At the Tenth Congress of the Communist Party of Italy Comrade Togliatti launched an open attack on the Chinese Communist Party and provoked a public debate. For many years, he and certain other comrades of the C.P.I. have made many fallacious statements violating fundamental tenets of Marxism-Leninism on a whole series of vital issues of principle concerning the international communist movement. From the very outset we have disagreed with these statements. However, we did not enter into public debate with Togliatti and the other comrades, nor did we intend to do so. We have always stood for strengthening the unity of the international communist movement. We have always stood for handling relations between fraternal Parties in accordance with the principles of independence, equality and the attainment of unanimity through consultation as laid down in the Moscow Declaration and the Moscow Statement. We have always held that differences between fraternal Parties should be resolved through inter-Party consultation by means of bilateral or multilateral talks or conferences of fraternal Parties. We have always maintained that no Party should make unilateral public charges against a fraternal Party, let alone level slanders or attacks against it. We have been firm and unshakable in thus standing for unity. It was contrary to our expectations that Togliatti and the other comrades should have utilized their Party Congress to launch public attacks against the Chinese Communist Party. But since they directly challenged us to a public debate in this way, what were we to do? Were we to keep silent as we had done before? Were the "magistrates to be allowed to burn down houses, while the common people were forbidden even to light lamps"? No and again no! We absolutely had to reply. They left us no alternative but to make a public reply. Consequently, our paper Renmin Ribao (People's Daily) carried an editorial on December 31, 1962, entitled "The Differences Between Comrade Togliatti and Us".
Togliatti and certain other comrades of the C.P.I. were not at all happy about this editorial and they published another series of articles attacking us. They declared that our article "often lacked explicit clarity", was "highly abstract and formal" and "lacked a sense of reality".[1] They also said that we were "not accurately informed"[1] on the situation in Italy and on the work of the C.P.I. and had committed an "obvious falsification"[2] of the views of the C.P.I. They accused us of being "dogmatists and sectarians who hide their opportunism behind an ultra-revolutionary phraseology",[2] and so on and so forth. Togliatti and the other comrades are bent on continuing the public debate. Well then, let it continue!
____________________________
In the present article we shall make a more detailed analysis and criticism of the fallacious statements made by Togliatti and the other comrades over a number of years, as a reply to their continued attacks against us.
When Togliatti and the other comrades have read our reply, we shall see what attitude they will take-- whether they will still say that we "often lack explicit clarity", that we are "highly abstract and formal" and "lack a sense of reality", that we are "not accurately informed" on the situation in Italy and on the work of the C.P.I., that we are committing an "obvious falsification" of the views of the C.P.I., and that we are "dogmatists and sectarians who hide their opportunism behind an ultra-revolutionary phraseology". We shall wait and see.
In a word, it will not do for certain persons to behave like the magistrate
who ordered the burning down of people's houses while forbidding the people
so much as to light a lamp. From time immemorial the public has never sanctioned
any such unfairness. Furthermore, differences between us Communists can only
be settled by setting forth the facts and discussing them rationally, and
absolutely not by adopting the attitude of masters to their servants. The
workers and Communists of all countries must unite, but they can be united
only on the basis of the Moscow Declaration and the Moscow Statement, on
the basis of setting forth the facts and discussing them rationally, on the
basis of consultations on an equal footing and reciprocity, and on the basis
of Marxism-Leninism. If it is a case of masters wielding batons over the
heads of servants, incanting "Unity! Unity!", then what is actually meant
is "Split! Split!" The workers of all countries will not accept such splittism.
We desire unity, and we will never allow a handful of people to keep on with
their splitting activities.