步發(fā)展出了革命的基本戰(zhàn)略方針，與此同時(shí)，鮑勃.艾沃肯呼吁要注意革命斗爭(zhēng)所面對(duì)的新挑戰(zhàn)，要進(jìn)一步發(fā)展革命戰(zhàn)略，以便適應(yīng)外國(guó)帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家革命的要求，這些外國(guó)帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家在近幾十年來(lái)，給世界及其中大多數(shù)國(guó)家?guī)?lái)了巨大的變化。
　　
　　-------------------------------原文-----------------------
　　» Strategic approach to revolution. Avakian’s new synthesis has regrounded communist work in, and has enriched, Lenin’s basic understanding of the need for the masses of people to develop communist consciousness not only, or mainly, through their own immediate experience and struggles but through the all-around exposure of the nature and features of the capitalist-imperialist system and the clear setting forth of the convictions, aims, outlook and method of communism, which is brought to the masses, in a systematic and all-around way, by an organized vanguard party, linking the struggle at any given time with, and diverting and directing it toward, the strategic revolutionary goal, while also “setting before the masses” the essential questions and problems of the revolution and involving them in forging the means to resolve these contradictions and advance the revolutionary struggle. With the leadership of Bob Avakian, the basic strategic orientation necessary for carrying out revolutionary work in an imperialist country, to hasten while awaiting the development of a revolutionary situation and the emergence of a revolutionary people, in the millions and millions, and then to seize on such a situation when it does finally come into being—and to be able to fight and win in those circumstances—has been developed and is continuing to be further developed. (In this connection, see Revolution and Communism: A Foundation and Strategic Orientation, a Revolution pamphlet, 2008.)
　　
　　All this is a living refutation of those who argue that revolution is not possible in imperialist countries, or that the practical and theoretical work of communists there should center on fighting for reforms and “solutions” to the immediate problems of the masses, in a way that severs this from revolutionary objectives and the communist outlook—and which, in reality, will lead away from that and, insofar as it influences masses of people, will lead them into a demoralizing dead-end and ultimate accommodation with the present system of oppression.
　　
　　At the same time as this new synthesis has further developed the basic strategic orientation for revolution in imperialist countries such as the U.S., Avakian has also called attention to new challenges for the revolutionary struggle, and the need for further development of revolutionary strategy, in countries dominated by foreign imperialism, given the great changes in the world, and within most of these countries, in recent decades. 　　

　　34.
　　
　　
　　 這種新整合，在許多重大方面（在此我們只能簡(jiǎn)單的談及下）為革命與共產(chǎn)主義打下了更堅(jiān)實(shí)的科學(xué)（理論）基礎(chǔ)。正如鮑勃.艾沃肯自己所強(qiáng)調(diào)的：
　　
　　 “不低估這個(gè)新整合的重要性及潛在積極力量是非常重要的：對(duì)于國(guó)際共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)和至今已存在過(guò)的社會(huì)
　　
　　主義國(guó)家的歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)，批判和破除其中的重大錯(cuò)誤和缺陷，同時(shí)繼續(xù)發(fā)揚(yáng)和改造它積極的方面；在真正意義上恢復(fù)一個(gè)新的、更先進(jìn)的基礎(chǔ)，恢復(fù)一個(gè)全新的、完全不同的世界的可行性和可取性，并將此目標(biāo)倚靠在一個(gè)更堅(jiān)實(shí)的唯物論和辯證法基礎(chǔ)之上。
　　
　　 因此，我們不應(yīng)低估它作為一種希望源泉和一種基于堅(jiān)實(shí)科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)的膽識(shí)的可能性。”
　　
　　------------------------原文--------------------
　　This new synthesis, in its many crucial dimensions (which we have only been able to briefly touch on here) has put revolution and communism on a more solid scientific foundation. As Avakian himself has emphasized:
　　
　　“[I]t is very important not to underestimate the significance and potential positive force of this new synthesis: criticizing and rupturing with significant errors and shortcomings while bringing forward and recasting what has been positive from the historical experience of the international communist movements and the socialist countries that have so far existed; in a real sense reviving
　　—on a new, more advanced basis—the viability and, yes, the desirability of a whole new and radically different world, and placing this on an ever firmer foundation of materialism and dialectics....
　　
　　So, we should not underestimate the potential of this as a source of hope and of daring on a solid scientific foundation.”
　　 　　

　　35.
　　
　　V. 十字路口的共產(chǎn)主義：未來(lái)的先鋒，還是過(guò)去的殘留？
　　
　　
　　 面對(duì)現(xiàn)階段持續(xù)的挑戰(zhàn)和困難，在共產(chǎn)主義革命在中國(guó)失敗以及共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段結(jié)束之時(shí)，共產(chǎn)主義者們的初次重組便開(kāi)始了，然而到最近，在很大程度上，這種重組讓位于內(nèi)部尖銳的分歧：一方面，我們黨（基本路線集中體現(xiàn)在我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨的黨章中）和另外一些黨派積極走向新的整合；而另一方面，又有兩種對(duì)立的傾向：要么是如宗教信仰般的全盤(pán)堅(jiān)持過(guò)往所有的經(jīng)驗(yàn)以及與之相關(guān)的理論和方法論，要么就是（實(shí)質(zhì)上，不是在口頭上就是在理論上）全盤(pán)否定所有這一切。
　　
　　 在某種意義上說(shuō)，這是對(duì)《征服世界？》所造成反響的一種預(yù)示，此文在約30年前首次發(fā)表。一方面，國(guó)際共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中的一些人對(duì)《征服世界？》一文所講述的內(nèi)容感到極度的不滿，他們聲稱它把共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)縮減為“一面破旗”，他們這種觀念本身就是對(duì)“什么是共產(chǎn)主義”教條認(rèn)識(shí)的一種反應(yīng)，而不是尊重并堅(jiān)持共產(chǎn)主義本來(lái)的面目：共產(chǎn)主義是一種鮮活的、發(fā)展的、決定性的革命科學(xué)，它本身的標(biāo)志之一就是不斷的自我反省。在另一方面，因其正確的觀點(diǎn)，也有些人歡迎《征服世界？》，又有些人確實(shí)也歡迎它，但卻是抱著這樣一種觀點(diǎn)和希望：它將成為一個(gè)撬開(kāi)房門(mén)的工具，借此達(dá)到擺脫和拋棄整個(gè)（共產(chǎn)主義革命）歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)的目的，而這整個(gè)（共產(chǎn)主義革命）歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)，正是《征服世界？》一文以一種完全不同的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行審慎分析的，其中一個(gè)認(rèn)識(shí)便是，客觀上說(shuō)，這些（共產(chǎn)主義革命）歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)主要內(nèi)容都是積極的，是歷史上前所未有的人類進(jìn)步，這點(diǎn)必須要認(rèn)識(shí)到；但同時(shí)也要認(rèn)識(shí)到，這兒還有很多真實(shí)的問(wèn)題、缺陷和錯(cuò)誤，有些還是十分令人痛心的，這些需要進(jìn)一步挖掘、審慎研究，并從中汲取教訓(xùn)。在當(dāng)時(shí)，那些反對(duì)《征服世界？》觀點(diǎn)的人主要集中在新興國(guó)家和一個(gè)范圍寬廣的群體之間。只是隨著過(guò)去數(shù)十年中事情的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，和對(duì)新困難的經(jīng)歷，包括革命斗爭(zhēng)所遭受到的挫折（在一段時(shí)間內(nèi)，革命看起來(lái)象要有新的突破并體現(xiàn)了世界共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的復(fù)興），這些反對(duì)的觀點(diǎn)得到進(jìn)一步發(fā)展和強(qiáng)化。
　　
　　----------------原文-------------------------------
　　V.
　　Communism at a Crossroads: Vanguard of the Future, or Residue of the Past?
　　
　　In the face of the continuing challenges and difficulties of the current period, the initial regrouping of communists which took place after the defeat in China and the end of the first stage of communist revolution has, to a significant extent, given way recently to sharp divergences: on the one hand, our Party, whose basic line is concentrated in our new Constitution, along with some others that are gravitating toward the new synthesis; and, on the other hand, two opposing tendencies—either to cling religiously to all of the previous experience and the theory and method associated with it or (in essence, if not in words) to throw that out altogether.
　　
　　In a certain sense, this was prefigured in the responses to Conquer the World? when it was originally published, nearly three decades ago now. On the one hand, there were those in the international communist movement who were extremely upset by what was said in Conquer the World?—claiming that it reduced the experience of the communist movement to “a tattered flag” (this was a response which itself was reflective of a dogmatic and brittle approach to what communism is, rather than regarding it and wielding it as what it really is: a living and developing critical revolutionary science, one of the hallmarks of which is its continual self-interrogation) —and, on the other hand, besides those who welcomed Conquer the World? for correct reasons, there were those who actually welcomed it but did so with the view, and the hope, that it would constitute a wedge opening the door to casting off and renouncing the whole historical experience which Conquer the World? was critically examining from a fundamentally different viewpoint, one of recognizing that objectively this experience was principally positive and involved historically unprecedented advances for humanity which must be firmly upheld, but also recognizing that there were real problems, shortcomings, and errors, some of them quite grievous, which needed to be further excavated, critically examined, and learned from as well. At that time, these opposing responses to Conquer the World? were in a more embryonic state and within an overall framework of broadly-defined unity. It was only with the further unfolding of things over the next few decades, and with the experience of further difficulties—including setbacks in struggles that seemed for a time to be breaking new ground and embodying a revitalization of the communist movement in the world—that these opposing views further developed and sharpened. 　　

