DISCUSSION WITH THE MASSES PROVIDES SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS, DEEPENS DEMOCRACY
The Party, which leads with the wisdom of the people’s knowledge and thought, through various means—especially through workers’ direct participation in political life and in drawing up and implementing the country’s economic and cultural development plans by discussing with them every problem of concern to the people—has created conditions for the comprehensive growth of the role of the masses and of socialist democracy.
On the basis of this method, our country has achieved successes, and progress is evident and lasting. The discussions and analyses taking place these days on the historic decisions of the 9th Plenum demonstrate the practical benefits of broadly exchanging views at open meetings of Party basic organizations, and of the active participation of Communists and non-Party workers in the decisions made by the collectives of enterprises and institutions to improve the cadres, appoint the most capable, and carry out and exceed all tasks. By examining the problems put forward for solution with political responsibility, people have begun to implement increasingly effective arrangements for work and production. Taken as a whole, the suggestions and concrete solutions are considered useful, because consultation between cadres and Communists and the masses has acquired new value. The personal example of sitting down for an unhurried discussion with ordinary people, the expansion of this broad participation by workers, constitutes the essence of socialist democracy.
Further: The task has been set of increasing the export plan. Yet the State Planning Commission distributed the plan arithmetically from above to the ministries, and they in turn distributed it to the districts and enterprises. Where, in this practice, is the opinion of the masses—the very masses who could suggest doing more, if they were consulted in time? Because, ultimately, “beautiful” plans yield no results. It would therefore be better for the corrections—which, on the one hand, deepen the democracy of the masses and, on the other, increase their mobilization and inspiration to achieve realistic objectives—to be made without delay, in keeping with the Party’s work and the interests of the broad mass of workers.
For a Communist, a cadre, or a forum to lead well, a first and foremost necessity is to know the Party’s directives well, to know how from the outset to assess questions that science has worked out, to ask the masses whether practice has verified the facts (figures), and to verify and correct what is wrong. Instructions issued by some institution—for example, the seed authorities—in the name of applied science, saying “sow this seed or that one,” without sufficiently taking into account the concrete conditions and the experience of the masses, reveal complacency and arrogance. The time when some people taught everyone everything is now gone. Is this the way to proceed? Others are more worried than they should be about the technical side of the matter, and do not forget, even now after the Plenum, to issue instructions: “Make sure all workers take part in the meetings of the basic organizations.” Yet this is demanded when the Central Committee decision clearly says that these meetings “are held openly, giving every non-Party member of the collective the opportunity to participate if they wish.”
It is not surprising that, in an atmosphere of discussion and solidarity, some leading cadres fail to notice the danger posed by crafty bureaucrats. The Committee of Culture and Arts was within its authority to select and appoint a lecturer from the Higher Institute of Arts to its own apparatus at one time, when he had been removed from the Institute as incompetent; but that does not mean one should continue to speculate, sending him “in the name of democratic centralism” to supervise, instruct, and lecture the Institute’s comrades. The decisions made several months ago to reduce so many positions of responsibility are real, but it is just as true that those people remain where they were. If we openly acknowledge this evil, our determination to fight bureaucratism will also be greater and more concrete. Otherwise, bureaucrats will once again vegetate.
Therefore, considering these phenomena in light of the demands of the times, a new understanding and stance by the basic organizations and their forums is necessary: to deepen the mass line, revolutionize the Party and the entire life of the country, strengthen mutual trust among Communists, cadres, and non-Party workers, and keep alive and increase everyone’s revolutionary spirit. Bureaucratism is a way of thinking and acting, and it cannot be fought with bureaucratic methods. Its essence is the separation of cadres from the masses, and the way to fight it is its opposite: the strongest and soundest possible connection with them. The point is that every cadre and Communist, in every forum and every apparatus, regardless of how high their position, must not carry out arbitrary actions that could make an ordinary person say: “Are there no laws, no rules for him?”
Clearly, a correct directive is not enough to lead; something else is needed as well: in positions of authority and at work, in the economy, and in every field of construction, there must be people who understand democracy and the mass line in their essence; capable people who implement them honestly and conscientiously, and who consider implementation of the decisions of the Party Central Committee’s 9th Plenum a foremost duty to the people and the Party. The Party’s basic organizations and their forums must discuss and act in this healthy spirit. It is important to deeply root the idea that broad consultation with the broad mass of workers on all problems, and respect for their voice, eliminate tutelage and bureaucratic routine.
and better, more effective organization of production work. considered useful, because consultation between cadres and the community, on the one hand, and the masses, on the other, has acquired new value. Personal example in holding open discussions with ordinary people and expanding ties with the working masses in the countryside and the city, as Comrade Ramiz Alia emphasizes, while casting aside excessive centralism and manifestations of officialdom and routine that hinder progress, are giving new impetus to qualitative factors on all fronts.
Nevertheless, the issue of holding concrete discussions with the masses must always remain at the center of attention of Party and state bodies. We say this because not infrequently some communists and cadres prefer to place their subordinates, and even an entire collective, under bureaucratic tutelage. The mindset of wanting as many powers as possible has made some cadres in ministries and committees so all-powerful that they not only issue orders, but also make decisions contrary to regulations and laws. The Ministry of Light Industry approves unjustified plans for the «Stalin» textile combine, even though the collective, the executive committee of the KP, or the People’s Council of the Tirana District rightly oppose them. Not only the council, but also the Ministry of Food Industry has become accustomed to operating in this way; it soon finds a «solution» with the Ministry of Agriculture for the «Ali Kelmendi» food combine, yet the plans drawn up in offices and laid down for years remain unchanged. Perhaps the figures must not be allowed to fall, and the interests of the economy demand this, but that does not mean these plans should be imposed without being supported, without ensuring that they are carefully examined first. In cases like these, we cannot say that the masses’ opinion and free judgment about production work are being valued. factors on all fronts.
what is wrong. Instructions issued by some institute, such as the seed institute, in the name of applied science—«sow this or that seed»—without adequately taking account of the concrete conditions and the experience of the masses, speak of tutelage is now past. To go to a collective or a Party organization as an instructor or secretary, thinking that you alone know how to set things right, means overestimating yourself and, at the same time, disregarding the opinion of the masses. It is an outdated method and practice when, at seminars and meetings on propaganda, livestock farming, agriculture, exports, [unclear], [unclear], seed varieties, and other subjects, conclusions are always delivered solely by the first secretary or the chairman of the executive committee. He cannot be a specialist in every field. It seems to us that here, too, there is tutelage, an attempt to display «erudition». For there are conclusions that can be better provided by a specialist, a person responsible for the agriculture section, a secretary for propaganda, for the economy, and so on. It is enough for their views to be respected, heard, and supported. That would be of great benefit.
Our society has achieved comprehensive emancipation. Our devoted people, committed to the cause of the Party and the people, rightly cannot tolerate excessive supervision. The excuse that «I carry out this supervision for the sake of the work, because of the duty I hold» is unacceptable. For example, «When you appoint educators in kindergartens and nurseries,» says an official letter of these days from the Executive Committee of the KP of the District to the executive committees of the KP of the Tirana regions, «you must consult with us.» Does this not speak of tutelage? Does it not mean infringing upon the authority of the ...