Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 17:51:49 +0200 From: Jorn Andersen <ccc6639-AT-vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: Re: Communist Parties - Denmark Kevin Cabral wrote: > > Can anyone here give a quick summary of general organizational > characteristics, party programmes, and parlimentary/grassroots influence > of communist parties today in Western Europe. Jorn: Communist Party in Denmark Was always a minority party never able to challenge the Danish Social Democracy but has after WW2 had some influence in some trade unions. It always had a direct line to Moscow. The Socialist Peoples Party (SF) After Hungary 1956 the Social Democrats were able to marginalize their TU influence, and two years later they split. The leader, Aksel Larsen, took with him a lot of the party into his new "Socialist Peoples Party" (SF), which in 1960 won a parliamentary representation, which they have maintained since then. They now get about 10% of the votes. The SF was an early Euro-Communist split-off which in the late 60's through to the late 80's looked quite a lot to Yugoslavia ("The Third Road" between stalinism and reformism; "workers councils"; internationally: the alternative of the unaligned countries etc.). The SF was from the start a Communist Party without Stalinism - but as the split took place in the hey-days of the Cold War and the with a very low level of working class struggles the outcome was not less parliamentary than had been the CP. They (as did the CP) saw their role primarily as pulling the Social Democrats to the left. The fact that they didn't manage to get the bulk of TU activists with them out of the CP and that their revolt against stalinism also included a more loose concept of party discipline strengthened the tendency to become a left Social Democratic party. In 1966-67 they were the parliamentary backers for a SD government (called "The red cabinet", but they had no ministers). The SD were able to manouvre (as they had done with the CP in the past) so as to blame the SF for the downfall of the government. The result was a left wing split off, the VS, which was to become a parliamentary centre for the New Left. In the 70's and 80's the SF (still the largest party to the left of the Social Democrats) was influenced by the grass roots movements. They became Red-Green. They did get some influence in some TU's, but still the CP had more. With the downturn in the class struggle in the late 70's the SF was drawn to the right in the 80's. They abandonded their principled opposition to NATO and they were not able to distinct themselves from to Social Democrats (in opposition 1982-92). When stalinism collapsed in 1989 the SF abandoned the last identification with Marxism and class politics and now they praise the market. In 1992 there was a narrow No vote against Maastricht. Although it was narrow - it was a major blow against the bosses' Denmark. The capitalist class enginered a 3 stage plan to win a new referendum: 1) Change the government from a bourgeois to a Social Democratic 2) Get some formal "exceptions" from Maastricht (the so-called Edinburgh Agreement forgotten anywhere else but in Denmark) 3) Get the SF to support a new Yes vote. The SF leadership supported the Yes vote just 11 months after the first referendum expecting that they might get into the SD government. They didn't. Their support didn't make their voters vote Yes, but it convinced many left wing Social Democrats that it would be OK to vote yes. The SF lost a lot of credibility amongst their own supporters with this manouvre and is regarded as traitors etc. by many on the left (a very sectarian position, which I don't support). The Communist Party The Danish Communist Party (DKP) was one of the most faithful to Moscow pre-Gorbachev. Having been outside parliament since the SF-split they won a few seats at a couple of elections in the 70's (after the referendum in 1972 that brought Denmark into the EC and where the DKP had played a very active role in the (more or less nationalistic) No Movement. In this period (mid-late 70's and early 80's) the DKP igain won some influence. They had about 7.000 members and a youth organization of about the same size or maybe more - not bad in a country of 5 mill. They were clearly the most important force to build active TU struggle and won a substantial position in the lower TU bureaucracy. But they were also active in making sure these struggles never really threatened the basic structures of Danish capitalism. In 1985 there was a 10 day general strike in Denmark - the so-called "Easter Strikes". The DKP with the slogan of taking the struggle back to the local workplaces dismounted the movement instead of taking it one step forward to get rid of the hated bourgeois Schluter government. Programmatically they stood on a popular front line. In 1975 they coined the term "anti-monopolistic democracy" to argue their case against big (especially multi-national) capital and at the same time support protectionism. With Gorbachev, glasnost and perestroika the DKP got confused - it was difficult to follow a Moscow-line that said: We don't care about you any longer. And already before the collapse of the Stalinist regimes they were in a mess - 1989-90 finished them off. Within a couple of years they lost over half of their membership. Their youth organization that had controlled the union of young workers and apprentices and the union of high school students was dissolved. The rest of the DKP split in two. One part (mainly those who were recruited in the 70's - and who didn't just give up) joined an elec- toral alliance with the Fourth International, the Maoists and the above mentioned (New Left) VS - the "Unity List" which is now more or less a party (politically like some of the extreme Labour left in UK). They are now in parliament and are difficult to distinguish >from the SF - except for their anti-EC policy. The other part (mainly the old guard) made their own party, KPD based on the 1975-programme. Their biggest problem is that they are too old - probably about 500 members and 100 active. They are very much a "social club" for people who were once active - those who haven't forgotten and haven't learned. They warn you against Ken Loach's "Land and Freedom" and are happy to see Stalin portraits in the streets of Moscow. Summarizing: The Danish Social Democratic Party is still *the leadership* of the Danish working class and have hegemony inside most TU's. The SF is the only force that could challenge this position, but their own politics makes sure that this won't happen. Although there is a growing dissatisfaction with the Social Democratic government - and at present a lot of debate for the first time in a decade inside the SD-party - one should not expect this party to "collapse", split or anything like that in the near future. This means that we will probably not in Denmark see an alternative emerge "out of nowhere" like in Italy. Hope this could be of use. Yours Jorn Andersen IS Denmark --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005