　　36.
　　
　　 今天，在那些拒絕審慎研究共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)的人那里，經(jīng)常可以看到堅(jiān)持“階級(jí)真理”和相應(yīng)的物化無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)現(xiàn)象，他們對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義理論和原則基本采取教條主義的方式，實(shí)質(zhì)上類似于宗教中對(duì)待教義的態(tài)度：“我們都知道我們需要知道的，我們擁有所有所需的基本要素，唯一要做的只是去貫徹這些已告知的智慧。”
　　
　　 在相反一端是那樣一些人，他們對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)的理解，特別是它遭受到困難、挫折和失敗的原因的理解，是膚淺的和毫無(wú)根據(jù)的，他們忽視或索性拋棄對(duì)深刻矛盾的科學(xué)共產(chǎn)主義分析（這些深刻矛盾正是導(dǎo)致社會(huì)主義國(guó)家中發(fā)生資本主義復(fù)辟的原因），而試圖以基于資產(chǎn)階級(jí)式民主原則、標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和資產(chǎn)階級(jí)民主合法性概念的方法取而代之：正式的選舉程序和政黨競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，這些在資本主義社會(huì)司空見(jiàn)慣，符合并有助于資產(chǎn)階級(jí)繼續(xù)占據(jù)政治權(quán)力。那些持這種觀點(diǎn)的人，即使還在繼續(xù)宣稱繼承共產(chǎn)主義的衣缽，都急于拋棄和保持與無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政及其歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)的距離，許多情況下，甚至是“無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政”這個(gè)名詞。實(shí)際上，這些人正在尋求從這個(gè)人類歷史上迄今最具解放精神的經(jīng)驗(yàn)中“卸下身上的重?fù)?dān)”。他們宣稱要闊步往前，以適應(yīng)時(shí)代新的形式…但是他們的車(chē)輛行駛在錯(cuò)誤的方向上，并且是在迅速的倒轉(zhuǎn)——以加速度的步伐倒退回資產(chǎn)階級(jí)式民主和狹隘的資產(chǎn)階級(jí)式法權(quán)，從21世紀(jì)倒退到18世紀(jì)。
　　
　　 雖然我們?cè)诖艘呀?jīng)確認(rèn)的這些錯(cuò)誤傾向之間有很大的差別，但有一個(gè)重要情況是，他們相互“鏡像對(duì)立”，他們實(shí)際上共享一些重要特征。事實(shí)上，值得注意的是，近年來(lái)出現(xiàn)了一些某個(gè)團(tuán)體從一端“滑到”另一端的現(xiàn)象，尤其是從教條主義及相關(guān)傾向投入到資產(chǎn)階級(jí)式民主（如果他們?nèi)匀皇窃趥窝b成共產(chǎn)主義）。以下是這些傾向所共有的一些重要特征。
　　
　　---------------------------原文-------------------------
　　Today, on the part of those who refuse to critically examine the historical experience of the communist movement, it is common to find the phenomena of insistence upon “class truth” and related reification of the proletariat, and generally an approach to communist theory and principles as some kind of dogma, akin to religious catechism—in essence: “We know all we need to know, we have all the fundamentals that are required, it’s just a matter of carrying out the handed-down wisdom.”
　　
　　At the opposite pole are those whose understanding of the historical experience of the communist movement—and in particular the causes of its difficulties, setbacks, and defeats—is also superficial and ill-founded, who ignore or dismiss scientific communist analysis of the profound contradictions that have given rise to the danger of capitalist restoration in socialist society, and who attempt to substitute in place of that analysis an approach based on bourgeois-democratic principles and criteria, and bourgeois-democratic notions of legitimacy—bound up with the formal process of elections, with competing political parties, so common in capitalist society and so compatible with and conducive to the exercise of political power by the capitalist class. Those who hold to these positions, even while continuing to claim the mantle of communism, are anxious to discard and distance themselves from the concept and the historical experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat—and in many cases the very term itself. In effect, such people are seeking to “unburden themselves” from the most liberating experience in human history so far! They claim to want to move rapidly ahead, to meet new conditions of the time...but they have their vehicles in the wrong gear, and they are moving rapidly in reverse—retreating at an accelerating pace into bourgeois democracy and the narrow confines of bourgeois right,14 traversing the centuries from the 21st back to the 18th.
　　
　　While the erroneous tendencies we have identified here involve real differences, there is also a significant aspect in which they are “mirror opposites,” and they actually share important characteristics in common. In fact, it is noteworthy that, in recent years, there has been a phenomenon of certain groups “flipping” from one pole to the other—and in particular from dogmatism and related tendencies to an embrace of bourgeois democracy (if still in the guise of communism). The following are some of the significant features these tendencies share in common.

　　
　　» Positivism, pragmatism, and empiricism. While again, this may take different expressions in accordance with different particular erroneous viewpoints and approaches, what is common to them is the vulgarization and degradation of theory—reducing it to a “guide to practice” only in the most narrow and immediate sense, treating theory as, in essence, a direct outgrowth of particular practice, and attempting to establish an equivalence between advanced practice (which itself, especially on these people’s part, involves an element of subjective and arbitrary evaluation) and supposedly advanced theory. A scientific communist, materialist and dialectical, viewpoint leads to the understanding that practice is the ultimate point of origin and point of verification of theory; but, in opposition to these narrow, empiricist distortions, this must be understood to mean practice in the broad sense, encompassing broad social and historical experience, and not simply the direct experience of a particular individual, group, party, or nation. The very founding, and the further development of, communist theory itself is a powerful demonstration of this: From the time of Marx, this theory has been forged and enriched by drawing from a broad array of experience, in a wide range of fields and over a broad expanse of historical development, in society and nature. Practice as the source of theory and the maxim that “practice is the criterion of truth” can be, and will be, turned into a profound untruth if this is interpreted and applied in a narrow, empiricist, and subjective manner.
　　 　　

　　38.
　　
　　 》很明顯，這些“鏡像對(duì)立”的錯(cuò)誤傾向都共同的陷入到，或退回到過(guò)去的模式之中，以這樣或那樣的方式（即使特定模式可能會(huì)有所不同）：要么教條的抱著共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段的老經(jīng)驗(yàn)不放；要么，相反的抱著一種不完整的、片面的、最終錯(cuò)誤的理解；要么，索性退回到過(guò)去資產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命的時(shí)代和它相關(guān)的原則上：退回到本質(zhì)上說(shuō)是18世紀(jì)資產(chǎn)階級(jí)民主的理論上，打著“21世紀(jì)的共產(chǎn)主義”的幌子，或以此為名，實(shí)際上把這“21世紀(jì)的共產(chǎn)主義”等同于所謂的“純粹的”或者“無(wú)階級(jí)的”民主，這種民主，在現(xiàn)實(shí)中，只要階級(jí)依舊存在，它只可能意味著資產(chǎn)階級(jí)民主和資產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政。所有這一切，伴隨著忽視、認(rèn)為過(guò)時(shí)和教條理解（或把對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義的理解訴諸于“共產(chǎn)主義基本知識(shí)”這種毫無(wú)意義的抽象的詞條，然后又將此與不相干的實(shí)際斗爭(zhēng)聯(lián)系起來(lái)），科學(xué)共產(chǎn)主義的根本內(nèi)涵（是從巴黎公社革命以來(lái)，數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)被壓迫者的鮮血中反復(fù)思考得來(lái)的）——舊的反動(dòng)國(guó)家必須被推翻和搗毀，一個(gè)全新的國(guó)家必須被建立，并且在改造社會(huì)和解放全人類過(guò)程中，代表先前被剝削階級(jí)的革命利益——必須被理解，否則，革命斗爭(zhēng)的任何成果都將被浪費(fèi)和破壞，革命力量將毀滅。
　　
　　 只有通過(guò)與這些錯(cuò)誤傾向決裂，深入理解并越來(lái)越堅(jiān)定共產(chǎn)主義的世界觀、方法論和原則，當(dāng)它們發(fā)展到了這一點(diǎn)（同時(shí)也必須進(jìn)一步往前發(fā)展）時(shí)，共產(chǎn)主義者便可站立起來(lái)，承擔(dān)起作為未來(lái)先鋒的重大責(zé)任和挑戰(zhàn)，而不是躑躅不前，或者墮落為過(guò)去的殘留，如此的話將會(huì)背叛全世界的人民大眾，對(duì)于他們來(lái)說(shuō)，共產(chǎn)主義革命是能夠帶領(lǐng)他們逃離現(xiàn)行世界的瘋狂與恐怖，走向一個(gè)真正宜居世界的唯一一條道路。
　　
　　-----------------------原文----------------------------
　　» Very significantly, these “mirror opposite” erroneous tendencies have in common being mired in, or retreating into, models of the past, of one kind or another (even if the particular models may differ): either clinging dogmatically to the past experience of the first stage of the communist revolution—or, rather, to an incomplete, one-sided, and ultimately erroneous understanding of that—or retreating into the whole past era of bourgeois revolution and its principles: going back to what are in essence 18th century theories of (bourgeois) democracy, in the guise, or in the name, of “21st-century communism,” in effect equating this “21st-century communism” with a democracy that is supposedly “pure” or “classless”—a democracy which, in reality, as long as classes exist, can only mean bourgeois democracy, and bourgeois dictatorship.15 All this while ignoring, treating as outdated, or dismissing as dogma (or consigning to the meaningless category of the “ABCs of communism” which are acknowledged as an abstraction and then put to the side as irrelevant to the practical struggle) the fundamental, scientific communist understanding, paid for literally and repeatedly in the blood of millions of the oppressed from the time of the Paris Commune, that the old, reactionary state must be smashed and dismantled and a radically new state must be brought into being, representing the revolutionary interests of the formerly exploited in transforming all of society and emancipating all of humanity, or else any gains of the revolutionary struggle will be squandered and destroyed, and the revolutionary forces decimated.
　　
　　It is only by rupturing with these erroneous tendencies, and deeply engaging with and becoming more firmly grounded in the viewpoint, methods, and principles of communism, as they have been developed up to this point (and must be continually developed further), that communists can rise to the great responsibility and challenge of indeed being a vanguard of the future, and not consign themselves to remaining, or degenerating into, a residue of the past, and in so doing betray the masses of people throughout the world for whom the communist revolution represents the only road out of the madness and horror of the present world and toward a world truly worth living in.
　　 　　

