Relato integral dos debates

Quarta-feira, 15 de Novembro de 2017 - Estrasburgo

18. Legado da revolução totalitária bolchevique de 1917 (debate de atualidade)

  President. – The next item is the topical debate (Rule 153a) on the legacy of the 1917 totalitarian Bolshevik revolution (2017/2933(RSP)).

I would like to add that there will be no catch the eye and no blue cards in this debate, so please take that into account and I will repeat this if necessary.

  Sandra Kalniete, author. – Mr President, one hundred years ago, Lenin’s coup in Russia paved the way for the most inhuman political system of the last century: totalitarianism. Today we remember and commemorate more than 100 million victims of totalitarian regimes, all those who vanished in Stalin’s gulags, Hitler’s death camps and Mao’s great famine, and those who were killed by other dictators and tyrants inspired by Communists and Nazis.

The consequences of these totalitarian regimes are felt to this day. Like many of those who were left behind the Iron Curtain under Communist rule, I have experienced totalitarianism myself. My grandparents perished in the gulag, my mother spent 17 years there, my father eight years, and I was born there. From day one of my life, my parents had to check me in with the KGB every month. I had no rights at all. I was born with the label ‘enemy of the people’.

For those crimes not to be repeated, we need remembrance and education to build immunity for our societies against every temptation of totalitarian solutions. And let me quote the great Hannah Arendt: ‘Totalitarian solutions may well survive the fall of totalitarian regimes in the form of strong temptations, which will come up whenever it seems impossible to alleviate political, social or economic misery in a manner worthy of man.’

Moreover we need to recognise and confront totalitarian trends wherever they manifest themselves, whether it is North Korea which poses a global threat, whether it is Russia where Stalin is once again admired, or whether it is totalitarian jihadist Islamism which is at war with our values and with true Islam. We should not close our eyes to the fact that China is emerging as a superpower under Leninist autocracy, or to the case of Venezuela, where populist rule has evolved into a dictatorial regime.

The clear link between populism, extremism, autocracy and dictatorship around the world is one to bear in mind as we face the challenges in our own societies. Our own Euro-Atlantic family of nations with shared values has not been immune to very obvious populist and authoritarian trends. Populism is a form of authoritarianism that distorts democracy without destroying it, but under populist rule, democracies become illiberal, with populists defining themselves as the entire people, and all those who disagree as enemies of the people. Therefore we need to clearly recognise and resist populists and radicals on both the left and the right and not let them hijack and denigrate our democratic values.

As we are facing the rise of autocratic global powers, we in Europe should find ways to revitalise our core values within our own family of nations. Whatever the temptations of totalitarian thinking, I strongly believe that liberal democracy must have and will have the last word.

  President. – Ms Kalniete, thank you very much for these strong words warmly welcomed by colleagues in the plenary.

  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, huge thanks to the European Parliament for arranging this discussion, a very topical one. Thanks for the invitation to the Presidency to take part in this discussion. Let me start by recalling the resolution of the European Parliament from 2 April 2009 on European conscience and totalitarianism, which calls for the proclamation of 23 August as a Europe—wide day of remembrance for all the victims of all the totalitarian regimes.

There is this famous sentence by the philosopher George Santayana: ‘Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it’. The topic of today’s discussion incites reflection on how we can learn from history. The 1917 Bolshevik revolution was a turning point in the history of a great nation, Russia, and it changed the history of the whole continent. Historians are still discussing the scale of the impact of the 1917 revolution, and rightly so. We cannot close our eyes, either, to the worrying tendencies still there, one century later, in Russia and beyond its borders.

The Bolshevik programme of peace, land and bread won the party considerable support among hungry urban workers and soldiers. It was effective propaganda. But it brought about destruction, famine and war. As the historian Anne Applebaum recently put it: ‘it created not a beautiful new civilisation but an angry, unhappy and embittered society, one that squandered its resources, built ugly, inhuman cities, and broke new ground in atrocity and mass murder’. The totalitarian regime and machinery that was built on this ideology also led us to the enforced division of Europe for half a century. This we have overcome, fortunately, through the positive, transformative force of European integration. But are we entirely out of the woods? Are we safe from foreign interference, from attempts to undermine our achievements?

Let me also remind you – just as Sandra Kalniete did just before me – my generation of Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Romanians and many other nations spent the first half of their lives under the totalitarian regime that the Bolsheviks created and spread throughout the eastern part of the European continent. I was 25 when Estonia freed itself from the Soviet occupation. For me, the Russian revolution is not something from history books, it is something very real. When I look around in today’s Europe, I find the real consequences, the real legacy of Bolsheviks, more than I like to.

In 1967, the year I was born into the Orwellian society of the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic, illegally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940, the great George F. Kennan, in an analysis of the Bolshevik revolution half a century on, wrote: ‘the Bolshevik leaders brought ... a complex of attitudes toward the Western governments... Among these attitudes were a fundamental challenge to the legitimacy of the Western governments, a pervasive cynicism about the parliamentary and democratic sources of their power, a denial that their peoples owed them loyalty.’

You would have thought that was in the past. However, last week, the Russian ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov, gave an interview to the Baltic Rim Economies Review where he states: ‘In the Russian view, the subsequent policies of NATO and EU enlargement, export of democracy and erosion of continent-wide arms regimes have put to rest any hopes for a truly inclusive governance of Europe.’ The EU’s ‘export of democracy’ – a cold breeze dating back a century – reminds us of anxieties we thought had long ago disappeared.

Let me now turn to the worrying phenomenon of populism. I am addressing this issue here because in today’s Europe, the populists target this Union of ours. They try to undermine the achievements of over 60 years of European integration. I am also addressing this issue because populism is at the very roots of Bolshevism, from the first works of Karl Marx, who started this cruel madness. Catchy and attractive—sounding, populist propaganda promises oversimplified solutions for complex issues. Populists divide our societies into good and bad, us and them. This undermines the democratic and open political debate, while radicalisation and extremism gain ground.

Europe has already paid a heavy price for creating such dividing lines in the past. The experience of the two World Wars taught us not to focus on differences but to create a common space to live, study and work. Our nations agreed on common fundamental principles such as democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights. Our societies are facing different challenges, related for instance to security, defence, migration and so on. Populist rhetoric has created deep divisions in our societies on those issues instead of allowing us to work together on common solutions in the EU. Populists use information technology to communicate the message even more widely. This has brought along new challenges, such as misinformation on a massive scale, fake news and attempts to influence democratic elections. It is not easy for citizens to discern fake news or to find and access reliable information.

These challenges need to be countered on many different levels. I welcome the Commission’s plans – as recently announced by First Vice—President Timmermans at the General Affairs Council – to carry out preparatory work on the topic of fake news. This is a fundamental issue of partly foreign interference threatening to seriously undermine our democracies. We must not forget the important role of education and youth work either. The first Leaders’ meeting under President Tusk’s Leaders’ Agenda on Friday in Gothenburg focuses precisely on education and culture.

We need to develop democratic resilience, media literacy, tolerance, critical thinking and conflict resolution skills. In particular, media literacy has become key to fighting off populist propaganda and manipulation through fake news. In October, the Estonian Presidency organised the third annual Rule of Law Dialogue in the General Affairs Council on the topic of media pluralism and the rule of law in the digital age. It was underlined that increased levels of disinformation are another core challenge, including for democracy and the rule of law. This challenge can be counterbalanced by increased levels of media literacy.

We need to put more energy and means into strategic communication and make the best use of the methods and tools which have proved efficient both in the EU and within our neighbourhood. For instance, the valuable work and output by the East Strategic Communication Task Force in the European External Action Service shows us how we can improve and magnify our narrative in the eastern neighbourhood.

I would like to conclude by stressing how important it is to prevent our citizens from being misled by populists. History shows the impact that propaganda and manipulation can have on our societies. Thus it is our common responsibility to preserve the vital values of tolerance, protection, human rights and the rule of law. I hope that today’s discussion on this sad anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution will further contribute to keeping and respecting these common values in the future, too.

  President. – Minister, thank you, and I must say that when you referred to the quote by Ambassador Vladimir Chizhov, having been for years his Czech counterpart both in Prague and in Brussels, I could supplement that with some other freezing quotes.

  Frans Timmermans, First Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, I could never speak as eloquently about this issue as Sandra Kalniete and Matti Maasikas have just done, for the simple reason that I had the good fortune to be born on the right side of the Iron Curtain, and therefore never had the personal experience of what it means to live in a dictatorship or in a totalitarian state. This does not mean that I do not feel a collective historic responsibility, for all Europeans, to make sure that this memory is never lost, that it is part of our educational system in a way, and that our children don’t forget, so that they do not repeat the mistakes of the past.

I am certainly not claiming this as a Commission responsibility or a European responsibility, but I do call on national authorities to make sure that the totalitarian past, which is an integral part of all our histories, is never forgotten so that the experience should never be repeated.

The 1917 revolutions in Russia were a turning point of twentieth century history and politics. It was the beginning of a wave of totalitarian regimes, in which the ideology dictated that the individual was not relevant; that the only thing that mattered was the ideology and the goals that the state dictated through people who thought that individual rights and democracy had no part in their society. As this regime, the Bolshevik regime, took over in the October Revolution, it sought legitimisation through the hunting down of enemies. There were incredible numbers of individual victims of the political terror, especially in the elite of the country, whose experience looms large in our history writing. But terror, to be effective, needs to be indiscriminate. Terror only works if innocent people are victims of it, because it makes everybody scared, and in absolute numbers it was the ordinary people who suffered most.

I think because it was not mentioned before today, I want to mention that we should maintain a special place in our collective memory for the many millions who perished in the Holodomor in Ukraine. The people of the Soviet Union made sacrifices on a scale which numbs the mind in helping to defeat the Nazi regime, but the end of the Second World War did not alter the baleful nature of the Stalinist dictatorship. Furthermore, the Soviet occupation of the Baltic States and the puppet regimes put in place in Central Europe left our continent divided, leaving people to the East with effectively closed borders yearning for political and personal freedoms and missing out on the prosperity that took off in our part of Europe.

The events of 1989 – to which I am proud to say I have been witness to throughout my career – were for most people a matter of joy, as country after country was able to throw off the totalitarian regimes imposed upon them, and then, in the EU enlargements in 2004 and since, to mend the terrible fracture in our continent. There is no more important event in 70 years of European integration than that wonderful event in 2004 when Europe became whole again. ‘Now grows together what belongs together’ should be a leading motto in our European Union.

While the wounds are deep and countries are still coming to terms with their history, the transformational power of the people to turn their countries into social market democracies where freedom reigns is a miracle. Those of us who witnessed the states of Central and Eastern Europe at the end of the 1980s and who go back now see a miracle; with all the shortcomings we still have, it is a miracle.

