This is the fourth in a series of UNITY study columns on Chairman Mao’s theory of three worlds. The first three parts explained the general features of the three worlds theory, the role of the two superpowers – the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. – as the main enemies of the world’s people, and the role of the third world as the main force opposing colonialism, imperialism and superpower hegemonism. This column focuses on the advanced capitalist countries of the second world as a force that can be united with in the struggle against the two superpowers.
We encourage UNITY readers to send in comments, criticisms and questions about the columns. In future study columns and articles in UNITY, we will attempt to respond to our readers’ questions.
At the end of each study column is a list of suggested readings and discussion questions.
* * *
The second world is composed of the lesser capitalist countries such as those in Europe, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and others. In the world arena today, the second world countries play a dual role. On the one hand, many of them oppress third world countries to varying degrees. On the other hand, the superpowers threaten and interfere in the affairs of the second world countries.
The second world countries therefore, are an intermediate force between the superpowers and the third world. Insofar as the second world countries oppose the superpowers, they form a part of the international united front against the U.S. and U.S.S.R. When they oppress the third world, they should be opposed.
The position of the second world countries today is quite different than 40 years ago. Before World War II, England, France, Germany and Japan were all world powers. They contended with each other for the redivision of the world. But due to their defeats during the war and their weakening by the war, and the subsequent rise of the two superpowers, these former “big” powers were relegated to a second-rate status relative to the two superpowers. In some cases, the superpowers have military forces occupying second world countries.
At the end of World War II comrade Mao Tsetung and other communists differentiated the dominant U.S. imperialism from the other capitalist countries. In the famous interview with Anna Louise Strong, Comrade Mao pointed out that U.S. imperialism “controls Japan” and “sought to control the whole of the British Empire and Western Europe.” He described the “many capitalist, colonial and semi-colonial countries in Europe, Asia and Africa,” as a “vast zone” in between U.S. imperialism and the then socialist Soviet Union. He advocated a united front against U.S. imperialism. (“Talk With The American Correspondent Anna Louise Strong,” Selected Readings of Mao Tsetung, p. 348.)
Again, in 1963 the Communist Party of China’s Proposal for the General Line of the International Communist Movement, written under Mao’s leadership, distinguished U.S. imperialism from the lesser capitalist countries and encouraged the proletariat to take advantage of the contradiction with U.S. imperialism to form a broad united front.
From these examples it is clear that Mao paid close attention to the differences among the capitalist countries and that the big imperialist countries can oppress even lesser capitalist powers. As Lenin pointed out, imperialism “strives to annex not only agrarian territories, but even most highly industrialized regions.” (Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Foreign Languages Press, p. 109.)
Today the U.S. interferes with the western capitalist countries, while the Soviet superpower dominates the second world countries of Eastern Europe. In fact, it is more accurate to say that many of the Eastern European countries have been made dependencies of the Soviets and have little actual independence. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the Soviets in 1968 shows to what lengths the Soviets will go to maintain their domination.
The large number of troops and military bases of the superpowers in second world territory indicates the degree of interference in the lives of the second world countries.
Europe, in particular, is the focus of attention of the two superpowers. They covet the area because of the concentration of industry and markets. This is why they have centered so much of their military forces in Europe. Whoever can dominate Europe can achieve world hegemony.
The relationship between the lesser capitalist countries and the two superpowers today is, therefore, not characterized by competition to redivide the world; rather, the second world is faced with the grave problem of safeguarding their independence and security from the threats of the superpowers.
The Eastern European capitalist countries are struggling to free themselves from Soviet domination and win some independence. The Western European countries, on the other hand, are struggling to get rid of U.S. interference in their affairs. But, at the same time, the Western European countries are concerned about the threat of Soviet aggression. Of the two superpowers, though, the Soviet Union is the more dangerous threat to Europe as it is on the offensive. Especially during the last ten years, the social-imperialists have rapidly built up their military forces in the areas bordering Western Europe. The subjugation of the European countries by Soviet social-imperialism would be a serious setback for the European proletariat and peoples, as well as for the people of the entire world.
Experiences from the period right before World War II hold lessons on the issue of defending na¬tional independence in Europe today. During the 1930’s the fascist powers of Germany, Italy and Japan conducted wars of aggression and annexed territories one after the other. They sought to annex not only colonial and semi-colonial areas such as China and Ethiopia, but capitalist countries like Spain, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland as well. The people in the subjugated areas suffered brutal suppression.
In response to the fascists, communists throughout the world correctly called for building a front against fascism and war. The Soviet Union, under the leadership of Stalin, promoted a policy of collective resistance to fascist aggression. In 1935 the Soviet Union and France signed a treaty of mutual assistance against aggression. A similar treaty was concluded with Czechoslovakia and other countries. These, of course, were agreements between a socialist government and capitalist governments, but they were a part of an international policy of encouraging united opposition to fascism. The proletariat, in countries threatened with fascist aggression, had important tasks of leading the fight against threats to national sovereignty, democracy and exposing national betrayal.
