Peaceful transition to socialism
사회주의로의 평화적 이행
The claim that the working class can pass from capitalism to socialism without civil war or armed insurrection, by combining a parliamentary majority with mass struggle. It became a pillar of the Soviet line after the CPSU's Twentieth Congress in 1956, and the 1957 Moscow Declaration and the 1960 Statement of the 81 parties recorded both peaceful and non-peaceful paths. In its 1963 Proposal Concerning the General Line the Chinese party argued that peaceful transition could not be made a new strategic principle of the international communist movement and that there was no precedent of a peaceful transition to socialism; the CPSU answered in its Open Letter that both peaceful and non-peaceful transition were possible. The Eurocommunism of the 1970s stood for transition within pluralist democracy.
In depth
The Moscow documents
The Moscow meeting of November 1957 backed Khrushchev's new line of different national paths to socialism, peaceful coexistence and popular-front tactics. On the line given by the meeting, transition through parliamentary elections was possible as long as the communist parties combined electoral work with mass struggle against reactionary forces. For Mao Zedong, talk of a "peaceful road to socialism" meant a negation of revolutionary politics and a capitulation to electoral politics.
The 1963 dispute
In point 11 of its Proposal the Chinese party said that communists had always been willing to pass to socialism by peaceful means, but that peaceful transition could never be made a new world strategic principle of the international communist movement. Citing the 1957 Declaration and the 1960 Statement that "the ruling classes never relinquish power voluntarily", it noted that there was so far no precedent in world history of a peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism; and reducing the general line one-sidedly to "peaceful coexistence", "peaceful competition" and "peaceful transition" violated the revolutionary principles of the two documents.
The CPSU replied in its Open Letter of 14 July that it and the other Marxist-Leninist parties, as the documents of the Moscow meetings and the CPSU Programme stated clearly, proceeded from the possibility of both peaceful and non-peaceful transition to socialism, yet the Chinese comrades persisted in ascribing to them recognition of the peaceful path alone. The working class and its vanguard sought to carry out the socialist revolution peacefully, without civil war; but if the exploiting classes resorted to violence against the people, the working class would be forced to use the non-peaceful path.