That is why I agree so wholeheartedly with President Juncker when he said, in the State of the Union address, that Europe must breathe with both its lungs, East and West. That is why I never hesitate to repeat the wonderful words expressed by Václav Havel at a conference I attended in Prague, when he said: ‘Our goal is to make sure that East and West regain just geographical meaning, not moral meaning, not economic meaning, only geographical meaning’. That should always be our goal, especially to honour the memory of people like Václav Havel.

Our Union is based on the tripod of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Through European history, we know that if we abandon one of the legs of the tripod, the whole tripod will topple and we will not be able to maintain these rights.

It is also important that Europe marks the 23 August, the anniversary of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, to remember all the victims of the totalitarian authoritarian regimes that have scarred Europe during the 20th century. Yes, they went at each other at some point, but Stalin would have preferred to maintain a strategic alliance with this other mass murderer called Adolf Hitler.

The Europe-wide Day of Remembrance for the victims of all totalitarian and authoritarian regimes keeps alive the memory of the victims and pays tribute to them. Commemoration also helps us to recall lessons learnt from this dark chapter in European history. The Spanish writer Jorge Semprún said that European integration was born in Buchenwald. The EU is based on the idea that you link your destiny to your neighbours’ destiny. That is a clean break with a totalitarian vision of exactly 100 years ago in the Bolshevik revolution.

The concept fostered in the Bolshevik revolution, in the Fascist regime in Italy, in the Nazi regime in Germany, and in the subsequent Fascist regimes in other European countries, was always that the individual does not count – it is only our goals that count, and if individuals die because of that, tough luck. This is something we as Europeans of today can never, ever accept.

We should never take our freedoms for granted. Nothing is irreversible, as the volatile politics of our continent show. Democracy and freedom need maintenance. Ideology that allows you to murder your neighbour is still rampant in Europe. Look at the fundamentalist jihadists who have exactly the same vision of being allowed to kill other human beings because they do not share your ideology: exactly what the Stalinists and the Nazis did.

It is perhaps not surprising, but it is dispiriting, that the current government of Russia, which incidentally seems very ambivalent in its own attitude to the Bolshevik revolution, is devoting so much effort and so many resources into misinformation aimed at our societies and other democracies. It is a matter of great concern that apparently it is seeking to divide us and rule us by teaming up with the present forces of illiberalism, nationalism and xenophobia, and inflaming hatred and instilling doubt about our hard-fought democratic values.

I would say, let us not fall for the temptation of the strong man. I do not understand why this is again so tempting to many of our co-citizens. Let us never give in to these dark forces. Let us not fall for the demons of extreme nationalism which, like alcoholism, offer short-term exaltation, but long-lasting headaches, deep disruption, poverty and despair. Europe is ultimately an idea and a promise that it is possible to overcome age-old antagonisms and live together, trade together and work together in freedom and peace. Markets and currency are important instruments, but not our end goals.

On this, the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution, it is good to recall the lessons of the past. Domination of one another is not the answer. Europe grows out of a free and democratic choice to join a union and pool one sovereignty so that the whole is greater than the sum of all its parts. Looking back on our history, we can only conclude that we are lucky to be alive today, and so we must cherish the open, prosperous, diverse and peaceful societies we have built where individual freedoms are not sacrificed on the altar of so-called collective interests based on a totalitarian ideologies. But we must never take this for granted, nor the fundamental values that our European house is based on. We then must consequently show the same energy, passion and determination to defend what Europe is, to defend who we really are and to understand that collective prosperity is impossible without individual liberty.

  President. – Ladies and gentlemen, we will now proceed with the debate. I need to underline that we have a very extensive list of speakers and I will be very strict in terms of respecting the speaking time. So on the second signal I will just have to take the floor from any who exceed their speaking time.

  Андрей Ковачев, от името на групата PPE. – Г-н Председател, г-н Министър, г-н Комисар, преди 100 години започна един ужасяващ политически и социален експеримент, отговорен за масовото депортиране, убийствата и заробването на милиони човешки същества. Комунистическата диктатура рухна през 89-а година, но комунизмът не беше осъден за престъпленията му, така както стана след Втората световна война с националсоциализма и фашизма, а тогавашният Запад в името на мирния преход преглътна сътрудничеството с бившите комунисти.

Днес младите поколения не само не знаят истината за репресиите, променили милиони човешки съдби, но и се опитват да им насаждат носталгия към тях. Дали има разлика между лагерите на Хитлер и Сталин? Такава няма, освен че сталинските бяха по-дълго и погубиха повече хора. Всички тоталитарни диктатури трябва да бъдат приравнени като еднакво човеконенавистни, както и техните символи. Непознаването на собствената ни история ни обрича да повтаряме грешките на миналото, като позволяваме да се възпроизведат старите авторитарни практики. Никога повече не трябва да допускаме такива експерименти и най-добрият инструмент за това е образованието!

Our duty, ladies and gentlemen, is to keep the memory of what has happened and never repeat it again. In my country Bulgaria alone, tens of thousands were killed after the Soviet occupation. Let us pay tribute to all victims of totalitarian regimes and never repeat it again.

  Christine Revault d’Allonnes Bonnefoy, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Mesdames et Messieurs, les révolutions russes de 1917 sont un événement majeur qui a changé le cours de l’histoire et qui a ébranlé le monde. Nourries par la colère d’une population opprimée contre un système autocratique et profondément inégalitaire, elles ont mis fin au régime tsariste. Cette révolte portait en elle l’espoir d’une société nouvelle, plus juste et solidaire.

Ces aspirations et ces idées, dévoyées par le coup d’État, puis par la dictature stalinienne, font partie de notre héritage, comme 1789 et 1848. Elles nous permettent de mieux comprendre comment changer la société pour assurer l’avenir. Sans démocratie, pas d’égalité. Aucun changement si radical n’a de sens s’il n’est pas juste.

L’exploitation n’a pas disparu, les injustices non plus. De nombreux Européens se sentent abandonnés, mis au ban de la société. Le chômage, la pauvreté et les inégalités grimpantes font rage. La résignation et la colère sont là.

Sans réponse aux souhaits de nos peuples que nos institutions soient attentives, réactives et effectives, c’est notre démocratie qui sera mise en danger. En effet, ce sont cette exaspération et cette peur qui constituent le terreau des extrémismes dont la cible est la démocratie.

Afin de permettre aux Européens de retrouver la confiance, de leur redonner de l’espoir, nous appelons à la concrétisation d’une Europe refondée reposant sur quatre piliers, à savoir d’une Europe sociale, écologique, respectueuse des droits fondamentaux et profondément européenne.

Ne nous voilons pas la face, le libéralisme est une impasse et le national-populisme une menace. Nous appelons à un changement d’Europe.

  President. – I am sorry, colleague, but I announced at the very beginning that this debate is without blue cards and without catch-the-eye. My apologies, but this is the case.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Składam hołd ofiarom komunizmu, ponad stu milionom osób na całym świecie. Chylę czoła przed bohaterstwem moich rodaków, którzy tuż po uzyskaniu niepodległości podjęli walkę z nawałą bolszewicką, ratując całą Europę. Chylę czoła przed bohaterami Katynia, Ostaszkowa, Miednoje, pomordowanymi polskimi oficerami, przed polskim państwem podziemnym, żołnierzami wyklętymi, bohaterskimi polskimi chłopami, ostoją patriotyzmu i tradycji, przed ofiarami grudnia 1970 i stanu wojennego. Ich ofiarę pamiętamy. Cześć ich pamięci.

  Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, the communist coup d’état in Russia, still called a revolution by some even in this House, opened the most brutal period of the 20th century. A hundred years ago, all hell broke loose, taking more than 100 million human lives among the Russian people and other innocent nations across the globe. The Bolsheviks’ sick desire to conquer the whole world with their communist ideals caused the equally shameful rise of National Socialists and similar human rubbish.

The communist system cost millions of lives, but it was doomed from the very outset. Getting rid of communism’s ghosts in Central and Eastern Europe was consolidating a peaceful process of human dignity and joy. Against the backdrop of such events, it makes us understand better than ever the real significance of the European Union, the most successful European project.

Mr President, taking no more time, may I ask you to pay a tribute with a minute’s silence for the more than 100 million people killed by the shameful Bolshevik coup d’état.

  President. – Colleagues, this is a serious issue, and I think the debate so far confirms the deep pain that many nations in Europe have suffered. I would ask you for one minute’s silence in memory of the victims.

(The House rose and observed a minute’s silence)

  Νεοκλής Συλικιώτης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι σημερινές συζητήσεις αποφασίστηκε να διοργανώνονται για να συζητούμε επίκαιρα ζητήματα που απασχολούν τους λαούς της Ευρώπης. Το ΕΛΚ, κατά την άποψή μας, προβοκατόρικα προκαλεί μια ιδεολογική συζήτηση για να αποπροσανατολίσει από τα πραγματικά προβλήματα που ταλανίζουν τους λαούς. Σήμερα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οι λαοί φτωχοποιούνται, διαλύεται το κοινωνικό κράτος, οδηγούμαστε σε κοινωνικό και οικονομικό ντάμπινγκ και τα δημοκρατικά και εργασιακά δικαιώματα καταργούνται, οδηγώντας στη μαζική ανεργία, τη φτώχεια, την έλλειψη πραγματικής δημοκρατίας.

Η διαχείριση του προσφυγικού, οι νεοφιλελεύθερες πολιτικές λιτότητας και η στρατιωτικοποίηση δείχνουν όσο ποτέ άλλοτε το μιλιταριστικό, ξενοφοβικό, ρατσιστικό και αντεργατικό πρόσωπο της Ένωσης. Την ίδια ώρα, η άνοδος της ακροδεξιάς, των νεοφασιστών και των νοσταλγών του Χίτλερ στοιχειώνει την Ευρώπη και δείχνει ξεκάθαρα πως το τέρας του φασισμού αναγεννιέται.

Η Οκτωβριανή Επανάσταση είναι ένα κοσμοϊστορικό γεγονός που άλλαξε τον ρου της ιστορίας στον 20ό αιώνα. Ανέτρεψε το σάπιο καπιταλιστικό σύστημα και απελευθέρωσε τεράστιες αναπτυξιακές παραγωγικές δυνάμεις. Άνοιξε τον δρόμο στους αντιαποικιακούς αγώνες των λαών και έπαιξε πρωταγωνιστικό ρόλο στο τσάκισμα του χιτλεροφασισμού. Πάνω απ’ όλα, έδειξε πως είναι δυνατή μια κοινωνία που μπορεί να αποτελεί ασφάλεια για το μέλλον των εργαζομένων, διασφαλίζοντάς τους στέγαση, εκπαίδευση και υγεία. Πως μπορεί να δημιουργήσει έναν νέο τύπο διεθνών σχέσεων βασισμένων στην ειρήνη και την αλληλεγγύη και όχι στους πολέμους και τις ιμπεριαλιστικές επεμβάσεις. Ως αριστερά εμπνεόμαστε από....

(Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή)

  President. – Mr Sylikiotis, please respect the time slot you have received and also show respect to your colleagues. I let you speak even though your speech is considered by the Chair as unfortunate and… in line with history. You had the opportunity to speak. Mr Sylikiotis, respect the chair. You had your time to speak.

(Interjection from Mr Sylikiotis)

Mr Sylikiotis, do not push me into taking measures.

(Interjection from the floor)

Colleague, you are not here to debate with other colleagues. You asked for a point of order. Under which rule do you wish to speak?

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, parece-me evidente que não tem, o Presidente que está a conduzir os trabalhos, a imparcialidade que se exige a quem conduz os trabalhos. O Senhor decidiu, não sei com base em que disposição do Regimento, mas gostava que aqui nos informasse, fazer um minuto de silêncio a pedido. Não sei se é habitual, não sei se lhe pedir agora também um minuto de silêncio…. Mas aquilo que se exige é a imparcialidade na condução dos trabalhos e não é dar mais tempo a uns e cortar do tempo de outros, como acabou de fazer. Isso não é imparcialidade! Está bem demonstrado o seu conceito de liberdade de expressão e de liberdade de opinião! Está bem demonstrado onde é que está o totalitarismo aqui nesta casa.

  Bronis Ropė, Verts/ALE frakcijos vardu. – Būkime sąžiningi. Įvykius Sankt Peterburge 1917 m. spalį net ir patys bolševikai ilgą laiką vadino „spalio perversmu“. „Didžiąja revoliucija“ šis perversmas tapo tik po gero dešimtmečio, kaip dalis komunistinės mitologijos. Negaliu sugalvoti nei vienos priežasties, kodėl mes turėtume toliau plėtoti sovietinę mitologiją. Todėl vadinkime daiktus savais vardais, o spalio įvykius Rusijoje – bolševikų perversmu.

Praėjusią savaitę keli kolegos Parlamente mėgino švęsti šimtąsias bolševikų perversmo metines. Turėtume užduoti sau klausimą – ar galime Europos demokratijos šventovėje leisti švęsti pradžią režimo, kuris ne tik nieko bendro neturėjo su demokratija, bet ir yra atsakingas daugiau kaip už šimtą milijonų mirčių visuose pasaulio žemynuose?

Mano šalis, keturis su puse dešimtmečio išbuvusi komunistinėje okupacijoje, yra priėmusi, manau, labai teisingą sprendimą. Abu didžiausi totalitariniai dvidešimtojo amžiaus režimai – tiek komunizmas, tiek nacizmas, yra teisiškai sulyginti ir pripažinti vienodai nusikalstamais. Esu įsitikinęs, kad geriausias 1917 m. bolševikų perversmo įvertinimas būtų jo įvardinimas nusikalstamu.

  Gerard Batten, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, the legacy of the 1917 Bolshevik coup d'état is the oppression and murder of hundreds of millions of people. That legacy continues in places like China, Cuba and North Korea. The ideology that inspired the Bolsheviks caused this human tragedy. Marxism is supposed to be scientific. It cannot be wrong. Therefore, it believes it is justifiable to sweep away anyone who opposes it by any means. The essential evil at the heart of Marxism is the idea that the end justifies the means. That idea unites Communism and Nazism. They are two sides of the same totalitarian coin.

Marxism is nonsense. Marxist parties that seize power become dictatorships with only one goal – their own self-preservation. Look at the Chinese Communist Party today for evidence of that. The Nazis pulled the gold teeth out of murdered Jews. The Chinese Communist Party today oversees a totalitarian system where they not only imprison and kill dissidents of any kind, but harvest and sell their organs for a multi-billion dollar organ transplant industry.

Under Marxism, any depravity becomes justifiable, but Marxists tell us it is not real Marxism and we need to try again. The Bolshevik coup proves just how fragile civilisation is and how the ideas behind it must be resisted by all of those who love freedom, liberty and decency.

  Marcel de Graaff, namens de ENF-Fractie. – De bolsjewistische staatsgreep bracht een afschuwelijk socialistisch regime aan de macht dat critici vervolgde. Burgers bespioneerden elkaar, kinderen verraden hun ouders en echtgenoten elkaar. Het richtte werkkampen en martelcentra in. Het kostte volgens minimale schattingen 22 miljoen mensen het leven. Communisme, marxisme, socialisme, dat zijn allemaal loten aan dezelfde stam en de nieuwste loot heet globalisme.

Ook het globalisme breekt gemeenschappen af tot angstige individuen, vernietigt de saamhorigheid van gezin en volk, vernietigt identiteit en eigenheid. Het haat christendom, boeddhisme en andere wereldbeschouwingen die de sociale band tussen mensen versterken. Het haat andere meningen. Het controleert de media en het onderwijs, maakt journalistiek en school tot propagandamachine. Deze Europese Unie is volledig in de greep van globalisten, van neo-marxisten.

Kijk naar de vrienden van deze EU: Turkije, China, Saoedi-Arabië, Iran, landen met totalitaire regimes. Het globalisme omarmt de totalitaire islam en laat zijn aanhangers met miljoenen de EU binnen. En kijk dan naar de vijanden van de EU: de regering-Trump, Rusland, Hongarije en Polen, waar regeringen de christelijke identiteit van hun land proberen te verdedigen, of het Verenigd Koninkrijk, dat zich expliciet tegen de totalitaire macht van de EU keert. Maar de grootste vijand van deze EU zijn niet de terroristen die monsterlijke aanslagen plegen in onze steden. Nee, het zijn de critici van de EU, die worden verketterd als populisten, als extreem-rechts, als fascisten en xenofoben.

Ja, de erfenis van de bolsjewieken is springlevend. Hier in deze EU wordt een totalitair regime voltooid. Gelukkig is er hoop. Steeds meer burgers — Britten, Polen, Hongaren, Sicilianen — staan op tegen deze EU. Dus burgers van de EU: sta op en loop weg van deze onderdrukkende elite, loop weg van deze marionettenpartijen.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). – Monsieur le Président, enfin une évocation du totalitarisme communiste issu de la révolution bolchévique, elle-même héritière de la Révolution française.

Chez tous les révolutionnaires, on observe en effet la même haine de l’ordre naturel, la même prétention à faire table rase du passé, la même négation de toute transcendance, la même violence contre les récalcitrants, une violence qui va jusqu’à l’assassinat, au meurtre de masse, au génocide, comme au Cambodge ou en Ukraine.

Cependant je ne puis qu’être navré de l’assimilation abusive formulée, lors de leurs témoignages émouvants, par Mme Kalniete et M. Maasikas quant à ce qu’ils appellent aujourd’hui les populismes.

En quoi la défense des identités qui est la nôtre, s’exprimant seulement pacifiquement par la voie des élections, injustement discriminée jusque dans cette enceinte, a-t-elle quoi que ce soit à voir avec le communisme?

M. Timmermans a cité Vaclav Havel, celui-ci n’était-il pas très critique au sujet de nos institutions?

Prenons garde à l’avertissement du dissident Boukovsky qui craignait que ne se constitue une nouvelle Union soviétique européenne.

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, aș începe adresându-mă mai întâi domnului din grupul comunist care era nemulțumit pentru că am păstrat un minut de reculegere în memoria victimelor. Aș vrea să îi reamintesc că jumătate din Europa a păstrat cincizeci de ani liniștea în privința a ceea ce se întâmpla dincolo de Cortina de Fier și ar trebui să își aducă aminte de acest lucru, cu atât mai mult cu cât, deocamdată, comunismul nu a existat decât în formă totalitară. Așa că, atunci când dumneavoastră considerați că trebuie să vă revendicați de la comunism, vă revendicați direct de la crimele comise în numele ideologiei pe care o reprezentați.

Mai este ceva care ar trebui discutat foarte deschis și tocmai în această incintă: o parte din partidele comuniste din centrul și estul Europei s-au transformat la începutul anilor '90 în partide social - democrate, au luat chiar numele celor pe care îi detestau cel mai mult în timpul istoriei comunismului, sunt unii dintre ei aici, cu noi, în acest hemiciclu și de altfel nu au de multe ori nicio problemă în a se asocia cu comuniștii și a vota împreună în numele unui viitor luminos.

Despre aceasta ar trebui să discutăm, despre incapacitatea de a accepta critică, despre refuzul de a accepta separarea puterilor, despre dorința de a acapara justiția în multe dintre țările foste comuniste. Acestea sunt chestiunile pe care ni le-au lăsat cei care au creat homo sovieticus pentru că, așa cum spunea Svetlana Alexievich, singurul proiect comunist care a reușit este crearea lui homo sovieticus și plătim costurile acestei creații fiecare dintre noi, în Europa.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, the best way to avoid the consequences of revolutions and wars is to prevent them by tackling the reasons that cause them.

In 1913, Vladimir Lenin wrote that the revolution he was preparing would not take place in his lifetime. However, it happened four years later. In 1917, it was not the Bolsheviks who seized power, but other groups that gave it to them, and nobody – except the Bolsheviks – was ready to take the power that was lying at their feet. The revolution happened because problems accumulating in society had been ignored for a long time.

What lessons should the European Union draw from the Russian revolution today? Firstly, it should recognise the problem and not deny it. We still try to deny problems and punish those who warn us about them. Secondly, institutions will not help if there is an ideological emptiness inside them. An absence of common values eventually leads to the collapse of structures. Thirdly, do not solve your problems of today at the expense of a weak group of the population. For example, the problem of social inequality should not be given to capitalists or national linguistic minorities’ problems to nationalists. Fourthly, do not solve internal problems by demonising your neighbours in order to consolidate your own society. Such consolidation works only for a short period, but the problems will return like a boomerang.

We need a clear vision. If we are unable to formulate our vision and our aims in a short form which is understandable for every single person, this means that we do not have this vision at all. It is a path straight to stagnation, then to collapse and anarchy followed by totalitarianism. Let us think about it.

  Bernd Lucke (ECR). – Herr Präsident, Herr Ratspräsident, Frau Kalnete! Der Bolschewismus, der Totalitarismus, der Maoismus, der Nationalsozialismus haben unendliches Leiden hervorgerufen und unzählige Opfer zu verantworten, und Sie haben dem in würdevollen Worten gedacht. Aber es war unwürdig, die Opfer des Totalitarismus zu instrumentalisieren, um jetzt gegen populistische Bewegungen auszuholen.

Herr Ratspräsident, Karl Marx war kein Populist, Nigel Farage ist kein Nazi, die Fünf-Sterne-Bewegung besteht nicht aus Bolschewisten. Es ist falsch, die Unterschiede zu verwischen. Und wenn Sie das tun und wenn Sie die Opfer des Nationalsozialismus und des Bolschewismus und des Maoismus so instrumentalisieren, dann geben Sie zu erkennen, dass Sie einen Anspruch auf Meinungsführerschaft haben, der sich gegen jede Form von Protest richtet einen Anspruch auf Meinungsführerschaft, der seinerseits dann etwas Totalitäres hat.

