From the perspective of communists in the United $tates the class structure in the imperialist countries of Western Europe is important, because the conditions are similar. Many comrades have asked us if we have done a concrete analysis to show that the class structure in Europe is similar to the one in the United $tates. We exclude Greece, Portugal and Spain; although the latter in particular may be an imperialist country as gauged by the existence of monopoly capitalist corporations. We exclude these countries, because an analysis of their imperialist character is not so clear-cut. By covering just the four big imperialists--England, France, Germany and Italy, we cover a population approximating that in the United States. However, in this essay we also include other imperialist countries including Japan.

Of course, we have also taken the position that some countries of Europe such as Albania are not imperialist at all. In Albania and Russia there is in fact a white proletariat unlike the situation of the majority of Western Europeans.

A. Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Definitions

1. Internationalism in the era of imperialist world war

Engaging in a polemic amongst European communists, Lenin put forward the ideological orientation and tactics of internationalism in the imperialist countries. "I must argue, not from the point of view of 'my' country (for that is the argument of a wretched, stupid, petty-bourgeois nationalist who does not realize that he is only a plaything in the hands of the imperialist bourgeoisie), but from the point of view of my share in the preparation, in the propaganda, and in the acceleration of the world proletarian revolution. That is what internationalism means, and that is the duty of the internationalist, of the revolutionary worker, of the genuine Socialist." V. I. Lenin (1 )

The opposite of internationalism when taken up by people calling themselves socialist is social-chauvinism.

"Social-chauvinism is advocacy of the idea of 'defence of the fatherland' in the present war. [World War I-ed.] This idea logically leads to the abandonment of the class struggle during the war, to voting for war credits, etc. In fact, the social-chauvinists are pursuing an anti-proletarian bourgeois policy, for they are actually championing, not 'defence of the fatherland' in the sense of combating foreign oppression, but the 'right' of one or other of the 'Great' Powers to plunder colonies and to oppress other nations. The social-chauvinists reiterate the bourgeois deception of the people that the war is being waged to protect the freedom and existence of nations, thereby taking sides with the bourgeoisie against the proletariat. Among the social-chauvinists are those who justify and varnish the government and bourgeoisie of one of the belligerent groups of powers, as well as those who, like Kautsky, argue that the socialists of all the belligerent powers are equally entitled to 'defend the fatherland.' Social-chauvinism, which is, in effect, defence of the privileges, the advantages, the right to pillage and plunder, of one's 'own' (or any) imperialist bourgeoisie, is the utter betrayal of socialist convictions."( 2)

Next book chapter