By Dave Stevens
WHEN the leader of the world's biggest Communist Party attacks the red holy cow of egalitarianism, you know that good old Marxism-Leninism isn't as healthy as some would like it to be.
The Chinese Party leader, Deng Xiao Ping, openly says that for an undefined period only capitalist practices can ensure a communist future.
What in fact we are seeing are the first moves towards the abandonment of communism. One major move in this direction is China's seeking of investment from the West. They hope to raise more than 8 million dollars in the next five years.
As Mr. Jing Shu Ping, head of China International Trust and a member of the 'People's Council', summed it up: "We need lots of money to modernise our China and we have to raise some of it from the international capital market."
The Chinese authorities have wined and dined numerous Western bankers, offering special tax terms, in the hope of attracting their financial backing.
A growing number of Chinese companies can now advertise for labour, can fire workers and even offer the workers productivity deals!
But it isn't just in the field of economics that changes are being seen. The Party general-secretary, Hu Yao Bang, has sent out a directive calling on the Chinese people to show their zeal for the new policies by wearing Western type clothes! In Peking alone they are selling 300 suits a day to Chinese social climbers.
Meanwhile, in the other communist monolith, the U.S.S.R., children are acting in a most ideologically unsound way. They are playing a game called Company, which seems to be a rougher version of Monopoly. These sons and daughters of the steppes cut up paper to make money, stocks and shares, and i.o.u.s etc. They name themselves after the better known multi-nationals, ie. Gee (General Electric) and Fod (Ford), and set about each other in a way that would warm the cockles of Milton Friedman's heart, if he had one, that is.
But it's in the playgrounds of the Soviet Union where the nitty-gritty starts; this time it's for real. Soviet-made cassettes with Western music can go for 20 roubles (￡19). Western jeans and sports shoes are going for five times their Western value.
Some Soviet citizens are none too happy about this state of affairs. They feel that their country's moral standards are falling. An article in the magazine Soviet Culture by a worker from the Crimea spells it out. He complains that even if he saves half his yearly wages he couldn't afford the jewellery, chandeliers and ornate furniture in the shop windows.
He states: "While some people might simply pass by, knowing they can't afford to buy, some of us might swallow the bait and rack their brains about how and when to raise the cash. Hence bribes, and theft.
"For years and years we used to talk about the importance of producing enough material goods. We even saw it as a panacea for other problems, but we did not think about the moral problems that would follow."
It seems from this that things are no better in Mother Russia than they are in Red China.
We should rightly see the situation in China and Russia as vindicating our anti-communism, proving what we've always said, that Marxism won't and can't work. That being said, however, we should gain no pleasure from these more recent trends.
The Chinese are alien to us in many ways, yet are a people with a history and culture worthy of respect. The Russians are, of course, Europeans, a fact sometimes forgotten by some 'Nationalists'. That the mantle of Marxism is slipping is good, but instead of evolving an order in line with their respective traditions Russia and China seem to be swapping one alien ideology for another. It is nothing short of a tragedy that more of the world is falling under the sway of the Almighty Dollar and the group of people who stand behind it, the enemies of humanity.
Finally, if we look a little closer to home, the decline in the ideas of Marxism-Leninism as an intellectual option, not helped by a trail of misery and death these ideas have spawned since their inception, has led to our own comrades becoming very touchy.
A recent book, Not In Our Genes, by a couple of leftist hacks, sees any genetic explanation of human behaviour as "a right-wing conspiracy to preserve social inequalities by making them appear natural".
This hysterical rubbish is too much even for some Marxists who are shifting on this issue. It can't do much for their peace of mind when scientists in that well known hot-bed of right-wing conspiracy, Moscow, have put the hereditability of intelligence at 78%.
In view of this mounting evidence, some Marxists are now saying that they only mean equality in the social sense, not in the human sense. It's certainly a less ridiculous and more defensible position. Indeed, Lenin said: "We speak of equality of social position, but not at all of equality of physical and mental abilities of individuals."
An arguable case indeed. But really the Marxists are onto a loser. If they stick with their "we're all the same" rubbish they'll be seen for what they are, blind liberal bigots who try and smear any truth that upsets their cosy little nightmare. If, on the other hand, they concede the biological case, as some are now doing, then logic dictates that if man isn't equal biologically he can't be made equal socially.
We Nationalists want a fairer society not a more egalitarian society. If an equal society were possible, which it isn't, it would be manifestly unfair. A fair and just society can only be built on natural values.
If we build a Nation that is a family, if we build a natural socialism, a racial socialism, which allows hierachy based on merit, talent and honour; if we build a Nation which allows for individualism and initiative, but which is an organic socialism which instills in us that we are part of something greater; if we build such a Nation then, for the first time ever, a kind of socialism can actually work, not as an artificial soulless oppressor, but as a natural liberator.