  Dita Charanzová (ALDE). – Pane předsedající, pane komisaři, byla bych ráda, aby tato debata vyzněla jako memento – memento událostí, které nezvratně negativně poznamenaly dějiny Evropy včetně mé země, České republiky.

To, co se před sto lety v Rusku stalo, mnozí ještě dnes vnímají jako sociální revoluci. Faktem je, že bolševický puč vedl k brutální totalitě, která jen v Sovětském svazu připravila o život desítky milionů lidí. Jejich památku a odvahu těch, kteří s komunistickým režimem vedli svůj osobní boj, bychom dnes měli ocenit především.

Bohužel, stále jsou ve světě ale u moci režimy, které pod rouškou ideologie perzekuují, vězní a popravují své odpůrce. Věnujme proto tuto debatu i těm, kteří stejně jako my před lety usilují o svou svobodu a uznání svých práv. Nechť je jim pád železné opony v tomto boji inspirací.

  Merja Kyllönen (GUE/NGL). – Arvoisa puhemies, hyvät kollegat, viisas kansakunta ottaa oppia historiasta. Vallankumous oli seurausta siitä, että teollisen vallankumouksen myötä suurella osalla väestöstä, aikuisilla ja lapsilla oli arvoa enää osana tuotantokoneistoa. Omistavaa osaa ei kiinnostanut, kuinka ihmiset elivät tai jaksoivat, heidän arvonsa ja oikeutensa olivat haitta ja koulutus tarkoitti hankalasti hallittavia. Vain mahdollisimman suuri tuotto mahdollisimman pienillä kustannuksilla oli tärkeää.

Ihmisten eriarvoistaminen ei ole tässä maailmassa johtanut koskaan mihinkään hyvään. Tänä päivänä me näemme korruption, ihmisten riiston ja järjestelmän ahneuden vaikutukset. Me ihmettelemme silti radikalismin nousua ja äärioikeiston houkutusta. Miksi? Mietitään vaikka Aasian vaateteollisuutta, mistä eurooppalaiset yritykset ostavat vaatteita ja kankaita, tai sitten omaa Eurooppaamme, missä suurteollisuuden äänitorvet vaativat, että ihmiset tekevät useaa eri työtä minimipalkalla ansaitakseen toimeentulonsa samaan aikaan kun omistava prosentti viihtyy veroparatiiseissaan.

Tekemällä kaikesta koulutuksesta maksullista me heikennämme sivistyksen ja koulutuksen tasoa ja kansasta tulee jälleen pelkkä osa tuotantokoneistoa. Onko siis ihme, että jatkuvan ihmisten eriarvoistamisen kautta kansalaiset nousevat vastarintaan? Toivottavasti olemme edes jotain historiasta oppineet ja ymmärrämme, että eriarvoistumisen tie ei ole fiksu tie Euroopalle eikä millekään muullekaan alueelle.

  Tim Aker (EFDD). – Mr President, Winston Churchill famously said that the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings and the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. And that misery was famine, suffering, repression, and political suppression. It is interesting that the communists in this place delight in freedom of speech by extolling a regime and political idea that took that away from millions of people over 70 years. They should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

Freedom is only ever one generation away from extinction. Those who are wary of anyone concentrating power in one place should always be on their guard. Look at those with power. How did they get it? Ask those with power what they are going to do with it, and if necessary, ask them how we can take it away from them. The price of freedom is always eternal vigilance.

  Michał Marusik (ENF). – Panie Przewodniczący! Proszę Państwa! Nasza ocena bolszewickiej rewolucji w Rosji obciążona jest pewnym takim błędem poznawczym, i to błędem pod wpływem propagandy lewicowej. Lewicowa propaganda mianowicie stara się nam wmówić, że cele tych bolszewików były słuszne, tylko metody były brutalne i nieludzkie. Tymczasem musimy się właśnie zastanowić nad tymi celami. Propaganda chce wmówić nam, że władza, która zabija i okrada jest władzą złą, a taka władza, która tylko okrada, a nie zabija, jest władzą dobrą. A to jest nieprawda. To też jest przecież zła władza. Musimy się zastanowić nad tym, jakie były prawdziwe cele komunistów, Wprowadzenie komunizmu, czyli wprowadzenie własności kolektywnej, było ich celem i celem komunistów pozostało na zawsze. Odebrano ludziom własność owoców ich pracy, nazywając to jakąś własnością kolektywną, jakąś własnością wspólną, własnością wszystkich. Robiono to oczywiście przy użyciu barbarzyńskich metod, ale zastanawiajmy się również nad tym celem. Popatrzmy bowiem na Europę, jaka ona się staje dzisiaj. Tu nie ma obozów koncentracyjnych. Tu nie ma jakichś masowych zbrodni. Nie ma masowego terroru, ale poziom inwigilacji obywateli, poziom kontroli władzy nad obywatelem, poziom ucisku fiskalnego wyraźnie pokazuje, jak bardzo jesteśmy zmuszani do pracy na naszych nadzorców. Dorobek narodów europejskich w zdecydowanej większości znajduje się w rękach biurokratycznych nadzorców. Komunizm więc – ta idea komunistyczna – tutaj święci swoje wielkie triumfy i trzeba o tym krzyczeć. Trzeba o tym mówić i nie przemilczać, tylko odważnie powiedzieć, że nam potrzeba wolności własności i sprawiedliwości. Jeżeli Europa ma nie zginąć pod ciosami własności wspólnej, to musimy się jej wyrzec. Musimy być takim kontynentem, w którym wolni i bogaci obywatele żyć będą w wolnych i bezpiecznych krajach. O to wołam!

  Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, υπερασπιζόμαστε τον σοσιαλισμό, που -σε λίγα μόλις χρόνια- έλυσε μεγάλα προβλήματα που παραμένουν άλυτα στον καπιταλισμό. Κατάργησε την ανεργία και την εκμετάλλευση, γνώρισε στους λαούς τι σημαίνει μόνιμη και σταθερή δουλειά με δικαιώματα, δωρεάν υγεία, παιδεία για όλους, πάμφθηνη κατοικία και σιγουριά για το μέλλον.

Το εκμεταλλευτικό σύστημα που υπερασπίζεστε σημαίνει εργασιακή γαλέρα, ουρές ανέργων, μόνιμη ανασφάλεια, πλειστηριασμοί, άνθρωποι να ψάχνουν στα σκουπίδια. Στον σοσιαλισμό οι λαοί έζησαν μονιασμένα και ειρηνικά για δεκαετίες. Το σύστημά σας στάζει αίμα από τα εγκλήματα των ιμπεριαλιστικών πολέμων, με Χιροσίμες, διαμελισμένα κράτη και προσφυγιά. Ο σοσιαλισμός νίκησε το τέρας του φασισμού στον Δεύτερο Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο και ο φασισμός είναι παιδί του καπιταλισμού. Η δημοκρατία που προβάλλετε είναι η δικτατορία των μονοπωλίων. Η λάσπη, ο αντικομμουνισμός και οι απαγορεύσεις που επιστρατεύουν οι υποστηρικτές και απολογητές του καπιταλισμού δείχνουν τον φόβο τους. Οι λαοί, διδαγμένοι, θα ξαναβρούν τον δρόμο τους. Το σάπιο σύστημα είναι το παλιό. Το μέλλον του κόσμου είναι ο σοσιαλισμός-κομμουνισμός.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). – Mr President, each tree should be assessed by its fruits. One hundred years of communism in practice equals roughly 100 million victims. It was, and still is, a system which is based on two pillars – violence and lies. From Karl Marx to Lenin, all ruling Communist leaders have advocated and practiced only one way of action: total liquidation of their real or supposed adversaries by systematic violence.

After 1917, the Bolsheviks could keep their power only through a reign of terror. Here, our Socialist colleague was absolutely mistaken, claiming that the start of the coup was glorious. In the first two years of Bolshevik power, 300 000 political executions were carried out. In two years, 100 concentration camps were in place. It was from them, 13 years later, that the Nazis took over the best practices.

Soviet communist rulers were in a permanent state of war, mainly against their own nation, but also against the rest of the world. All this equals large-scale and systematic crimes against humanity. The problem today is the inequality of victims. Those who have suffered under communist terror have not yet seen an internationally binding commitment to ‘never again’.

I think today it is high time to unite ourselves in equal respect and solidarity with victims of all terrorist regimes.

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Francisco Assis (S&D). – No célebre congresso de Tours, em dezembro de 1920, o grande socialista francês Léon Blum afirmou, referindo-se aos leninistas soviéticos, que então enfrentavam: “Pela primeira vez em toda a história do socialismo, vós concebeis o terrorismo não apenas como um recurso de última hora, não apenas como uma medida extrema de salvação pública perante a resistência burguesa, nem sequer como uma necessidade vital para a revolução, mas sim como um meio de governação”.

Isto é, logo na génese do processo soviético, houve uma esquerda europeia que se opôs à revolução soviética. Blum perdeu aquele congresso, mas ele tinha toda a razão. A verdade é que o que se verificava na União Soviética era a de confiscação de todo o poder por parte de uma vanguarda partidária que anulou qualquer perspetiva de debate pluralista, impediu a afirmação de qualquer modelo de constitucionalismo democrático, proibiu a prossecução de uma razão crítica e, dado o carácter classista que exaltou, anulou a sua própria pretensão universalista. Cem anos depois, o balanço que podemos fazer da revolução soviética não pode ser senão um balanço trágico.

  John Flack (ECR). – Mr President, the legacy: hundreds of millions of people dead and democracy crushed across half of Europe for generations. If it had not been for Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, who ended the Cold War in the 1980s, the death toll would have grown higher and democracy would have continued to be denied to hundreds of millions of people.

So what is relevant today as the world faces threats from other unelected totalitarian regimes? The democratic West must resolutely stand up for freedom, for self—determination and for democracy, and not allow the artificial imposition of borders imposed by any small, unelected ruling elite. As President Reagan famously said in words that were unattributed a few minutes ago: ‘Freedom is never more the one generation away from extinction’. He went on to say: ‘We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same’. That is the lesson all in this Parliament should accept.

  Yana Toom (ALDE). – Mr President, I would like to remind my colleagues that we have representatives of eight communist parties elected to this Chamber and we have pretty good relations with some communist regimes such as, for instance, China.

The October Revolution is a very complex phenomenon, and this year even the Kremlin decided not to commemorate officially the anniversary of the October Revolution. In spite of that, some of my colleagues used the events of 1917 as a pretext to demonise contemporary Russia. We really have a lot of problems with this state, but please could we maybe limit ourselves to more urgent issues like Ukraine, Crimea and the Eastern Partnership, for instance.

We are all politicians, and as politicians we have to understand that each word has its price. And if we are not preparing for a war with Russia the day after tomorrow, we have to save at least some opportunities for future dialogue. I strongly believe that today’s debate does not serve that purpose.

  Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL). – Pane předsedající, bolševická revoluce v Petrohradě v říjnu 1917 byla bezesporu historickým milníkem v dějinách moderního Ruska a možná i celého světa. Je to historická událost, o které je třeba mluvit. Názory na ni jsou i v samotném Rusku rozpolcené stejně jako společnost. Jisté je, že revoluce dosáhla úspěchů, vymýtila negramotnost, pozvedla životní úroveň části obyvatel.

(Předsedající přerušil řečníka z důvodu problému s tlumočením.)

V mimořádně krátké době proběhla rekordní vlna industrializace, během pouhých 10 let, i když uznávám, za cenu velkých lidských obětí.

Nelze opominout ani hrdinství vojáků Rudé armády v boji proti Hitlerovi. Každá politická ideologie nese stejný bolestný kříž v podobě lidských obětí. Snad se všichni shodneme na tom, že vynášet rozsudky nad historickými událostmi mají historikové, nikoliv poslanci EP.

  Nathan Gill (EFDD). – Mr President, President Gorbachev famously proclaimed that the EU was the old Soviet Union dressed in western clothing. The erosion of democracy and sovereignty has been incremental. Nothing has been done by force, but allegedly in the public’s best interests, with power grabs from crisis or through mass migration. Even the modern day Pravda journal observed striking similarities between the Lisbon Treaty and its communist predecessors.

Former Soviet dissident, Vladimir Bukovsky, warned of disturbing similarities between the USSR and blueprints for the EU superstate. He said the European Commission was the Politburo in view of the secretive way in which power is exercised. The European Parliament, he added, is a mere rubber—stamp institution like the Supreme Soviet of the old USSR. Thankfully, the biggest difference between the EU and the USSR is a constitutional pathway out of the Union. I am proud that the...

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Marie-Christine Arnautu (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, la célébration du centenaire de la révolution bolchévique les 8 et 9 novembre au Parlement, à Bruxelles, et l’intitulé du débat d’aujourd’hui «Legs de la révolution totalitaire bolchévique de 1917» sont une insulte à toutes les victimes du communisme et à leur famille, dont la mienne.

Comment peut-on oser parler de «legs» ? De quel héritage s’agit-il?

L’excellente exposition organisée par notre collègue, Marek Jurek, nous l’a pourtant rappelé: les crimes perpétrés au nom du communisme à hauteur de plus de cent millions de morts n’ont jamais été officiellement et définitivement condamnés, comme ce fut le cas, à juste titre, pour les crimes nazis.

Je siège dans cet hémicycle depuis plus de trois ans et j’y ai entendu des centaines de fois les mots «tolérance» et «démocratie» avec un empressement non dissimulé, d’ailleurs, pour s’ingérer dans le gouvernement de nations pourtant souveraines, sous couvert qu’elles bafoueraient les valeurs européennes ou qu’elles seraient, comme on l’a entendu, populistes, c’est-à-dire qu’elles défendraient leurs peuples, d’abord, à savoir exactement le contraire du communisme. Je pense bien sûr, par exemple, à la Hongrie, à la Pologne et à la Russie. Le hasard veut que ce soit justement des pays qui ont payé un très lourd tribut au régime de l’Union soviétique.

Aujourd’hui, ces pays se battent plus que d’autres pour préserver l’identité de leurs peuples. Ils veulent réhabiliter leurs racines chrétiennes, ils n’en ont pas honte et ils veulent défendre la famille et le concept salvateur de nation, en clair, tout ce que le communisme s’est acharné à détruire pendant 70 ans. Et pourtant, certains continuent de distiller son idéologie mortifère.

Aucune complaisance n’est acceptable. Nous devrions tous, ici, nous engager solennellement à ce que nos peuples ne revivent jamais cela.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Elnök Úr! Kedves Képviselőtársaim, kedves Timmermans úr, aki egy nagyon érdekes, huncut ember, ahogy látom. Miért mondom ezt? Ugye elképzelem, hogy egészséges, normális gondolkodású, különösen a posztkommunista országokban élő emberek, ha látják, hogy mi történt itt ma, teljesen meghatódnak. Ugyanis egy perces néma vigyázz volt az Európai Parlamentben, a kommunizmus százmillió áldozatának tiszteletére és emlékére.

Milyen csodálatos dolog! De ők nem ismerik az Európai Uniónak a velejéig romlott és végtelenül hazug természetét! Timmermans Úr, kedves, maguk megváltoztatták ennek az egész vitának a címét! Amikor én bejelentkeztem múlt héten, még ez volt: Radikalizmus és populizmus Európában száz évvel az oroszországi bolsevik forradalom után. Összedugták a fejüket, rájöttek, ez egy kicsit túl átlátszó, ezzel együtt láttuk a vitán, hogy erről szólt a dolog, hogy az Önök által populistának nevezett, a nemzeti szuverenitásért kiálló erőket akarják gondolatilag (...) (Az elnök megvonta szót.)

  Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sto lat od bolszewickiej rewolucji to sto milionów ofiar śmiertelnych i dziesiątki milionów więźniów politycznych na całym świecie. Komunizm zawsze i wszędzie, na każdym kontynencie był wprowadzany siłą, ale pod szczytnymi sztandarami równości, sprawiedliwości, powszechności czy likwidacji klas. Ale praktycznie jednak oznaczał zawsze jedno: nieograniczony terror, bo komunizm to dyktatura jednostki, to polityczny monopol partii komunistycznej, to likwidacja społeczeństwa obywatelskiego, to podporządkowanie władzy wszystkich środowisk, grup społecznych czy organizacji pozarządowych, to zakaz nie tylko działania, ale nawet myślenia innego niż to nakazane przez władze. Dlatego uważam, że komunizm, jako ideologia szkodliwa dla jednostki, także dla tkanki społecznej, powinien być zakazany.

  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oggi ricorrono i cent'anni dalla nascita di un modello di Stato che l'Europa ha lasciato confinato al secolo scorso, un modello che da ideologia si fa imposizione e sopraffazione. Sì, sto parlando del totalitarismo. Da quella Rivoluzione d'ottobre è nata una dittatura che aveva preso un pezzo di mondo per buona parte del Novecento. Il popolo in quella dittatura, come in tanti altri nati in quegli anni, è sempre stato parte della retorica totalitaria. La dittatura del popolo, l'orgoglio del popolo, l'onore del popolo. Eppure, popolo e oligarchi e dittature non hanno mai avuto nulla in comune, se non lo sfruttamento dei primi a vantaggio dei secondi. Dalla storia un monito, signor Presidente, per tutti noi, in un tempo, il nostro, in cui troppo spesso il popolo torna ad essere sventolato come bandiera in grado di giustificare ogni sopruso. Poco importa il nome di chi lo usa a proprio vantaggio, il rischio è sempre lo stesso: scivolare nella violenza del totalitarismo.

  Kosma Złotowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sto milionów ofiar. Niewyobrażalny terror. Słusznie złożyliśmy dzisiaj hołd ofiarom komunizmu. Ale ja chciałbym zwrócić uwagę na inny aspekt komunizmu. Otóż konstytutywnym elementem komunizmu było kłamstwo, kłamstwo posunięte do niewyobrażalnych rozmiarów. Już sama nazwa bolszewicy jest kłamliwa. Ale oni kłamali we wszystkim: w historii, w ekonomii, w biologii (Miczurin), w naukach ścisłych – wszędzie, wszędzie, zawsze kłamali. Odwracali znaczenie słów, odwracali znaczenie pojęć, które są utrwalone kulturowo w naszej europejskiej kulturze. I czyż dzisiaj nie dzieje się to samo? Popatrzmy na siebie, Szanowni Państwo, popatrzmy na debaty, które tutaj odbywamy, na debatę, która dzisiaj toczyła się o Polsce.

A gdzież były fakty? Otóż faktów nie było. Chodzi o odwrócenie znaczenia słów, a to odwraca kierunek rozwoju ludzkości. I ten wniosek wyciągnijmy dla siebie, Szanowni Państwo, z tej paskudnej...

(Przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos)

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, u prošlom su stoljeću Europu zadesila dva totalitarizma, nacistički i komunistički. Moj je otac bio žrtva oba. Deportiran je u nacistički logor Dachau, a poslije je zatočen u komunističkom logoru Goli otok.

Međutim, želim biti jasan. Dok je Lenjinova Oktobarska revolucija imala za cilj slobodu i solidarnost, Hitlerov je nacizam u temeljima imao rasizam i ksenofobiju. Oktobarska revolucija imala je osim sovjetskog komunizma, gdje su stradali milijuni, mnoge varijante u Europi, ali i u Aziji, Africi i Latinskoj Americi. Neki su još i danas živi.

I jugoslavenski, Titov komunizam je na početku proveo mnoge tragedije, proizveo mnoge tragedije da bi kasnije njegova socijalistička verzija ipak otvorila prostore privatnom vlasništvu, samoupravnom socijalizmu i slobodi kretanja, tada u cijeloj podijeljenoj Europi. Dakle, za razliku od većine u ovom Parlamentu nisam živio ni iza željezne zavjese, ali ni u liberalnoj demokraciji.

Potpuno sam siguran, najbolji odgovor za oba totalitarizma je Europska unija.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, nenhum acontecimento histórico terá sido alvo de tanta hostilidade e de tantas campanhas de mentiras e calúnias como a Revolução de Outubro. Não é de estranhar que assim seja. Cada realização, cada conquista da Revolução de Outubro é uma boa razão para fazer dela inspiração para todos os que lutam por um mundo melhor, sem lugar para a exploração e para a opressão, mas, simultaneamente, cada uma dessas conquistas justifica o ódio que contra ela destilam os que querem perpetuar a exploração e a opressão.

Amplos direitos sociais, direito ao trabalho, proibição do trabalho infantil, jornada máxima de oito horas de trabalho, direito a férias pagas, pleno emprego, direito à habitação e à saúde e educação gratuitas, proteção na maternidade, igualdade entre homens e mulheres, o contributo decisivo para a derrota do nazi fascismo, para a paz e para a libertação dos povos oprimidos pelo colonialismo: nenhuma tentativa de reescrever a história é capaz de apagar este legado. O capitalismo não é o fim da História.

  David Coburn (EFDD). – Mr President, comrades, socialism has been the most catastrophic political experiment in history, responsible for the deaths of millions. Socialism is completely unnatural to mankind. All forms of socialism lead inexorably to dictatorship of the bureaucrat and not the proletariat. Socialism can only achieve equality through authoritarian bureaucratic police states.

Capitalism and its concomitant economic and political liberty provides the greatest material wealth for the greatest number of people. Furthermore, capitalism fits well with the rule of law and democracy. The European Union follows its socialist predecessors, trying to achieve bureaucratic authoritarianism by sleight of hand and by salami-slicing legislation, rather than Soviet tanks and guns. However, all socialism leads to the same thing – in this case a pan-European police state where elected Catalonian politicians are deported on a European arrest warrant. Socialism is a complete infringement of human rights.