　　
　　39.
　　
　　VI. 美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨內(nèi)部的文化革命
　　
　　 對(duì)于錯(cuò)誤的、甚至公然的修正主義路線的影響，我們黨很難擺脫。事實(shí)上，我們?cè)诖怂械男拚髁x路線和傾向不僅已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)在我們黨內(nèi)部，而且經(jīng)過(guò)一些年的發(fā)展，到最近已經(jīng)形成了一股強(qiáng)大的力量，給我黨成為革命共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)的目標(biāo)帶來(lái)了真正的危險(xiǎn)，試圖使我們墮落為另一種亂七八糟的改革派，即使一段時(shí)間內(nèi)還暫時(shí)保留共產(chǎn)主義的標(biāo)簽。
　　
　　 在上世紀(jì)80年代到90年代期間，在我們黨內(nèi)部，實(shí)際上存在兩個(gè)派別，代表了兩種根本對(duì)立的道路。一方面，有“官方的”黨的路線，以及該路線的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，這些新發(fā)展體現(xiàn)在鮑勃.艾沃肯新的整合理論，它們主要發(fā)表在黨的機(jī)關(guān)報(bào)（《革命勞動(dòng)者》，現(xiàn)在為《革命》）以及其它一些黨的文件和出版物上。但同時(shí)，另一方面，隨著反對(duì)新整合理論及總體上的革命-共產(chǎn)主義路線的聲音的走強(qiáng)，修正主義觀點(diǎn)和路線在黨內(nèi)各個(gè)級(jí)別中逐漸占據(jù)了上風(fēng)，盡管他們并沒(méi)有對(duì)修正主義觀點(diǎn)和路線做出任何系統(tǒng)性的表達(dá)和討論，這些修正主義觀點(diǎn)和路線盡管在細(xì)節(jié)上有些不同，但客觀的說(shuō)，它們有很大的一個(gè)共同點(diǎn)，那就是放棄共產(chǎn)主義革命世界觀與目標(biāo)，力求融入帝國(guó)主義制度，并且充其量上只尋求一些這可怕制度內(nèi)的改革。
　　
　　 這些修正主義路線的主要特征是什么，又是什么因素導(dǎo)致其實(shí)力的增長(zhǎng)以及在黨內(nèi)影響力的不斷提升？
　　
　　---------------------原文-------------------------------
　　VI.
　　A Cultural Revolution Within the RCP
　　
　　The influence of incorrect and even outright revisionist lines is hardly something to which our Party itself has been immune. In fact, the lines and tendencies we have criticized here have not only existed within our Party, but over a number of years, and until very recently, exerted a powerful pull and posed the real danger of our Party’s ceasing to be a revolutionary communist vanguard and instead degenerating into yet another motley collection of reformists, even if retaining, for a time at least, the label of communist.
　　
　　Over the period of the 1980s and 1990s, a situation had developed within our Party in which, in effect, there were two parties, representing two fundamentally opposed roads. On the one hand, there was the “official” line of the Party, and the ongoing development of that line, as embodied particularly in the new synthesis Bob Avakian was bringing forward and, in the main, expressed in the Party’s newspaper (the Revolutionary Worker, now Revolution) and other documents and publications of the Party. But at the same time, in increasing opposition to the new synthesis and the revolutionary-communist line overall, were revisionist views and orientations which, while not generally expressed and argued for in a systematic way, were becoming predominant on all levels of the Party—views and orientations which varied in certain particulars but had in common that, objectively, they amounted to abandoning the outlook and aims of the communist revolution, accommodating to the system of imperialism and settling for, at most, reforms within this horrific system.
　　
　　What were some of the main features of these revisionist lines, and main factors leading to their growth and increasing influence within our Party?
　　 　　

　　40.
　　
　　 » 共產(chǎn)主義在中國(guó)的失敗和共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段的結(jié)束，以及上世紀(jì)60年代社會(huì)狂潮在美國(guó)和全球范圍內(nèi)逐漸消退并進(jìn)入70年代后，世界大多數(shù)帝國(guó)主義國(guó)家數(shù)十年內(nèi)相對(duì)“穩(wěn)定”，不僅使許多曾經(jīng)立志為世界的根本變革而積極抗?fàn)幍娜嗣允Х较颉⑹繗獾吐洌瑯右矊?duì)共產(chǎn)主義者，包括我們美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨造成了同樣的影響。共產(chǎn)主義政黨是由抱著同樣理想的人聚集起來(lái)的，他們對(duì)革命的必需性和可能性有著共同的先進(jìn)的、科學(xué)的理解，他們都?jí)粝胫鵀槿祟悗?lái)一個(gè)根本不同的、更好的未來(lái)。但是他們都生存在現(xiàn)行的體制之下，在這個(gè)體制下進(jìn)行著他們的工作，他們不會(huì)，不能，也不應(yīng)該與世界上其它的事物和那些對(duì)自己潛移默化的條件相隔離、相封閉。
　　
　　 與此同時(shí)，那些舊秩序的捍衛(wèi)者和辯護(hù)者在過(guò)去的數(shù)十年中抓住共產(chǎn)主義革命的失敗和挫折不放，對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義進(jìn)行無(wú)情的意識(shí)形態(tài)攻擊，在這種情況的影響下，試圖融入帝國(guó)主義，尤其是像美國(guó)這樣的國(guó)家的傾向變得愈發(fā)的強(qiáng)烈。
　　
　　 在許多年前的一次重要的黨內(nèi)會(huì)議上，鮑勃.艾沃肯在他的發(fā)言中直面，并尖銳批判了黨內(nèi)的修正主義路線，他的意見(jiàn)如下：
　　
　　--------------------------原文-------------------------
　　» The defeat in China and the end of the first stage of communist revolution—combined with decades of relative “stability” in the world’s most powerful imperialist country, after this defeat and the related ebbing of the great upsurge of the 1960s and into the early 1970s, in the U.S. as well as on a worldwide scale—not only had a disorienting and demoralizing effect on large numbers of people who had actively sought, and fought for, radical change in the world, as well as people more broadly, but this was also true among communists and within our Party. Communist parties are made up of people who come together on the basis of an advanced, scientific understanding of the necessity and possibility for revolution, aiming for a fundamentally different and far better future for humanity; but they exist and carry out their work within the present system—they are not, cannot be, and should not be separated, much less sealed off, from the rest of the world and the conditions it imposes and the pulls it exerts.
　　
　　At the same time, and seizing on the defeats and setbacks for the communist revolution, there has been the relentless ideological assault on communism carried out by the defenders and apologists of the old order over the past several decades, and the effect of this has been to make the pull toward accommodation with imperialism, especially in a country like the U.S., all the more powerful.
　　
　　Speaking to an important Party meeting several years ago—at which he directly confronted and sharply criticized the revisionist lines within the Party—Bob Avakian made the following observations:
　　 　　

　　41.
　　
　　 “讓我們?cè)僬\(chéng)實(shí)的看下。我談到了我們將繼續(xù)品嘗中國(guó)的損失給我們帶來(lái)的苦果，我們決不能低估共產(chǎn)主義在中國(guó)的失敗，以及一切由此帶來(lái)的后果，一切帝國(guó)主義以此而進(jìn)行的活動(dòng)。中國(guó)，連同它對(duì)全世界無(wú)產(chǎn)者和世界無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命所意味的一切，在文化大革命之后，在百萬(wàn)、數(shù)百萬(wàn)人經(jīng)歷的動(dòng)蕩（的確是一種改造他們世界觀的重要過(guò)程）之后，它的失去依然是我們要持續(xù)面對(duì)的，無(wú)論是從客觀現(xiàn)實(shí)，還是從我們自身的思想上。
　　
　　 如果你將此視為完全的“共產(chǎn)主義消亡”現(xiàn)象，視為反共產(chǎn)主義勢(shì)力的持續(xù)反抗和從各種方向上、以各種形式對(duì)中國(guó)文化大革命的詬病和誹謗，視為對(duì)中國(guó)革命和中國(guó)社會(huì)主義制度（實(shí)際上是對(duì)所有存在過(guò)的社會(huì)主義制度和無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)專政）的詬病和誹謗；如果你思考過(guò)這些影響，而且你是個(gè)唯物主義者，使用辯證法，就不會(huì)認(rèn)為它們不會(huì)影響到我們，只會(huì)影響到黨外人士。即使在我們的思想和靈魂中，在我們的內(nèi)心深處，如果我們想要用“共產(chǎn)主義消亡”這個(gè)詞，難道對(duì)于這一切我們真的沒(méi)有問(wèn)題么：為什么我們失敗了？如果我們是如此的合理，如果我們所追求的是如此的正確，那為什么最終會(huì)是這樣？我不認(rèn)為有很多同志在內(nèi)心里從未受到過(guò)這些問(wèn)題的折磨，興許還不止一次。
　　
　　 對(duì)這些事情我們有答案，但是你必須去挖掘答案，不停的挖，而且你還需以科學(xué)的方法。你必須采取唯物論和辯證法的方法。”
　　
　　 然而問(wèn)題是，雖然鮑勃.艾沃肯和黨內(nèi)其他一些同志以這種方式進(jìn)行“挖掘”，應(yīng)用科學(xué)的世界觀和辯證唯物主義的方法，但黨內(nèi)各個(gè)級(jí)別的多數(shù)同志，并不這樣做，反而是，在很大程度上，“購(gòu)買(mǎi)了”對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義的誹謗，并且就如列寧所精辟闡述的那樣，自發(fā)的走到資產(chǎn)階級(jí)的羽翼之下，無(wú)論是在意識(shí)形態(tài)上還是在政治上：撤退到資產(chǎn)階級(jí)民主和法權(quán)的局限之中，緊隨改良主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的世界觀，這包括“認(rèn)同政治”和相關(guān)的哲學(xué)意義上的相對(duì)主義（認(rèn)為沒(méi)有客觀真理或者具有某種確定度的客觀真理，只有不同群體或個(gè)人的不同“敘事”，要么都是真的，要么都是假的），以改良替代革命作為根本的目標(biāo)。
　　
　　----------------------------原文-------------------
　　“Let’s look again honestly at this. I talked about how we are still suffering from the effects of the loss of China. We should not underestimate this defeat in China, and everything it has brought forth, everything the imperialists have done on that basis, and have built on that. China, and everything it represented for the international proletariat and the world proletarian revolution—to lose that after the Cultural Revolution [in China], after millions and millions of people went through that upheaval, and yes, a significant process of remolding their world outlook—this is something we’re still coming to terms with, both in objective reality and in our own thinking.
　　
　　If you add to this the whole “death of communism” phenomenon, and the constant barrage of anti-communism and abuse and slander heaped from all directions and in all forms on the GPCR [the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China], on the Chinese revolution and socialism there, and in fact on all of the experience of socialist society and the dictatorship of the proletariat; if you think about the effect of all that, and you are a materialist and you apply dialectics, it is very difficult to think that we are immune from the effects of all that and that it only influences people outside the Party. Even in our thinking and our souls, if you want to use that term, in our heart of hearts, don’t we have questions about whether we were wrong about all this: Why did we lose? If we were so right, and if what we’re for is so correct, why did it end up this way? I don’t think there are very many comrades who can say they haven’t had those questions agonizing within them, probably more than once.
　　
　　We have an answer to those things, but you have to dig for that answer and you have to keep on digging—and you have to be scientific. You have to go to materialism and dialectics.”
　　
　　The problem was that, while Bob Avakian and a few others in the Party had been “digging” in this way, applying the scientific outlook and method of dialectical materialism, most of the Party, on all levels, was not doing so—and instead was, to a large degree, “buying into” the slanders of communism and becoming swept up in what Lenin so incisively identified as the spontaneous striving to come under the wing of the bourgeoisie, ideologically and politically: retreating into the confines of bourgeois democracy and bourgeois right, tailing after the outlooks characterizing the reformist movements—including “identity politics” and the related relativism philosophically (the idea that there is no objective truth, or that objective truth cannot be determined with any degree of certainty, and that there are merely different groups or individuals with different “narratives,” all equally true, or untrue)—and replacing revolution with reform as the basic objective.
　