An important lesson one should draw from this history is that the struggle of the proletariat for socialism and the conditions of the class struggle in any country are influenced by international factors. Under certain circumstances, such as with the threat of aggression and annexation, the struggle to protect national sovereignty is the responsibility of the working class and a condition for the success of the socialist revolution.
In the second world countries there are a number of mass struggles taking place today. The working people are fighting to improve their working and living conditions. There are struggles opposing reactionary government policies, such as in West Germany where the people are demanding an end to the anti-communist laws. In some countries there are fierce struggles against national oppression, such as for the right to self-determination of the Quebec nation in Canada. We should support these struggles. Marxist-Leninist organizations and anti-revisionist communist parties are also forming in many second world countries, and we should give them our firm support.
At the same time, the people of the second world are opposing the two superpowers. In Eastern Europe there have been a number of heroic rebellions and protests against the new Tsars. The Polish and Czech people have been very active in resisting Soviet occupation of their countries. In Japan people are demanding the recovery of several northern Japanese islands now occupied by the Soviets. The people are also conducting just struggles to expel US. military forces from their country and end U.S. control over their defenses. The Scandinavian people, too, are becoming alerted to the danger of Soviet invasion. The social-imperialists have conducted numerous military exercises right off the shores of Norway and have violated its territory on several occasions.
The second world is also helping to weaken the superpowers in other ways. More and more second world countries, threatened by the two superpowers, are seeing the growing strength and unity of the third world countries. They are, therefore, taking certain steps to assist the third world, such as in the economic sphere. Several European countries in recent years have cancelled debts owed by third world countries.
A number of second world countries have supplied third world countries with exports that have lessened their dependence on the superpowers. France, for example, has supplied enriched uranium to Brazil which has helped the country produce electricity more efficiently. The sale had been opposed by the U.S. imperialists, who want to restrict the development of Brazil’s nuclear power industry.
The Western European countries are also taking steps to strengthen their national economies and to promote economic cooperation among themselves, to lessen the impact of the falling U.S. dollar and the domination of European postwar economies by U.S. imperialism.
Overall, the Western European countries are concerned also about strengthening their defense capabilities. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization forms a part of the military forces of Western Europe. It was once mainly an aggressive alliance under the domination of the U.S., but has now taken on somewhat of a defensive aspect in the face of threats from the Warsaw Pact, the Soviets’ military alliance. On principle, both NATO and the Warsaw Pact should be opposed; however, it would be wrong to call for the unilateral dismemberment of NATO so long as the Warsaw Pact remains an aggressive military bloc for the social-imperialists.
The U.S., which is included in NATO, is trying to use it to further U.S. imperialism’s own war plans. Therefore, the Western European countries more and more see that they must develop their own independent defense capabilities and strengthen their unity to counter the threats of aggression.
The proletariat in the second world countries today face a complex task. They are faced with the task of making revolution to overthrow the bourgeoisie and to combat the growing danger of war and threats against their country. A victorious socialist revolution, with the proletariat achieving state power, would be the greatest bulwark in op-posing any aggressor, but in order to reach that, goal, the proletariat must unite with the just sentiments of the masses of people who are concerned with the safeguarding of national independence.
If a second world country is invaded and occupied by a superpower, especially the Soviet Union, the conditions for the proletariat and the masses of people are made very difficult. It is therefore a good thing whenever the second world countries oppose the superpowers and take steps to lessen superpower influence in their affairs. The proletariat seizes upon every opportunity that will postpone the outbreak of war, and give it time to develop and advance its work for the eventual and final triumph of socialism.
Chairman Mao’s Theory of the Differentiation of the Three Worlds Is A Major Contribution to Marxism-Leninism, Foreign Languages Press, esp. pp. 54-64.
Stalin, History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Chap. 12, Part 1.
Mao Tsetung, “The Identity of Interest Between the Soviet Union and All Mankind,” Selected Works of Mao Tsetung, Vol. II.
“Defense of National Independence and Second World Countries,” Peking Review No. 5, Feb. 3,1978.
1. Why is it important to recognize that the relationship between the second world countries and the superpowers is not characterized primarily by rivalry for the redivision of the world, but by superpower threats against the sovereignty of the second world countries?
2. What would be the situation for the Western European countries if they were invaded by the Soviet social-imperialists? Why should the proletariat be concerned about protecting national sovereignty in the second world?
3. While opposing the threat of Soviet aggression, why must U.S. imperialism also be opposed?
4. Why is it important for the proletariat in the second world countries to struggle to defend national independence? How does this struggle relate to the struggle for socialism?