  Georg Mayer (ENF). – Herr Präsident! Wenn sich ein solches Ereignis wie diese vermeintliche Revolution, deren Ausmaß ja auch historisch und auch menschlich so schwer greifbar ist, zum hundertsten Mal jährt, dann sollte man sich diesem Thema mit einer gewissen Distanz nähern. Man sollte auch – das gilt vor allem für unser Haus – gewisse Schlüsse daraus ziehen, Schlüsse, die uns dazu bringen und weiterbringen, friedlich und frei vor allem miteinander zu leben und auch miteinander umzugehen. Das ist etwas, was uns jedenfalls diese Geschichte lehren kann.

Deswegen finde ich es auch bedenklich, wenn etwa heute Herr Maasikas vom Rat einen Schluss zieht, den ich so nicht stehen lassen kann. Denn wenn er den Populismus mit den Kommunisten und mit der Revolution von damals vergleicht, dann ist das eine völlig unzulässige Annäherung an dieses Thema. Das ist politisch einfältig, und es ist nahezu schon gefährlich verharmlosend, was hier vom Rat als Position gegeben wurde. Denn ich bin – und ich denke, er hat auch mich damit gemeint – gerne Populist, ich höre gerne auf die vox populi. Diesen Vergleich, Herr Präsident, sollte man hier in diesem Haus nicht zulassen.

  Steven Woolfe (NI). – Mr President, freedom, liberty, democracy: those words roll off the tongue so easily, don’t they? Yet we forget how hard they were to win. This debate reminds us how the ideology of extreme socialism leads to poverty, violence and, indeed, to the loss of that freedom. This debate also reminds us how dangerous a political ideology is when, as Mr Timmermans says, the only things that matter are the goals dictated by the state. And yet, this debate is being turned into an anti-populist debate rather than concerning itself with the evil of communism.

We hear today that populists are the dangers – the dangerous people – yet we are not the ones who are trying to forge a new EU extreme ideology of a flag, a Council, a Parliament and its own anthem on people who do not want it.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, vidite kako su emotivne ove rasprave. Vidite kako gospodin Timmermans, koji je imao sreću živjeti s druge strane, shvaća i prihvaća nasljeđe koje se dogodilo u Europi, a vidite koliko smo sretni mi koji možemo danas živjeti u ujedinjenoj Europi bez totalitarizama. Ali smatramo da su razotkrivanje istine, osuda kršenja temeljnih ljudskih prava, zadovoljština žrtvama i njihovim obiteljima preduvjeti odgovornog suočavanja s prošlošću.

Naša europska pučka obitelj prihvatila je opće civilizacijsko nasljeđe i vrijednosti Europske unije. Smatramo se odgovornima podsjećati i danas na to kako europsko društvo svoju budućnost gradi u skladu s europskom osudom svih fašističkih, komunističkih i totalitarnih sustava koji su u cijeloj Europi kroz proteklo stoljeće prouzročili tragična stradanja, progone, likvidacije političkih neistomišljenika.

I moja domovina Hrvatska, kao članica Europske unije, neupitan je dio europskog civilizacijskog kruga i nema alternative procesu suočavanja s prošlošću koju su prošle i druge države članice, svojedobno pripadnice istočnoeuropskog komunističkog bloka. To je nužan proces u razotkrivanju istine. Naš zajednički dug čitavom europskom naraštaju, a osobito mladima, jest da na temelju međusobnog uvažavanja i poštivanja univerzalnih humanističkih vrijednosti otvorimo put budućnosti bez društvenih podjela. Ne smijemo dopustiti da se pojavom radikalizma i populizma u Europi dovedemo u stanje gdje sustav postaje dovoljno slab, kada ekstremisti vrlo naglo mogu ući u središte i tamo gdje ih nitko ne očekuje.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). –Señor presidente; cien años después de 1917, un fantasma recorre Europa, pero no es el fantasma del comunismo del Manifiesto de Marx que inspiró a los bolcheviques. Es el fantasma del populismo, a menudo teñido de nacionalismo reaccionario, lo que nos recuerda algunas lecciones importantes.

La primera es que nunca ningún derecho ni ninguna libertad está conquistado para siempre, tampoco en la Unión Europea. La segunda, que es una triste paradoja mantener la resistencia a un régimen fenecido resucitando sus fantasmas. Y eso le puede pasar a quien mantenga una retórica antisoviética o antirrusa imitando al régimen de Putin, o al que mantenga una retórica antifascista o antifranquista cuarenta y dos años después de muerto Franco mientras practica desde alguna instancia de poder político una restricción del pluralismo, de las libertades, o una negación de las diferencias y del derecho a convivir bajo la ley y el Derecho, rompiendo el Estado de Derecho.

De modo que lo más importante, si hay una lección, es que nada hay tan antieuropeo como la negación del Derecho como técnica de resolución pacífica de conflictos y como conquista democrática de la civilización.

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Domnule președinte, holocaustul roșu a făcut o sută de milioane de victime. În „Cartea neagră a comunismului”, Martin Malia spunea că numărul victimelor regimurilor comuniste este între 85 și 100 de milioane de oameni. Prin rezoluția din 2006, Consiliul Europei a condamnat regimurile comuniste totalitare din Europa Centrală și de Est din ultimul secol, marcate fără excepție de violarea masivă a drepturilor omului și a menționat asasinatele și execuțiile, lagărele de concentrare, tortura, moartea prin înfometare, deportările, închisoarea pe nedrept, închisoarea celor care se opuneau regimului politic, adică comunismului, munca forțată, persecuțiile pe motive etnice sau religioase și, bineînțeles, încălcarea libertății de conștiință, de exprimare și a celorlalte.

Trebuia atunci, în 2006, poate și mai devreme, mers până la capăt și interzis comunismul. De ce nu am interzis atunci comunismul? Trebuie interzis așa cum a fost interzis și fascismul.

  Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz (ALDE). – Señor presidente. En primer lugar, perdón, por haberles abandonado durante décadas tras el telón de acero. Segundo, un hecho: tres años después de la toma del Palacio de Invierno los mismos marineros que ayudaron a los bolcheviques a tomar el poder se rebelaron en Kronstadt y fueron aplastados por el Ejército Rojo. Pedían elecciones con voto secreto, libertad de expresión y de prensa, libertad de reunión, libertad de trabajo y producción.

No hubo lo que prometía la propaganda comunista. Hubo una dictadura de una casta dirigente con poder absoluto sobre la vida y la muerte durante décadas. A los bolcheviques les siguieron otros populistas, propaganda y tensiones antidemocráticas de signos opuestos. Aprendimos dolorosamente que el fin no justifica los medios.

Hoy otros populismos, mentiras, propaganda y tensiones antidemocráticas juegan contra la Unión Europea y sus libertades. En Cataluña, por ejemplo, agentes externos han liderado mentiras, propaganda, fakes para debilitar España, buscando debilitar el futuro de la democracia en toda Europa.

El reto es desenmascarar, ahora también, a los aprendices de tirano, emboscados algunos en la Rusia de Putin o en la Venezuela de Maduro.

  Eleonora Forenza (GUE/NGL). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Alexandra Kollontaj è stata la prima ministra donna al mondo. Rivoluzionaria, portò nella costituzione del '18 il diritto all'aborto e il diritto al divorzio, i diritti di autodeterminazione delle donne. In "Largo all'eros alato" Kollontaj parla dell'amore come di un sentimento profondamente sociale nella sua essenza. Ecco, la rivoluzione, cento anni fa, fu un atto d'amore, che io rivendico come femminista e come comunista, contro la vostra vergognosa equiparazione di comunismo e nazismo sotto l'etichetta di totalitarismo. State paragonando un disegno razziale di sterminio a un'idea di uguaglianza e di libertà che non è sepolta sotto le tragedie e sotto il crollo del socialismo reale.

Nel 1917 non fece soltanto irruzione il gruppo bolscevico nel Palazzo d'inverno, fecero irruzione operai e contadini nella storia. Forse preferireste a parlare con gli zar, come oggi preferite parlare con il re anziché col popolo catalano. Sì, quel giorno è stata data una spinta alla storia verso una futura umanità. Un fantasma si aggira per l'Europa.

  Mario Borghezio (ENF). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, due argomenti tabù di cui si parla poco, soprattutto del primo: le origini misteriose e i finanziamenti oscuri della rivoluzione bolscevica. Non se ne parla mai, chissà come mai, e invece meriterebbero un approfondimento anche in sede politica oltre che storica. E poi l'altro, sollevato giustamente, creando un'enormità di polemiche, dal grandissimo Ernest Nolte anche qui al Parlamento europeo: la comparabilità e la consequenzialità fra comunismo sovietico e nazionalsocialismo alla luce di genocidi nel Novecento, cioè i massacri comunisti e l'Arcipelago Gulag come antecedente storico di Auschwitz.

Questi sono argomenti seri, su cui dovremmo riflettere. Ci dite che non dovremmo parlare noi populisti, molti lo dicono. Ma, quando c'era l'Unione Sovietica, chi se non i nostri movimenti patriottici e nazionalisti parlava di queste cose, rivelava, proclamava chi erano i veri autori responsabili delle forze di Katy, che ancora a Norimberga sono stati attribuiti erroneamente non ai veri autori sovietici. E allora onore a Putin, che rifiuta di celebrare la Rivoluzione d'ottobre...

(Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore)

  Janusz Korwin-Mikke (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! W 1917 r. do władzy doszli bolszewicy, obiecując walkę z wyzyskiem, równość płci, walkę z nacjonalizmem, walkę z rasizmem, wolne związki zamiast małżeństw, obalenie monarchii, wprowadzenie demokracji, czyli dokładnie to samo, co obiecuje Unia Europejska. W 1920 r. Polacy powstrzymali tych szaleńców, którzy chcieli zająć Europę. I co jest dzisiaj? Dzisiaj muszę oglądać bolszewika Altiero Spinelli w Brukseli. Muszę widzieć, że na znaczkach poczty belgijskiej Lenin jest najwybitniejszą osobistością XX wieku. Na sali widzę pana Timmermansa, a 95% tutaj ludzi na sali to są albo socjaliści, albo komuniści, albo chrześcijańscy socjaliści, albo narodowi socjaliści i inni faszyści, i inni czerwoni. Tak? Nie tylko u nas. W USA Bernie Sanders, przecież to Trocki, o mało co nie został prezydentem Stanów Zjednoczonych. Tymczasem w Rosji staliniści wyrżnęli bolszewików, a potem coraz wolniej, powoli odchodzili od bolszewizmu. I dzisiaj pan Putin by usunął w ogóle bolszewizm, gdyby nie to, że przegrałby z Ziuganowem, bo tam jest demokracja, i dlatego go nienawidzicie.

(Przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos)

  President. – Mr Korwin-Mikke, you have run out of time. May I ask you, for now and for any time in the future, not to offend your colleagues.

  Boris Zala (S&D). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, kolegovia, niet pochýb, že musíme jednoznačne odsúdiť akékoľvek revolučné násilie. Rovnako tak je odsúdeniahodné boľševicko-stranícke uchopenie moci, ktoré vždy vedie k tomu, čo voláme totalitný štát. Ale rád by som zdôraznil, nepripomínajme si len tragické dôsledky, ale aj rovnako tragické príčiny revolučných nálad a násilia. Ak sa pozriem na poučenie z boľševického puču z hľadiska príčin, tak EÚ nesmie nikdy cynicky ponechať osud celých sociálnych skupín napospas neľudským trhovým silám. EÚ musí posilniť svoj sociálno-trhový charakter, definitívne prekonať neoliberálnu ortodoxiu. Práve tá plodí odpor, vzburu tých, ktorí boli a sú v tejto ortodoxii obetovaní. Dnešné vzmáhanie sa nacionalizmu, populizmu, neofašizmu, ale aj ľavicového radikalizmu je dôsledkom, negatívnym dôsledkom nesociálneho konštruktu politiky. Ak sa chceme vyhnúť malým a veľkým boľševickým prevratom, myslime na to.

  Zdzisław Krasnodębski (ECR). – „Podstęp, kłamstwo, przelana krew, dyktatura są usprawiedliwione, jeżeli umożliwiają władzę proletariatowi. Polityka marksistowska jest w swojej formie dyktatorska i totalitarna.” Tych słów nie napisał reakcyjny wróg marksizmu i komunizmu, lecz jego postępowy obrońca Maurice Merleau-Ponty, wybitny, subtelny francuski filozof, bo także po tej stronie żelaznej kurtyny, po której szczęście miał żyć przewodniczący Timmermans, byli komuniści, byli zwolennicy komunizmu, byłe silne partie komunistyczne. I trochę uważam za niestosowne, że akurat przy tej okazji Pan się powołuje na Semprúna, który również był wieloletnim działaczem hiszpańskiej partii komunistycznej.

Przemoc, terror, masowe egzekucje były wpisane w sam rdzeń marksistowskiej doktryny. I wszędzie, gdzie próbowano je wcielić życie, znajdują się masowe groby. Myślę więc, że ta rocznica powinna być dla wielu członków tego Parlamentu, którzy byli członkami partii komunistycznych, okazją do rachunku sumienia i ekspiacji.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). – Señor presidente; señor Timmermans, ha dicho que siente la responsabilidad colectiva de toda Europa y que va a contribuir a que no repitamos errores impulsando la memoria democrática. En consecuencia, está obligado a recibir y a escuchar a las asociaciones de víctimas y familiares de las más de 150 000 personas asesinadas por la dictadura franquista. Y comprobar, como dicen la ONU o el Consejo de Europa, que hoy siguen sufriendo porque viven buscando a más de 150 000 asesinados. Porque viven pendientes de verdad, de justicia y de reparación.

Ayer mismo, en una de estas fosas comunes, en Aragón, las víctimas sufrieron una nueva humillación: la retirada de ayudas públicas impidió exhumar y enterrar dignamente a quince vecinos de Pomer, ciudadanos europeos asesinados por defender la democracia.

La transición española fue posibilista. Nos cambió a mejor. Pero debemos afrontar de una vez sus pecados originales. La amnesia es uno de ellos. Traten a las víctimas del franquismo igual que a las del comunismo o el nazismo. Y pido que incluya a las autoridades españolas entre las que deben recibir un llamamiento para mejorar, y mucho, en la recuperación de la memoria democrática. Si lo hace, se lo agradeceremos.

  Marina Albiol Guzmán (GUE/NGL). – Señor presidente, ocho personas poseen la misma riqueza que la mitad más pobre de la humanidad. Millones de mujeres son explotadas en fábricas textiles que producen, por ejemplo, para Inditex. Sesenta y cinco millones de personas en el mundo desplazadas por conflictos o violaciones de derechos humanos. Y un planeta que se nos muere por deforestación, contaminación de los mares y calentamiento global. Este es el resultado del capitalismo: horror, barbarie y explotación.

Así que la pregunta no es cómo podemos seguir siendo comunistas. La pregunta es si aún queda alguien tan irresponsable como para defender el capitalismo. Cien años después de la revolución que triunfó con la consigna de «paz, pan y tierra» en el país del pueblo que venció a los nazis, el reparto de la riqueza en el mundo, el feminismo, el socialismo, es decir, que nadie sufra para que otros vivan mejor, no solo es la opción más justa sino que, además, es la única viable.

Y a ustedes lo que les aterra es saber que una vez sucedió, que una vez el pueblo explotado se levantó, y que volverá a suceder.

  Nicolas Bay (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, le titre de ce débat, «Les legs de la révolution totalitaire bolchévique» peut évidemment nous inviter à nous souvenir des 100 millions de morts du communisme quelques jours seulement après l’anniversaire de la chute du mur de Berlin.

Cette idéologie effroyable qui a ensanglanté non seulement l’Europe, mais beaucoup d’autres pays du monde et qui continue d’ailleurs de prospérer dans un certain nombre de pays et d’oppresser un certain nombre de peuple.

Mais bien sûr il y avait des arrière-pensées derrière la volonté d’imposer ce débat aujourd’hui, dans notre Parlement, en essayant de fustiger la Russie d’aujourd’hui, qui évidemment n’a rien à voir avec le communisme d’hier.

La Russie d’aujourd’hui est une grande puissance qui est un allié naturel de nos nations européennes et nous n’avons que des inconvénients à ne pas tenir compte de cette réalité.

En revanche on peut s’interroger aussi sur les orientations de l’Union européenne. L’Union européenne méprise de plus en plus les peuples, elle fustige la Hongrie ou la Pologne, parce que les choix démocratiques des peuples sont contraires aux orientations de la Commission européenne, c’est un des aspects du totalitarisme.

Et puis, on voit bien que l’on veut aller toujours plus loin, à marche forcée, vers une Union européenne fédéraliste, comme l’URSS fonctionnait autrefois.

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Pane předsedající, minulý týden, dne 7. listopadu, uplynulo 100 let od bolševického puče v Rusku, eufemisticky nazývaného Velkou říjnovou socialistickou revolucí. V tyto dny jsme si komunistický převrat připomínali i v Bruselu. V Domě evropských dějin se uskutečnila kvalifikovaná konference. Panelisté zmínili zločiny komunismu ve světě. Padla zde i cifra označující počet mrtvých, které mají komunisté na svědomí: více než 90 milionů obětí.

Nyní mi dovolte, dámy a pánové, abych oslovil komunisty, kteří dnes v tomto sále mezi námi sedí. Především se to týká portugalských komunistů. Milí naši evropští bolševici, minulý týden jste uspořádali na půdě Evropského parlamentu výstavu oslavující sté výročí komunistického převratu. Panely vaší výstavy byly čistou adorací komunistických symbolů a komunistického násilí. A já se vás ptám: To vám není hanba oslavovat smrt devadesáti milionů lidí?

Nyní se obracím znovu k vám, vážení demokratičtí poslanci. Komunisté se v řadě zemí bývalého sovětského bloku znovu derou k moci. Zneužívají demokracie, do vysokých pozic protlačují příslušníky bývalých nomenklatur a stávají se významným bezpečnostním rizikem pro EU. Čas celoevropského zákazu komunistických symbolů už nastal. Demokracii je třeba bránit.

PRZEWODNICTWO: BOGUSŁAW LIBERADZKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

  Przewodniczący. – Jeszcze raz przypominam. Nie stosujemy „niebieskiej kartki” ze względu na charakter tej dyskusji. Jednocześnie, również serdeczna prośba: nie używajmy zwrotu „europejscy bolszewicy”, bo to nie pogłębi jakości naszej dyskusji.

  Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, a cent'anni dalla Rivoluzione di ottobre, i motivi da cui essa è scaturita sono ancora tutti qua: le disuguaglianze sociali, lo sfruttamento dell'uomo sull'uomo e la voglia di emancipazione dei popoli.

Come socialista europeo ho sposato un'ideologia politica che pensa di poter coniugare libertà civili e politiche con maggiore uguaglianza contro il modello del socialismo reale, ma da italiano so quanto la storia del Partito comunista italiano in Italia sia stata una storia di battaglia e di progresso, e voglio ricordare che fu proprio quel Partito comunista italiano a eleggere qui da indipendente Altiero Spinelli.

Oggi l'Unione Sovietica non c'è più e il modello dello Stato sociale europeo occidentale non sta più in piedi, in contrapposizione al modello sovietico. Oggi diventa fondamentale, quindi, come proveremo a fare giovedì a Göteborg, al Summit per il pilastro sociale, dimostrare la nostra capacità come europei di tenere insieme aspirazioni all'uguaglianza sostanziale, sempre vive nelle persone, con il desiderio di difendere la libertà dal totalitarismo di qualunque colore politico.

  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Gospodine predsjedniče, glavno nasljeđe boljševičke revolucije je 100 milijuna mrtvih. Neki su skončali od gladi, neki u neljudskim uvjetima u logorima od raznih bolesti i tjelesne iscrpljenosti, neki od posljedica mučenja od strane represivnog aparata, a neki su jednostavno likvidirani kao neprijatelji raznih komunističkih režima od 1917. do danas.

Svi oni koji imaju potrebu romantizirati boljševičku revoluciju i pričati bajke o radnicima, jednakosti i pravdi neka prvo zastanu i sjete se ovih 100 milijuna žrtava. I među njima je bilo puno običnih ljudi, radnika i obespravljenih, a od komunista su u zamjenu za svoj težak život dobili tešku smrt.

Nažalost, čini se da nismo naučili lekciju pa danas pojedinci koji spavaju s komunističkim priručnicima pod jastukom imaju veliku političku moć u nekim zapadnim državama, a u nekima čak prijete doći na vlast.

Imamo veliku odgovornost educirati nove generacije kako bi znale prepoznati komunističko zlo i oduprijeti mu se. I jedna nova smrt u ime sulude ideologije koja je iza sebe dosad ostavila 100 milijuna leševa bila bi previše.

  Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea (ALDE). – Señor presidente, para mí es un misterio insondable que hoy, en 2017, aún haya alguien que considere a Lenin un genio, alguien cuya obra quedó ensombrecida por Stalin, porque eso es falso. Lenin fue un populista y un dictador que usó el terror de forma sistemática. Lenin enseñó a Stalin el camino del genocidio y ese es su verdadero legado.

Sí, en España, en mi país, hay populistas como Pablo Iglesias que llaman «genio» al dictador Lenin y que van a celebrar los cien años de la revolución bolchevique precisamente a Bolivia, justo cuando Evo Morales declara su intención de conducir a su país en la dirección de Cuba o Venezuela. También hay líderes como el de Izquierda Unida, Alberto Garzón, que rinde tributo a Lenin en las redes sociales. O también hay partidos independentistas antisistema, como la CUP, que usan carteles de inspiración leninista para su propaganda.