　　42.
　　
　　 » 我們黨內(nèi)的修正主義體現(xiàn)的正是共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中長(zhǎng)期存在的修正主義特性，這一點(diǎn)已經(jīng)被列寧揭示——它體現(xiàn)在這樣一種概念上：“（共產(chǎn)主義）運(yùn)動(dòng)本身就是一切，并無(wú)最終目的”，一切都被決定，必需的便是可能的，可能的便是業(yè)已做過(guò)的。這又使得在人民大眾中產(chǎn)生一種錯(cuò)誤意義上的“挖掘”，偏離了革命和共產(chǎn)主義，充其量只是以一種毫無(wú)意義的、無(wú)生命力的方式導(dǎo)向改良主義，拋棄了本黨現(xiàn)行活動(dòng)的真實(shí)意義，也割裂它們之間的聯(lián)系——結(jié)果是埋葬了革命和共產(chǎn)主義。黨員們總是很忙——被這事，被那事占據(jù)了時(shí)間，但革命與共產(chǎn)主義除外。
　　
　　 從本質(zhì)上講，這是“經(jīng)濟(jì)主義”的一種形式（備注：經(jīng)濟(jì)主義是“以追求眼前經(jīng)濟(jì)利益為特征的機(jī)會(huì)主義思潮。產(chǎn)生于19世紀(jì)末。認(rèn)為無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)的主要任務(wù)是進(jìn)行經(jīng)濟(jì)斗爭(zhēng)，反對(duì)進(jìn)行推翻資產(chǎn)階級(jí)制度的斗爭(zhēng)，否認(rèn)建立統(tǒng)一的馬克思主義政黨的必要性。”—百度百科）。在共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的歷史上，經(jīng)濟(jì)主義意味著把工人階級(jí)的關(guān)心重點(diǎn)集中在眼前的經(jīng)濟(jì)利益和斗爭(zhēng)之上，把它看作實(shí)現(xiàn)自身利益，并在某天實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)主義和共產(chǎn)主義的“最普遍適用的方式”。列寧在其名著《怎么辦？》中對(duì)這種觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了徹底的揭露和駁斥，他指出這種觀點(diǎn)永遠(yuǎn)也不能發(fā)起一個(gè)志在共產(chǎn)主義的革命運(yùn)動(dòng)，它只會(huì)淪落在資本主義制度的體制內(nèi)，限制了革命運(yùn)動(dòng)和其中的民眾。為了反對(duì)這種觀點(diǎn)，列寧強(qiáng)調(diào)，雖然對(duì)于共產(chǎn)主義者來(lái)說(shuō)，親自參加或參與到重大的民眾斗爭(zhēng)之中，甚至努力去領(lǐng)導(dǎo)這些斗爭(zhēng)是非常重要的，但他們要做的是那些共產(chǎn)主義者應(yīng)該去做的，他們的工作重點(diǎn)是：通過(guò)及時(shí)和令人信服的鼓動(dòng)和宣傳，揭露資本主義制度的特性和本質(zhì)，樹(shù)立我們的共產(chǎn)主義信念和目標(biāo)，由此把這些斗爭(zhēng)和運(yùn)動(dòng)與革命和共產(chǎn)主義的目標(biāo)聯(lián)系起來(lái)，使得這些斗爭(zhēng)和人民大眾不再是單純的自發(fā)行為，而是轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橘Y本主義羽翼下的有目的行為，朝著革命目標(biāo)前進(jìn)。自列寧時(shí)代以將，經(jīng)濟(jì)主義通過(guò)宣揚(yáng)“最普遍適用的方式”這種概念，逐漸拓展了它的含義，它不再僅限于工人階級(jí)的經(jīng)濟(jì)斗爭(zhēng)，還延伸至諸多階層之間斗爭(zhēng)的范疇——使得共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的根本重點(diǎn)集中在組織這種斗爭(zhēng)之上，而至少在口頭上，實(shí)際已將革命和共產(chǎn)主義的前景看作為某種抽象的東西，屬于遙遠(yuǎn)的不確定未來(lái)，與現(xiàn)時(shí)的（社會(huì)）狀況、某個(gè)時(shí)間上的運(yùn)動(dòng)和斗爭(zhēng)毫無(wú)關(guān)聯(lián)。
　　
　　---------------------原文---------------------------------
　　» The revisionism within our Party was characterized by long-standing features of revisionism in the communist movement that Lenin had also exposed—which were embodied in the notion that “the movement is everything, the final aim is nothing,” and the determinist orientation that what is necessary is what is possible, and what is possible is what is already being done. This involved “digging in” among the masses in the wrong sense—on a narrow basis and with a narrow conception of struggle, with revolution and communism left to the side or at most “tacked on,” in a meaningless and lifeless way, to reformist work, and gutted of any real meaning and connection to the ongoing activity of the Party—in effect burying revolution and communism. Party members were often very busy—but occupied, or preoccupied, with everything but revolution and communism.
　　
　　In essence, this was a form of “economism.” Historically in the communist movement, economism has meant focusing the attention of the working class on its own immediate conditions and struggles as the “most widely applicable means” of winning them, some day, to socialism and communism—an approach which Lenin thoroughly exposed and refuted in his famous work What Is To Be Done?, where he showed that this approach will never lead to building a revolutionary movement aiming for communism but will only contribute to confining the movement, and the masses involved in it, within the framework of capitalism. In opposition to this, Lenin emphasized that, while it is important for communists to take part in and relate to significant struggles of the masses, and even to strive to lead many of these struggles, they must do so as communists, whose emphasis is on doing exposure of the features and nature of the capitalist system, through timely and compelling agitation and propaganda, setting before all our communist convictions and aims, and in this way linking the struggles and movements of the day with the goal of revolution and communism, diverting these struggles, and the masses of people, from the spontaneous striving to come under the wing of the bourgeoisie, and leading all this toward the revolutionary goal. Since the time of Lenin, economism has come to take on the broader meaning of applying the notion of “most widely applicable means” not only to economic struggles of workers but more generally to struggles among many different strata—making the essential focus of communist work organizing such struggles and in reality, if not always in words, treating the prospect of revolution and communism as something abstract and belonging to a far off realm in the indefinite future, with no living link to the present and the movements and struggles at any given time.

