Communist rhetoric proved to be quite productive domestically. It is very popular with the elderly who have seen nothing but communism in their lives. An illustration to this end, are the messages voiced several weeks ago by the Communist high rank officials, including President Voronin himself, at the 10th anniversary of the restoration of the Communist Party of the Republic of Moldova, as well as at the 86th anniversary of 1917 Bolshevik revolution.
During the ceremony President Voronin tried to answer the question “Who are today’s Communists in Moldova? And what is their future?” President’s arguments were intended to counteract the dogmatic and “left radicals” of the party, who were accused of “political short-sightedness and naiveness”. According to the President, they did not understand that “going back to socialism” via nationalisation of property is impossible, due to the fact that “in the Republic of Moldova almost each citizen has become an owner of private property”. Reproaches to the effect that the Communist Party programme lacks a thesis on “dictatorship of the proletariat” were refuted by the following: “What kind of proletariat, what kind of working class are we talking about when the entire industry of the country has been ruined? Only a blind would not see such an obvious thing, i.e. in a very short period even the notion of working class has been totally devalued”.
Noteworthy, the “blind and naive” of the Communist Party might be right after all. From a historic perspectives all those who tried to exclude the basic thesis from the Marxist-Leninist practice were called opportunists and revisionists. Moreover, the most important thesis defined by Marx refers to Feuerbach. The most famous one: “Philosophers sought to explain differently the world, our task is to change it”. Having said that, President Voronin is rather a philosopher trying to explain why it is dangerous to re-nationalise private property, or why the proletariat and working class had degraded in the Republic of Moldova. “Naives” believe that a true Marxist leader would have to change the state of affairs, especially when he has all the power to do it. Otherwise, it would be honest for him to relinquish Marxist-Leninist rhetoric, conduct the much-promised reform in the party and adopt an appropriate political program. Apparently what President Voronin calls an “utopia” brings forward electoral and political gains, even if it generates all kinds of curiosities and confusions as well.
For instance, according to some official estimates almost half a million of Moldovan citizens are true proletariats, however they are working abroad. Governmental agencies are negotiating with similar agencies abroad to legalise the export of work force from the Republic of Moldova. Therefore one may say that working class of the Republic of Moldova has become an extremely profitable export item ensuring the economic growth, which Moldovan authorities like to brag about for propaganda purposes.
Naturally, a Communist party should have taken a raft of measures to repatriate its working class, whose interests they claim to represent. For this to happen policies aimed at attracting foreign investments are necessary, as well as opportunities for their employment should be provided.
Those shifts in ideology have lead to some curiosities lately. On the one hand, Communist faction in Parliament signed together with opposition factions a statement featuring European integration as a top priority, on the other hand party press praises nationalisation of companies, party efforts to fight privatisation programs and contest property rights on land. However, it is known for a fact that one of the fundamental requirements for EU accession is a viable market economy. It remains to be seen how the Communist Party would contribute to a functional market economy via its political programme based on Marxist-Leninist theory.
Another curiosity, while Communist newspaper was praising its Chinese counterparts for taking the path of reforms in the Marxist-Leninist spirit, international press featured the statement of the Chair of the State Property Commission of China, Li Rongrong. The statement reads that at the recent party plenary session a decision was taken on the privatisation of state companies. Further, the privatisation results would not be subject to any revision, whereas foreign companies would be allowed to hold the majority stake in privatised companies. Evidently, state would maintain control over the companies of strategic importance for the state security. It remains to be seen how Marxist-Leninist principles would be employed in explaining the aforesaid revolutionary events.