　　43.
　　
　　 本質(zhì)上說(shuō)，經(jīng)濟(jì)主義以非革命替代革命，坐等革命形勢(shì)的主動(dòng)來(lái)臨，經(jīng)濟(jì)主義者的信條是：“以改革等待革命”——依照這種方法，革命永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)主動(dòng)到來(lái)，也不能實(shí)際取得。經(jīng)濟(jì)主義的基本特征表現(xiàn)為“跟隨民眾”，而不是爭(zhēng)做先鋒以便領(lǐng)導(dǎo)他們——向民眾學(xué)習(xí)，但在學(xué)習(xí)中加以領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，使他們的眼光得到提高進(jìn)而認(rèn)識(shí)到革命的可能性和必需性，與他們一起工作、抗?fàn)帲瑺?zhēng)取他們信仰革命和堅(jiān)持共產(chǎn)主義立場(chǎng)，為實(shí)現(xiàn)無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)解放目標(biāo)而斗爭(zhēng)。
　　
　　 經(jīng)濟(jì)主義以及整體上的修正主義，在我們黨內(nèi)的實(shí)際工作、生活和文化之中表現(xiàn)得越來(lái)越明顯，它們同時(shí)也體現(xiàn)出了共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)中常見(jiàn)的實(shí)用主義和經(jīng)驗(yàn)主義特征（關(guān)于這一點(diǎn)，我們已經(jīng)在上面討論過(guò)了），以及某種不可知論，對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義既定原則，甚至對(duì)革命和共產(chǎn)主義的可取性與可能性都提出了懷疑。對(duì)于目前的共產(chǎn)主義理論以及本黨主席鮑勃.艾沃肯所帶來(lái)的真正理論突破，大部分黨員所持的態(tài)度是忽視而不是反對(duì)，或者同樣毫無(wú)興趣的說(shuō)“哇，真不賴”，然后束之高閣，獨(dú)染灰塵。這是因?yàn)檫@些共產(chǎn)主義理論以及它的理論突破，雖然對(duì)革命和共產(chǎn)主義目標(biāo)來(lái)說(shuō)是非常重要的，但對(duì)于那些深陷經(jīng)濟(jì)主義和修正主義的人來(lái)說(shuō)，卻是毫無(wú)價(jià)值沒(méi)有用的東西。
　　
　　 與上述相關(guān)的是，這種“修正主義繡包”里還有另外一個(gè)重要花樣，已經(jīng)在我們黨內(nèi)流行了起來(lái)，它并不將共產(chǎn)主義看作為一個(gè)真正的革命方向（我們必須堅(jiān)持這種革命方向以改變世界，人民大眾能夠而且必須自覺(jué)主動(dòng)的去為這種革命方向而奮斗），而是將共產(chǎn)主義減化為一種“可替代的生活方式”。根據(jù)這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)，我們黨正或多或少的走向自我證實(shí)的內(nèi)在對(duì)立。有時(shí)這種“可替代的生活方式”令人忙著關(guān)注自己和其他人，不斷在不同的眼前利益間跳來(lái)跳去；有時(shí)又為自己是共產(chǎn)主義者而飄飄然、自我滿意，自認(rèn)擁有了專門(mén)的歷史知識(shí)和倫理理論，然而縱使你擁有這些知識(shí)也努力嘗試過(guò)，你依舊可能永遠(yuǎn)無(wú)法與別人溝通；有時(shí)它只意味著原地踏步，將重要思想扔到冷凍箱中不聞不問(wèn)。我們黨的工作越來(lái)越多的采取向大眾灌輸枯燥思想理論的方法，將這些思想描述為“神秘知識(shí)的神殿”，進(jìn)而將共產(chǎn)主義變成一種無(wú)生命力的、實(shí)質(zhì)上宗教般的教條主義。
　　
　　--------------------------原文-----------------------------
　　In essence, in place of the orientation of revolutionary work in a non-revolutionary situation, hastening while awaiting the development of a revolutionary situation, the economist recipe is: reformist work pending revolution—a revolution which will never come and is never actually built for with this approach. What all manifestations of economism have as a fundamental characteristic is tailing the masses, instead of acting as a vanguard to lead the masses—learning from them, yes, but leading while learning—raising their sights to the possibility and necessity of revolution and working and struggling with them to win them to take up the revolutionary and communist standpoint and fight for its emancipating goals.
　　
　　» The economism and overall revisionism that was increasingly characterizing the actual work, life, and culture of our Party was also marked by the pragmatism and empiricism that has been so common in the communist movement (and which we have discussed above), as well as agnosticism about well-established principles of communism and even about the desirability as well as the possibility of revolution and communism. The ongoing theoretical work and real breakthroughs in communist theory that the Chairman of the Party, Bob Avakian, was carrying forward were not so much frontally opposed as largely ignored by most of the Party—or in some cases greeted with an equally uninterested “wow, heavy” and then put on the shelf to gather dust—because such theoretical work and the breakthroughs it produced, while crucial in relation to the goals of revolution and communism, were not of value and not “useful” to those mired in an economist and revisionist orientation.
　　
　　» Related to the above, another key element of the “revisionist package” that had gained such currency within our Party was the approach not of treating communism as a real, revolutionary orientation—which must be consistently applied to change the world, and which masses of people can and must be won to take up consciously and actively fight for—but instead reducing communism to an “alternative lifestyle.” With this viewpoint, the Party was becoming just one more self-validating oppositional niche, more or less trendy. Sometimes this “alternative lifestyle” meant busily preoccupying yourself, and everyone else, dashing from one immediate struggle to the next; sometimes it took the form of smug, dogmatic satisfaction at (supposedly) being a communist, with your special knowledge of history and set of ethics (that you could never connect with anyone, if you even still ever tried); sometimes it just meant marking time, putting critical thinking in the freezer. The work of the Party was increasingly marked by the approach of feeding the masses pablum while maintaining, as the special province of the “initiated,” what has been described as “a temple of secret knowledge”—turning communism into a lifeless, essentially religious, dogma.
　　 　　

    44.
　　
　　 在反對(duì)鮑勃.艾沃肯的著作、美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨報(bào)、黨的其它出版物和官方文件，以及黨內(nèi)主要公眾人物的運(yùn)動(dòng)中，書(shū)店也加入其中，比如，它們散發(fā)出舊時(shí)代的霉味（宣揚(yáng)舊有的觀念），充當(dāng)著忙碌的（非革命的）各色“運(yùn)動(dòng)中心”角色。這些反對(duì)運(yùn)動(dòng)有非常多的變化形式，但是它們的根源和結(jié)局是同樣的：修正主義。
　　
　　 伴隨與此的是明確的反感和刻意的避免在人民大眾之中進(jìn)行意識(shí)形態(tài)上的斗爭(zhēng)，尤其是反對(duì)宗教觀念和概念以及其它落后觀點(diǎn)，而這些實(shí)際上正是束縛在人民大眾身上的枷鎖、精神鉸鏈。這種反感和刻意發(fā)展到了一定程度便成了不情愿甚至是直接的拒絕，進(jìn)而成了反共產(chǎn)主義的偏見(jiàn)和成見(jiàn)，這種現(xiàn)象在今日非常普遍，但同時(shí)也非常膚淺。
　　
　　 總體而言，在最根本意義上，“修正主義派”代表了對(duì)革命的放棄：即使沒(méi)有明說(shuō)或者以某種公開(kāi)的態(tài)度表明，但他們的確采取了“我們已經(jīng)看到了所有我們將要看到的革命”的態(tài)度。最多，革命只是遙遠(yuǎn)將來(lái)的事情，或者是別人的事情，在其他地方，也許是第三世界，它能取得成功，但若遵照修正主義的觀點(diǎn)，革命成功與我們黨一直做的或應(yīng)該做的基本無(wú)緣，當(dāng)然我們也許可以去充當(dāng)其它地方革命斗爭(zhēng)的拉拉隊(duì)。對(duì)我們黨以及它的文化來(lái)說(shuō)，在這種修正主義的影響下，自由主義在黨內(nèi)猖獗橫行，一種普遍的態(tài)度在本質(zhì)上相當(dāng)于說(shuō)：“來(lái)吧，讓我們面對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)，你能指望什么？在這個(gè)國(guó)家你不可能擁有一個(gè)真正是革命先鋒隊(duì)的政黨，它的的確確配得上革命共產(chǎn)黨這個(gè)稱號(hào)。”
　　
　　 我們黨內(nèi)的兩條路線在根本上相互對(duì)立，矛盾日益尖銳，其中一條是以鮑勃.艾沃肯新整合的方法論和觀點(diǎn)為基礎(chǔ)的新興勢(shì)力，另一條便是黨內(nèi)所謂的“官方”路線、文件和黨刊，在另一方面說(shuō)就是“修正主義派”，這兩者無(wú)論特征上，還是我們?cè)诖烁攀鲞^(guò)的基本內(nèi)容上都互不相同，在近幾年間它們已經(jīng)發(fā)展到了如下的地步：這兩股對(duì)立的路線再也不能在黨內(nèi)彼此共存下去了，或者這種共存將導(dǎo)致修正主義的勝利和真正充當(dāng)了革命-共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)角色的黨的滅亡。
　　
　　-------------------------原文------------------------
　　In opposition to the works of Bob Avakian and the Party’s newspaper and other publications and official documents, much of the public face of the Party—the bookstores associated with it, for instance—gave off the musty odor of relics of the past, or else the busy-ness of (non-revolutionary) “movement centers.” The variations in all this may have been many, but the source and result were the same: revisionism.
　　
　　» Along with all this was a definite aversion to, and a studied avoidance of, carrying out ideological struggle with masses of people, particularly in opposition to religious conceptions and notions as well as other backward viewpoints which are, in fact, shackles, mental chains, on the masses of people. This went so far as to include even a reluctance, or refusal, to take on the anti-communist prejudices and preconceptions that are now so widespread but at the same time so superficial.
　　
　　» Overall and most fundamentally, what this “revisionist package” represented was giving up on revolution: adopting—even if without saying so explicitly and in an open and aboveboard way—the attitude that “we’ve seen all the revolution we’re going to see.” At most, revolution was something for the distant future—or it was for others, somewhere else—perhaps it could succeed in the Third World but, with the revisionist viewpoint, that was seen as having very little in the way of a real, and living, relation to what our Party was doing or should do (other than, perhaps, to reduce itself to being vacuous “cheerleaders” of revolutionary struggles elsewhere). As for the Party and its culture, under the influence of this revisionism, liberalism ran rampant and a general attitude took hold that said in essence: “C’mon, let’s be realistic—what do you expect?—you can’t have a party in this country that is really a vanguard of revolution, that is actually worthy of the name Revolutionary Communist Party.”
　　
　　The fundamentally antagonistic and increasingly acute contradiction between these two lines—the developing body of work and method and approach of Bob Avakian and the “official” line, documents, and publications of the Party, on the one hand, and the “revisionist package,” with the various features and the essential content we have outlined here—came fully to a head in the last few years: These opposing lines could no longer coexist within the Party, or such “coexistence” would lead to the triumph of revisionism and the end of the Party as any kind of a real revolutionary-communist vanguard.
　　 　　

　　45.
　　
　　 誘發(fā)黨內(nèi)因?yàn)檫@些分歧而爆發(fā)公開(kāi)的、深刻的沖突的原因出現(xiàn)在這樣的背景下：黨內(nèi)正準(zhǔn)備發(fā)起一場(chǎng)運(yùn)動(dòng)，以便建立以鮑勃.艾沃肯同志為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的黨內(nèi)新格局，創(chuàng)立以理解、提高認(rèn)識(shí)以及普及他的研究成果、方法論與觀點(diǎn)為核心的黨內(nèi)文化。創(chuàng)建這種文化如今已被視為我們黨全方位革命工作的兩個(gè)支柱之一（另一個(gè)支柱是我黨的報(bào)刊，所有這些在我們黨新的黨章中都有討論）。但在那時(shí)，也就幾年之前，黨內(nèi)對(duì)此的討論比以往更清楚的揭露了一點(diǎn)：在黨內(nèi)，就像最近一份黨內(nèi)文件所提及的，“對(duì)黨主席鮑勃.艾沃肯的革命和共產(chǎn)主義再設(shè)想理論，即新整合（提出這些理論恰恰是黨主席的首要工作責(zé)任）缺乏深入的理解。”這份黨內(nèi)文件如此說(shuō)：
　　
　　 “這項(xiàng)新整合工作在這一點(diǎn)上已經(jīng)持續(xù)了25年，但修正主義路線正在背棄這項(xiàng)工作，首先是不理解，然后隨著事情的發(fā)展，進(jìn)而直接反對(duì)了。
　　
　　 一些新的事物曾經(jīng)(現(xiàn)在依舊)努力的展現(xiàn)在世界的面前；它奮力向上，不僅反對(duì)常規(guī)的智慧，也反對(duì)教條主義，和共產(chǎn)主義中的改良主義。但是它要么遭受到黨內(nèi)同志的反對(duì)…要么就被忽視，要么最多只是被視為“有趣的玩意”。它的內(nèi)容普遍沒(méi)有被掌握，或者被折衷的反對(duì)。在實(shí)踐中它被看作無(wú)關(guān)緊要的東西。粗俗的經(jīng)驗(yàn)主義“理論不能先于實(shí)踐”…從未受到根本性的挑戰(zhàn)，大行其道。
　　
　　 自中國(guó)十年文化大革命之后，太多的人都不能將馬克思主義從修正主義中區(qū)分出來(lái)， 鮑勃.艾沃肯對(duì)這個(gè)難題進(jìn)行了深入的研究。這個(gè)難題被許多同志忽視過(guò)，也有許多同志為此寢食不安過(guò)。他深入研究這些極端棘手的問(wèn)題并尋找到了答案，然而卻再次遭遇反對(duì)，要么是直接的反對(duì)，要么通過(guò)“忽視”來(lái)達(dá)到這一目的。這種修正主義的反對(duì)行為在客觀上達(dá)到了“買(mǎi)斷”“共產(chǎn)主義之死”的目的，通過(guò)此，它用冰冷的、教條主義式的宗教般的信仰替代了鮮活的、發(fā)展著的共產(chǎn)主義，后者實(shí)際上正在努力解決（和提供答案）《我們?yōu)槭裁词チ酥袊?guó)》中所提到的痛苦問(wèn)題。”
　　
　　 在這點(diǎn)上，我們黨內(nèi)修正主義與共產(chǎn)主義之間的對(duì)立不僅表現(xiàn)得越來(lái)越明顯，而且已經(jīng)尖銳的集中在這樣的問(wèn)題上：對(duì)于在鮑勃.艾沃肯領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下能夠獲得的一切認(rèn)識(shí)和他的新整合理論的核心，我們是否應(yīng)該充分理解并將它們灌輸給人民大眾，或者干脆拋棄它們，拒絕按此行事。在這些情況下，前者代表了在革命和共產(chǎn)主義的道路上繼續(xù)前行，這是因?yàn)轷U勃.艾沃肯所提出的理論本身、方法論和觀點(diǎn)，在共產(chǎn)主義的發(fā)展過(guò)程中，表現(xiàn)為一種有生命力的科學(xué)和革命戰(zhàn)略方向；而我們黨內(nèi)的另一派，則代表了向改良主義和帝國(guó)主義的后退，縱使它依舊保持著“共產(chǎn)主義”，把共產(chǎn)主義當(dāng)做一種宗教教義和（或者）一類“可替換的生活方式”。
　　
　　 在充分認(rèn)識(shí)到局勢(shì)的嚴(yán)重性、其中的利害關(guān)系和相關(guān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，以及克服危機(jī)只能依靠黨內(nèi)核心層后，鮑勃.艾沃肯大膽的提出在美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨進(jìn)行一場(chǎng)文化大革命。同時(shí)他指出，這必須是一場(chǎng)發(fā)生在“革命長(zhǎng)征”中間階段的文化大革命，通過(guò)這個(gè)比喻強(qiáng)調(diào)了我們黨的根本性變革和振興（即這場(chǎng)文化大革命的目的和宗旨），必須在對(duì)更大范圍內(nèi)客觀世界改造的背景下進(jìn)行，而且也必須從根本上服務(wù)于這種改造。這項(xiàng)工作的開(kāi)展必須在共產(chǎn)主義原則和目標(biāo)的指導(dǎo)下進(jìn)行，以期成為一個(gè)革命的而非改良的運(yùn)動(dòng)。我們?cè)诖擞懻撝T久的原因是，這場(chǎng)文化大革命的重點(diǎn)和關(guān)鍵問(wèn)題在于我們是把根基建筑在鮑勃.艾沃肯所提出的理論本身、方法論和觀點(diǎn)上，并且遵循這種先進(jìn)的新整合理論以及它所蘊(yùn)含的革命戰(zhàn)略；還是轉(zhuǎn)身離開(kāi)這種理論，代之以另一種修正主義或折衷主義。
　　
　　 在今年年初的一次對(duì)黨員談話中，鮑勃.艾沃肯闡述了文化大革命初始階段的方針：
　　
　　-----------------------原文----------------------------
　　The precipitating factor, leading to open and profound struggle over these fundamental differences, occurred in the context where the Party was preparing to carry out a campaign of building a culture of appreciation, promotion, and popularization of Bob Avakian’s role as a communist leader, as concentrated in his body of work and method and approach. Building this culture of appreciation, promotion, and popularization has now come to be recognized as one of the two mainstays of our Party’s all-around revolutionary work (the other mainstay is wielding our Party’s press—all this is discussed in our Party’s new Constitution). But at the time, only a few years ago, discussions about this within the Party revealed, more clearly than had been apparent before, that within the Party itself there was, as a recent internal Party document puts it, “an abysmal lack of appreciation for what had actually been the principal content of the Chair’s work—his re-envisioning of revolution and communism, the new synthesis.” As this internal document goes on to point out:
　　
　　The work of this new synthesis had been going on for 25 years at that point; but the revisionist line was turning away from that work, first in non-comprehension and then, as things developed, objective opposition.
　　Something new was—and is—struggling to be born into the world; it’s fighting uphill against both conventional wisdom and the dogmatism, along with reformism, of the communists. But this was either opposed by comrades...or else this was ignored, or at most treated as “interesting.” And almost universally its content was not grasped (or eclectically opposed). In practice it was treated as irrelevant. The vulgar empiricism that “theory cannot run ahead of practice”...went essentially unchallenged in the ranks.
　　
　　Bob Avakian had been confronting and going deeply into the real problems that had led to all too many people being unable to distinguish Marxism from revisionism after ten years of the GPCR in China. This was ignored by many comrades, and some became downright uncomfortable with this. The fact that he had gone deeply into this and begun to develop answers to these extremely vexing questions: again, opposed—either outright, or through “ignore-ance.” This [revisionist opposition] amounted, objectively, to “buying into” the “death of communism”—in that it replaced living, developing communist leadership, actually grappling with (and forging answers to) the agonizing questions of “why we lost China” with frozen, dogmatic religious faith.
　　At this point, the opposition between the revisionist and communist lines in our Party had not only become more fully expressed but had become clearly and sharply focused on the question of whether to grasp, and boldly take out to the masses of people, what is represented by the leadership of Bob Avakian and is concentrated in the new synthesis he is bringing forward—or whether to reject this and refuse to act on it. In these circumstances, the former represented advancing on the road of revolution and communism—because the role of Bob Avakian and his body of work and method and approach consists, above all, in the development of communism, as a living science and strategic revolutionary orientation—while the opposition to this within our Party represented, in a concentrated way, retreating into reformism and capitulation to imperialism, even if this was done while maintaining “communism” as some kind of religious catechism and/or an “alternative lifestyle.”
　　Fully recognizing the seriousness of the situation and the stakes, as well as the risks, involved—and able to rely at that point only on a very small core within the Party leadership—Bob Avakian boldly issued a call for a Cultural Revolution within the RCP. At the same time, he insisted that this must be a Cultural Revolution in the midst of a Long March—emphasizing through this metaphor that the radical transformation and revolutionary revitalization of the Party, which was the purpose and aim of this Cultural Revolution, must be carried out in the context of, and fundamentally to serve, the transformation of the larger objective world—the carrying out of work by the Party which would actually be guided by communist principles and objectives and would build a revolutionary, and not a reformist, movement. For the reasons that have been discussed here, the focal point and cardinal question of this Cultural Revolution was whether to base ourselves on and actively carry out the new synthesis and the overall body of work and method and approach of Bob Avakian, and the advance in communist theory and strategy that this concentrates, or whether to turn away from that and adopt instead one or another variation—or some eclectic stew—of revisionism.
　　
　　In a talk earlier this year to a group of Party members, Bob Avakian spoke about his orientation at the start of this Cultural Revolution:
　　 　　

　　46.
　　
　　 “大約5年前，我就發(fā)現(xiàn)和遭遇到了這些事情，在那時(shí)，盡管黨在“官方”路線上還堅(jiān)持著革命-共產(chǎn)主義的方針，但實(shí)際上，黨內(nèi)到處充斥著修正主義并且被修正主義所左右。對(duì)我而言，有三個(gè)選擇，這三個(gè)選擇是：
　　
　　1、接受既定事實(shí)，在本質(zhì)上放棄一切我們黨本應(yīng)該遵循的東西；
　　
　　2、退~黨，重新組建一個(gè)新黨；
　　
　　3、在黨內(nèi)發(fā)起一場(chǎng)文化革命。
　　
　　 我當(dāng)時(shí)相信，現(xiàn)在也依舊認(rèn)為，就像我在別處和今早說(shuō)過(guò)的那樣，最后一種選擇才是正確的、也是必須的方向。這是因?yàn)椋紫纫粋€(gè)已經(jīng)存在的政黨是值得去珍惜的，此外倘若不成熟地、不正確地放棄這個(gè)黨再去創(chuàng)立一個(gè)新的政黨，那也是非常艱難的。但是，是的，這是真的，這世界沒(méi)有哪個(gè)黨是神圣不可侵的，如果美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨不能真正成為革命的先鋒隊(duì)，那就甩了它——讓我們?nèi)プ鳇c(diǎn)別的事情，得到別的東西。但我當(dāng)時(shí)相信，現(xiàn)在也如此認(rèn)為，我們決不能放棄我們黨，除非在客觀上和科學(xué)上都明確表明，已經(jīng)沒(méi)有任何希望將它改造為它本應(yīng)該的面目。”
　　
　　 文化大革命不是黨內(nèi)清洗，而是斗爭(zhēng)——意識(shí)形態(tài)上的斗爭(zhēng)，它的目的與方法不是針對(duì)個(gè)人，而是將革命主義路線和修正主義路線二者進(jìn)行比較與對(duì)照，通過(guò)這種方式以革命主義路線來(lái)加深黨和黨員的基礎(chǔ)，同時(shí)揭露和批判修正主義路線，與之決裂，進(jìn)而恢復(fù)和激勵(lì)各級(jí)別黨員堅(jiān)定自己革命者和共產(chǎn)主義者的身份；堅(jiān)定采取科學(xué)共產(chǎn)主義方法論和觀點(diǎn)；拯救和振興美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨，使之成為一支真正的革命共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)，有能力、有決心承擔(dān)起它應(yīng)盡的責(zé)任。黨內(nèi)的文化大革命，它的實(shí)質(zhì)與進(jìn)程在它發(fā)起后的5年間，經(jīng)歷了各種各樣的復(fù)雜情況，有時(shí)甚至是非常激烈的情況。它經(jīng)歷了許多的曲折，它要求我們進(jìn)行不斷的、更深層次的意識(shí)形態(tài)上的斗爭(zhēng)，從而在部分黨員以及黨身上剔除掉修正主義的影響，再一次實(shí)現(xiàn)飛躍，成為更深意義上的共產(chǎn)主義者和共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)，這是我們本該做的，也是我們現(xiàn)在決心去做的。它經(jīng)歷了諸多不同階段，并在早期階段取得了決定性的進(jìn)展，當(dāng)時(shí)黨的路線在基本層面上處于革命路線上，并在鮑勃.艾沃肯的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下朝著革命路線繼續(xù)發(fā)展和奮斗，在此基礎(chǔ)之上加強(qiáng)黨的決心與能力，貫徹文化大革命，從而擊敗修正主義，挽救和振興我黨作為革命共產(chǎn)主義先鋒隊(duì)的這一目標(biāo)。
　　
　　-------------------原文-------------------------
　　“As I saw and confronted things at the time, more or less 5 years ago, there were three basic choices when it became clear that, despite the continuing revolutionary-communist character of the Party’s “official” line, the Party was in fact “saturated with” and even characterized by revisionism. The three choices were:
　　
　　accept this Party as it was, and in essence give up on what the Party is supposed to be all about;
　　
　　quit, and set out to start a new Party;
　　
　　or, launch the Cultural Revolution.
　　
　　I believed then, and still believe now, for reasons I’ve spoken to elsewhere and earlier today, that the latter course was the only correct course and the necessary course. This is for reasons having to do with how precious a party is, and how difficult it would be to create a new party if in fact prematurely and incorrectly this Party were given up on. But, yes, it is true, there is nothing holy about a party, and if it’s not going to be a revolutionary vanguard, then fuck it!—let’s do something else and get something else. But I believed then, and believe now, that we must not give up on this Party unless objectively and scientifically it is clearly indicated that there is no hope for actually transforming this Party into what it needs to be.”
　　
　　This Cultural Revolution was not a purge but a struggle—an ideological struggle whose purpose and method was not to target individuals but to compare and contrast the revolutionary line with the revisionist line and in this way to deepen the foundation of the Party, and its members, in the revolutionary line while exposing, criticizing, and rupturing with the revisionist line—to revive and give even greater impetus to the orientation of Party members, on all levels, as revolutionaries and communists, to ground this more firmly in a scientific communist method and approach, and to rescue and revitalize the Party as a whole as a real revolutionary-communist vanguard capable of and determined to take on its responsibilities as that, and nothing less. The course and nature of this Cultural Revolution, over the five or so years since its initiation, has been complex and at times intense. It has involved a number of twists and turns and has required repeated, and deepening, ideological struggles to bring about a basic rupture, on the part of members of the Party and the Party as a whole, with revisionism and a leap to becoming—once again, and on a more profound basis—communists and the communist vanguard we are required to be and are now determined to be. It has been marked by different stages, with a decisive advance taking place in its early stages, when the leadership of the Party collectively rallied, in fundamental terms, to the revolutionary line and the leadership of Bob Avakian in developing and fighting for that line, and on that basis deepened its determination and ability to carry this Cultural Revolution through to defeat revisionism and rescue and revitalize the Party as a revolutionary-communist vanguard.
　　 　　

　　47.
　　
　　 就像預(yù)計(jì)的那樣，這種規(guī)模的斗爭(zhēng)帶有很大的賭注，在黨內(nèi)文化大革命的過(guò)程中，我們黨與那些愿意與帝國(guó)主義保持和平、容忍帝國(guó)帝國(guó)主義滔天罪行的人分道揚(yáng)鑣了，盡管這些人有時(shí)仍然自稱為共產(chǎn)主義者，或者也會(huì)表達(dá)出對(duì)更好世界的期望，然而，他們不愿意擔(dān)負(fù)斗爭(zhēng)的職責(zé)，不愿意接受可能的犧牲，而犧牲正是實(shí)現(xiàn)這一期望所必須的。有些人拒絕，或者發(fā)現(xiàn)自己無(wú)法同修正主義決裂，所以退~黨（或者被人說(shuō)服后退~黨）。那些退~黨的人，除了少數(shù)的例外，大多數(shù)人不相信革命是可能的，至少在這個(gè)國(guó)家、在任何有意義的時(shí)間框架內(nèi)是不可能的，同時(shí)，甚至有一些人承認(rèn)他們已不再把革命和共產(chǎn)主義視為可取的。實(shí)際上，這并不意味著革命是不可能的、共產(chǎn)主義是不可取的，而是意味著這些人的革命意志和共產(chǎn)主義理想已經(jīng)退化了，意味著不像那些已經(jīng)通過(guò)黨內(nèi)文化大革命考驗(yàn)并再次將自己與共產(chǎn)主義事業(yè)深深聯(lián)系在一起的黨員同志那樣，這些背棄黨的人認(rèn)識(shí)到，革命和共產(chǎn)主義的目標(biāo)要求他們承擔(dān)“艱辛的工作，危險(xiǎn)的工作，經(jīng)常不受歡迎的‘反潮流’工作，以實(shí)現(xiàn)革命和共產(chǎn)主義的目標(biāo)。”但他們不愿意承擔(dān)。他們不再符合我們黨章中所提及的基本準(zhǔn)則。（黨章第二部分：組織原則）：
　　
　　 “美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨是由那些為幫助實(shí)現(xiàn)人類最偉大需要而走到一起的人組成的，這個(gè)偉大需要是：革命，朝著共產(chǎn)主義邁出第一步。他們嚴(yán)肅沉靜，飽含熱愛(ài)，激蕩決心與熱情，愿意為此獻(xiàn)出自己的生命。”
　　
　　 在其主要方面和本質(zhì)上，我們黨內(nèi)文化大革命的結(jié)果是黨的革命和共產(chǎn)主義世界觀、目標(biāo)、精神和文化的真正振興，我們竭盡所能的為美國(guó)的革命而奮斗，為全世界同樣的革命事業(yè)（最終目標(biāo)都是共產(chǎn)主義）提供最大的幫助，我們正視和科學(xué)對(duì)待一切由此造成的復(fù)雜性、困難、危險(xiǎn)和可能后果。這個(gè)斗爭(zhēng)在黨內(nèi)，將依靠新的基礎(chǔ)而繼續(xù)進(jìn)行，進(jìn)一步加強(qiáng)和深化它的革命性和基礎(chǔ)，以黨的革命共產(chǎn)主義路線為指引，繼續(xù)努力的、有創(chuàng)造性的推進(jìn)革命事業(yè)。
　　
　　----------------------原文-------------------------
　　As should be expected in a struggle of this magnitude and with these stakes, the process of the Cultural Revolution in our Party has been one which has involved a dividing out with those who were willing to make their peace with imperialism and its monstrous crimes, even if sometimes they would still call themselves communists, or would express the wish that a better world could be brought into being, so long as they did not have to take responsibility for the struggle, and face the sacrifices that would be required to actually make this a reality. Some people refused, or found themselves unable, to rupture with revisionism and so resigned (or were prevailed upon to resign) from the Party. For the most part, and with a few exceptions,17 those who have left the Party have done so on the basis of insisting that they do not believe that revolution is possible—at least not in this country, not in any meaningful time frame—while some have even acknowledged that they no longer regard revolution and communism as desirable. In reality, what this means is not that revolution is not possible, and communism not desirable, but that these people’s revolutionary will and communist orientation have degenerated and—unlike those who have come forward through the course of the Cultural Revolution in our Party, and once again and more deeply have committed themselves to the cause of communism—those who have turned their back on the Party and on revolution recognize that this revolution and its goal of communism will require, but they are not willing to undertake, “the hard work, the risky work, the often unpopular and ‘going against the tide’ work, to make this a reality.”18 They no longer meet the basic criteria spelled out in our Party’s Constitution (Part II. Principles of Organization):
　　
　　The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA is made up of people who have come together to help fulfill the greatest need before humanity: making revolution, as the first step toward communism. They have fully dedicated their lives to this—with great seriousness and great love; with great determination and great passion.19
　　
　　In its principal aspect and most essentially, the outcome of the Cultural Revolution within our Party has been a real revitalization of the revolutionary and communist outlook, objectives, spirit, and culture of the Party—a Party facing squarely, and confronting scientifically, the complexities, the difficulties and the dangers, as well as the inspiration, of doing all it can to work for revolution in this country, and to contribute the most it can to this same cause throughout the world, all aiming for the final goal of communism. And the struggle continues, on a new basis, within the Party to further strengthen, and deepen, its revolutionary character and foundations, in the context of vigorously and creatively carrying out revolutionary work, based on what is in fact the revolutionary-communist line of this Party.
　　 　　

　　48.
　　
　　 在共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段結(jié)束至今的整個(gè)時(shí)期內(nèi)，我們黨，還有一直關(guān)心著我們的人民大眾，以及更廣泛意義上的那些客觀利益依附在共產(chǎn)主義革命上的人們，由于在我們黨內(nèi)日漸得勢(shì)的修正主義的影響，一直為那些對(duì)共產(chǎn)主義革命第一階段采取錯(cuò)誤的總結(jié)和分析方法的的潮流所苦。帝國(guó)主義，老的和新的，蠻橫的抓住這一形勢(shì)，更加無(wú)情的掠奪世界，發(fā)動(dòng)了一場(chǎng)無(wú)情的意識(shí)形態(tài)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)和政治戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，企圖摧毀社會(huì)主義第一階段所取得的那些偉大成就，詆毀共產(chǎn)主義革命科學(xué)，這一革命科學(xué)揭示了現(xiàn)實(shí)世界斗爭(zhēng)的可能性并引導(dǎo)了這個(gè)斗爭(zhēng)，從而實(shí)現(xiàn)那些偉大的成就。通過(guò)黨內(nèi)的文化大革命，我們變得更加強(qiáng)大，在更高的層次上團(tuán)結(jié)一致，在思想上、政治上和組織上，更加堅(jiān)定的立足于共產(chǎn)主義科學(xué)，同時(shí)由于鮑勃.艾沃肯提出的新整合理論以及對(duì)這個(gè)理論的理解，共產(chǎn)主義科學(xué)得到了進(jìn)一步的發(fā)展，鮑勃.艾沃肯的新整合理論是一個(gè)鮮活的科學(xué)理論，我們必須通過(guò)不斷的斗爭(zhēng)，繼續(xù)遵循并進(jìn)一步發(fā)展它。
　　
　　 我們始終堅(jiān)持共產(chǎn)主義的原則和目標(biāo)，拒絕為改良主義而拋棄革命路線，為此我們付出了很多代價(jià)，改良主義的車(chē)轍已爛，毫無(wú)未來(lái)，雖然有人聲稱改良主義更符合“現(xiàn)實(shí)”，某種程度上更有“效用”，但無(wú)數(shù)的痛苦經(jīng)驗(yàn)一次又一次的表明，改良主義只有在使人民深陷資產(chǎn)階級(jí)統(tǒng)治和資本主義壓迫痛苦深淵時(shí)，才有“效用”。但是在承受這個(gè)代價(jià)的同時(shí)，現(xiàn)在我們做好了更大的準(zhǔn)備以承擔(dān)我們必須承當(dāng)?shù)闹卮筘?zé)任，我們有更大的決心去滿足擺在我們面前的需要，以鮑勃.艾沃肯的新整合理論為基礎(chǔ)，為美國(guó)的革命而積極奮斗，為此目標(biāo)我們做任何能做的事情，貢獻(xiàn)任何有意義的貢獻(xiàn)，同時(shí)，以同樣的態(tài)度，為世界范圍內(nèi)的共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)而奮斗。
　　
　　 我們充分意識(shí)到如此做可能面臨的問(wèn)題和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，由此我們正在總結(jié)自己的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，并且通過(guò)這個(gè)經(jīng)驗(yàn)我們更深刻也更牢固的掌握了諸多認(rèn)識(shí)，這個(gè)經(jīng)驗(yàn)因其共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)本身，以及給我們整個(gè)事業(yè)帶來(lái)的深刻教訓(xùn)和影響，為外人所周知。我們的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，尤其通過(guò)黨內(nèi)的文化大革命，極大的提升了我們對(duì)一些問(wèn)題的理解：對(duì)全世界這兒那兒的被壓迫大眾而言這意味著什么，對(duì)人類的未來(lái)而言這意味著什么；這個(gè)理解便是這樣一個(gè)政黨從未被擊敗和摧毀，這個(gè)政黨不僅保存下來(lái)了，而且還取得了真正的復(fù)興，不斷在思想上、政治上，以及革命觀點(diǎn)、共產(chǎn)主義方向和以科學(xué)為基礎(chǔ)的決心上得到加強(qiáng)，不懈努力，獲得此種理解后，縱使在帝國(guó)主義們強(qiáng)大的淫威下，全世界的人民也能聯(lián)合起來(lái)，朝著共同的目標(biāo)，不斷的自覺(jué)革命。正如我們黨主席鮑勃.艾沃肯最近所寫(xiě)道：
　　
　　 “利用這種方式，倚仗這種科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)，通過(guò)這種科學(xué)方法論和觀點(diǎn)的應(yīng)用，對(duì)于革命和共產(chǎn)主義，我們能夠，也必須擁有一種壓倒一切的精神力量和胸懷壯志的滿腔激情（借用了濟(jì)慈的一句詩(shī)句）。”
　　
　　-----------------------原文-----------------------------
　　Over a whole period of time, our Party has suffered—while masses of people who have looked to the Party, and the masses of people more broadly whose objective interests lie with communist revolution, have also suffered—as a result of the revisionism which had gained increasing influence within our Party, being fed by, and in turn strengthening, the tendency to adopt an incorrect summation and approach to the situation where the first stage of communist revolution had ended with the restoration of capitalism in China, and imperialists, old and new, were on a rampage to seize on this situation to even more ruthlessly plunder the world and to wage an unrelenting ideological and political war in the attempt to demolish any remaining respect for the great things that had actually been accomplished in that first stage of socialism and to discredit the revolutionary science of communism which brought to light the possibility and gave guidance to the real-world struggle that made possible those great achievements. Through the course of the Cultural Revolution in our Party, we have emerged much stronger, and unified on a much higher level, ideologically and politically as well as organizationally, more firmly grounded in the science of communism, as it has been further developed through the new synthesis brought forward by Bob Avakian, and with the understanding of this as a living science which we must continue to apply and to further develop, in an ongoing way and through continuing struggle.
　　
　　We have paid a price for sticking to communist principles and objectives and refusing to abandon the road of revolution for the well-worn ruts of reformism—which, it is claimed, is more “realistic” and will somehow “work”—when bitter experience has shown, over and over again, that this can only “work” to keep people contained within the killing confines of bourgeois rule and capitalist oppression. But having paid this price, we are now more prepared to take on the great responsibilities we must shoulder, more determined to rise to great needs before us—to actively work for revolution here, on the basis of the new synthesis brought forward by Bob Avakian, to make everything we do actively and meaningfully contribute to that revolutionary goal, and to fight for this same understanding and orientation in the communist movement in the world as a whole.
　　
　　Fully aware of very real problems and risks that may be involved in doing so, we are making our experience—and what we have come to grasp, more deeply and firmly, through this experience—known to others, in the communist movement and more broadly, because of its profound lessons and its great importance for our whole cause. Our experience, particularly through the Cultural Revolution in our Party, has greatly raised our understanding of what it means for the masses of oppressed, here and around the world, and for the future of humanity, that such a Party has not been defeated and destroyed—that it has not only persevered but has achieved a real revitalization and strengthening, ideologically, politically and in terms of strategic revolutionary approach and communist orientation and a scientifically grounded determination to work tirelessly to make this understanding a powerful, living reality of masses of people consciously fighting for revolution, yes in this mightiest of all imperialist powers, in unity with people doing the same throughout the world. As our Chairman, Bob Avakian, has recently written:
　　
　　“It is in this way, it is on this scientific foundation and through the application of this scientific method and approach, that we can, and should, have a conquering spirit—and an orientation of (to borrow a phrase from a poem by Yeats) passionate intensity—for revolution and communism.20”
　　 　　

　　49.
　　
　　VII. 結(jié)論：改變與號(hào)召
　　
　　 我們?cè)诖怂f(shuō)的，我們?cè)诿绹?guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨黨章結(jié)論中所說(shuō)的，都是我們所堅(jiān)持的和信仰的：
　　
　　 “美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨承擔(dān)著在美國(guó)這個(gè)帝國(guó)主義怪獸核心國(guó)家領(lǐng)導(dǎo)革命的使命，在全世界革命和共產(chǎn)主義最終目標(biāo)的實(shí)現(xiàn)過(guò)程中也擔(dān)負(fù)著重要的責(zé)任。這是一個(gè)偉大的、歷史性的事業(yè)，所有渴望這種事業(yè)的人都應(yīng)該團(tuán)結(jié)起來(lái)，支持美國(guó)革命共產(chǎn)黨這個(gè)革命的先鋒隊(duì)，與它一起戰(zhàn)斗，相互扶持，并且以同樣的事業(yè)和共產(chǎn)主義世界觀為基礎(chǔ)，加入它。
　　
　　 全人類的解放是我們的最終目標(biāo)，除此之外，別無(wú)它愿。這世界，沒(méi)有比此更偉大的事業(yè)，沒(méi)有比此更值得我們?nèi)カI(xiàn)身的目標(biāo)。”
　　
　　 我們?cè)诖怂f(shuō)的一切，我們直接地、坦率地戳穿的一切，應(yīng)該給予更大的意義和更多的強(qiáng)調(diào)，以便號(hào)召人民站立起來(lái)，分享或者尊重我們要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造一個(gè)沒(méi)有剝削與壓迫的全新世界的決心，為我們黨提供援助和支持。
　　
　　 全世界所有的革命者和共產(chǎn)黨人，所有渴望另一個(gè)完全不同的、更美好的世界的人們：我們決不能倒退回過(guò)去，無(wú)論是以哪種形式，讓我們朝著共產(chǎn)主義偉大目標(biāo)勇敢前進(jìn)，朝著將全人類從數(shù)千年傳統(tǒng)枷鎖中解放出來(lái)的偉大目標(biāo)大膽前進(jìn)！
　　
　　
　　 《完結(jié)》
　　
　　
　　------------------------原文------------------------
　　VII.
　　Conclusion: A Challenge and a Call
　　
　　We mean what we have said here, and we mean what we say in the Conclusion of our Party’s Constitution:
　　
　　“The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA has taken the responsibility to lead revolution in the U.S., the belly of the imperialist beast, as its principal share of the world revolution and the ultimate aim of communism. This is a great and historic undertaking—and all those who yearn to see this happen should rally to and support this vanguard, working together with the party, building support for it and, on the basis of taking up the cause and outlook of communism, joining it.
　　
　　The emancipation of all humanity: this, and nothing less than this, is our goal. There is no greater cause, no greater purpose to which to dedicate our lives.21”
　　
　　All that we have spoken to here, and what we have laid bare, in direct and unvarnished terms, should give even greater meaning and emphasis to the call for people who share, or respect, our determination to bring a new world into being, without exploitation and oppression, to rally to the aid and support of this Party.
　　
　　To the revolutionaries and communists everywhere, to all those who thirst for another, radically different and far better world: Let us not retreat into and retrench in the past, in whatever form—let us instead go forward boldly toward the goal of communism and the emancipation of humanity from thousands of years of tradition’s chains.
　　
　　 the End
　　 　　

× 烏有之鄉(xiāng) WYZXWK.COM

您的打賞將用于網(wǎng)站日常運(yùn)行與維護(hù)。
幫助我們辦好網(wǎng)站，宣傳紅色文化！

歡迎掃描下方二維碼，訂閱烏有之鄉(xiāng)網(wǎng)刊微信公眾號(hào)