Sí, todavía hay algunos que aspiran a ser Lenin, pero no en la Rusia zarista de 1917 sino en la Europa democrática de 2017. Cuidémonos del legado de Lenin. Cuidémonos del legado leninista, porque solo sirve hoy, en 2017, para dos cosas: para privar de libertades y derechos y para hundir países prósperos en la pobreza.

  Steeve Briois (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, nous célébrons aujourd’hui le triste anniversaire de la révolution bolchévique, qui a donné naissance à l’URSS, responsable de la mort de quinze millions de personnes. N’oublions jamais les ravages du communisme et du nazisme.

Ce devoir de mémoire est essentiel pour combattre les deux totalitarismes idéologiques qui menacent aujourd’hui notre vieux continent.

Le premier, c’est celui porté par les mondialistes qui veulent une jungle mondiale sans protection économique, sans barrières douanières, dont les effets sont ravageurs pour l’emploi. Ce mondialisme encourage la spéculation financière, le dumping social et l’évasion fiscale. Avec ce mondialisme, ce sont des conditions de vie indignes et précaires pour des millions d’Européens dont vous n’entendez pas la souffrance.

L’autre danger, c’est celui des immigrationnistes qui imposent à nos nations européennes des millions de migrants, alors que nous subissons déjà une submersion migratoire.

Ces deux dictatures, personne n’a le droit de les contester. Malheur à ceux qui oseront critiquer la pensée unique, car ils seront taxés de populistes, de xénophobes, de racistes ou d’extrême droite.

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE). – Mr President, some of the Members of this House have today compared the Soviet Union with the European Union, mixing up open borders democracy, human rights, a market economy and democratic elections with the Iron Curtain and borders, torture, deportations and executions.

I must tell those Members in question that they have not learned anything, and have not understood anything about democracy. It is a shame, and an insult to all those who suffered and lost their lives. It is also a shame that we still see people celebrating the so—called Glorious Revolution of October 1917. They do not understand that totalitarian ideas will always lead to totalitarian dictatorship, totalitarian executions and deportations – because, when might goes before right, freedom is lost and individuals suffer.

The core responsibility of the European Union is to be the firm and strong defender of human rights, democracy, open borders and a free society. That is why we need to understand the differences, because, if we do not, we lose some part of our freedom.

(Applause)

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, this year marks the centenary of the Russian totalitarian revolution. It is indeed 100 years since that Bolshevik coup in Russia. What, at the time, looked like a small group of ideological extremists was soon established as a totalitarian communist regime.

In order to strengthen … I am sorry, can I speak please? It seems that some discussions are going on in the Chamber. In order to strengthen the resilience of European democracies, it is important to reflect on the lessons of the past century and on the current challenges to democracy in Europe and worldwide. It is constructive to review the consequences of that revolution, which was a time when people attempted to assert their rights, but in the end their voices were ultimately pushed away.

Drawing on conclusions about the present, we forecast and build a future, relying on things of which we are ‘certain’ only in relation to the past. Taking into account the current challenges the European continent faces, the EU has to provide long-term solutions by building bridges and defending and promoting democratic values: free elections, the market economy and human rights.

There are millions of witnesses from Central and Eastern Europe who could give testimony on what happened in that part of Europe between the end of World War II and 1989.

  Marek Jurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Pierwszy Wiceprzewodniczący Komisji! Koleżanki i Koledzy! Bardzo bym chciał, żeby ta dzisiejsza debata stała się przełomem i żeby nigdy już nie doszło do takich sytuacji, jak na przykład odrzucenie przez ten parlament wniosku o debatę, która miała upamiętnić siedemdziesięciolecie zdrady jałtańskiej i skazania połowy narodów Europy na życie pod dominacją sowiecką. Wtedy tych naszych 40% izby, która za tym głosowała, żeby o tym rozmawiać, nie uratowały żadne prawa mniejszości.

Wysoka Izbo! Komunizm zrodził się z nienawiści do Boga, do ludzkiego strumienia, do rodziny, do tradycji narodowych. Komunizm oczywiście zrodził się również z pogardy dla zwykłego życia ludzi. Dlatego chłopi już w Tambowie musieli się przeciwko niemu buntować. Dlatego nasi dziadkowie uratowali świat w 1920 roku. Dlatego zagłodzono miliony Ukraińców. I dzisiaj nacjonalistyczny populista jest tym leninowskim kułakiem, krwiopijcą, którym się straszy ludzi. Naprawdę opamiętajcie się, dlatego że słyszeliście, ilu jeszcze ludzi usprawiedliwia zło komunizmu. I niestety, Panie Pierwszy Wiceprzewodniczący, Pan nie do nich kierował swoją dłoń i swoje orędzie.

  António Marinho e Pinto (ALDE). – Senhor Presidente, tentar fazer uma revolução socialista num país feudal só poderia levar à socialização da miséria e da servidão, que era o que verdadeiramente havia para socializar na Rússia de 1917. Prometeu-se paz, pão, terra e liberdade, mas o que se distribuiu foi a guerra civil, a fome generalizada, a coletivização da terra e um Estado policial que suprimiu todas as liberdades individuais e coletivas.

A voracidade assassina desse Estado policial não poupou mesmo os dirigentes do próprio partido bolchevique que desencadeara a revolução, como ficou evidenciado nos Processos de Moscovo e no assassínio de Leon Trotsky, consumado a milhares de quilómetros da Rússia por um sicário de José Estaline.

Albert Camus disse um dia que a revolução bolchevique acabou por conduzir à realização de uma das mais emblemáticas utopias do marxismo, ou seja, a passagem do Estado governo de pessoas a Estado administrador das coisas. Mas, sinistra ironia, misturando e confundindo as pessoas e as coisas.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Conselho, Senhor Vice-Presidente da Comissão, naturalmente que celebrar os cem anos da revolução russa é celebrar, antes de mais, a morte de dezenas de milhões de pessoas e só isso é suficiente para condenar o comunismo como ideologia e o comunismo como regime, assim como condenamos o nacional-socialismo, assim como condenamos o maoísmo. E aqui, hoje à tarde, já foram dados muitos exemplos daquilo que aconteceu em toda a Europa de Leste.

Mas eu gostava de dizer que até no Ocidente e em África, no caso português em 75, durante um ano, nós fomos objeto da repressão comunista, das perseguições comunistas e ainda hoje o país paga o preço das nacionalizações que nessa altura foram feitas e que congelaram a economia portuguesa durante imenso tempo.

Mas, pior que isso, quando foi feita a mais que justa, necessária e muito atrasada descolonização, deixámos a União Soviética em Angola, em Moçambique, em Cabo Verde, na Guiné Bissau, em São Tomé e Príncipe e também em Timor e deixámos os povos africanos entregues a Cuba e à União Soviética, à maior das repressões e ao regime mais inigualitário e mais vil que podia ter sido instalado. Esses povos também merecem uma homenagem neste dia em que celebramos um acontecimento tão nefasto.

  László Tőkés (PPE). – Elnök Úr! November 8-án, az Európai Parlamentben centenáriumi ünnepség keretében emlékeztek meg az 1917. októberi bolsevik forradalomról. Az alkalmi plakáton a sarló és kalapács kommunista jelképe díszelgett. Október folyamán a francia államtanács viszont arra utasította a bretagne-i Ploermel városát, hogy II. János Pál pápa emlékművéről távolítsa el a kereszt krisztusi szimbólumát. Itt és így állunk most Európában.

A valamikori keresztény Európát puszta létében fenyegető totalitárius bolsevik kommunizmus egyenes örökségeképpen az Unió szívében és a szabad Nyugaton, demokratikus támogatással folyik tovább az európai értékeket meghazudtoló ateista propaganda. Miközben a holokauszttagadást méltán bünteti a törvény, ezzel szemben Európa nagy részében a tömeggyilkos kommunizmus bűntettei és önkényuralmi jelképei nem esnek ugyanazon megítélés alá.

Végérvényesen szakítanunk kell a képmutató kettős mérce használatával! Jelenkori globális fenyegetettségünkben, európai és keresztény identitásunk és értékeink védelmében egyszer s mindenkorra szabadulnunk kell a kommunizmus romboló örökségétől.

  Μανώλης Κεφαλογιάννης (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, όσοι δεν διαβάζουν την Ιστορία σωστά είναι καταδικασμένοι να τη ζήσουν στη χειρότερή της μορφή. Δεν καταδικάζουμε τις σκέψεις και τις ιδέες, καταδικάζουμε τις πράξεις συγκεκριμένων καθεστώτων. Γιατί στο όνομα των υψηλότερων ιδανικών έγιναν τα πιο απαίσια εγκλήματα στην ιστορία.

Βεβαίως, αν δει κανείς τις ιδεολογίες, είναι σαν να σκαρφαλώνουμε στην κορυφή ενός βουνού που έχει στην κορυφή του κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη και ελευθερία. Εμείς προσπαθούμε να κατακτήσουμε την κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη μέσα από την ελευθερία και κάποιοι έλεγαν ότι θα κατακτήσουν την ελευθερία μέσα από την κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη. Η περίοδος της αθωότητας όμως έχει περάσει εδώ και 100 χρόνια από το πραξικόπημα -επανάσταση όπως το λένε οι ίδιοι- των μπολσεβίκων με 100 εκατομμύρια νεκρούς.

Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο ανακήρυξε την 23η Αυγούστου ως ημέρα μνήμης των θυμάτων του σταλινισμού και του ναζισμού, και είναι συγκεκριμένη η πράξη αυτών των ακραίων καθεστώτων, και το Συμβούλιο της Ευρώπης καταδίκασε τα εγκλήματα των ολοκληρωτικών κομμουνιστικών καθεστώτων.

Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, ο σύγχρονος ολοκληρωτισμός είναι ο λαϊκισμός και πρέπει να ηττηθεί, πρώτα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και σε κάθε κράτος ξεχωριστά. Προστατεύουμε τον ευρωπαϊκό τρόπο ζωής, ο οποίος μας χάρισε 70 χρόνια ειρήνης και 70 χρόνια καλής δημοκρατίας. Καταδικάζουμε τον ολοκληρωτισμό σε κάθε του μορφή, απ’ όπου κι αν προέρχεται. Καταδικάζουμε τα άκρα και τις ακρότητες.

  Асим Ахмедов Адемов (PPE). – Г-н Председател, уважаеми колеги, болшевишката революция преди 100 години роди чудовищна диктатура в бившия Съветски Съюз и страните от Източна Европа. Тази революция е може би най-голямата морална катастрофа в историята на човечеството. Последствията от това събитие деморализират нашите общества и до днес. Една от първите стъпки на държавите, заразени от този болшевишки вирус, беше да унищожат местната интелигенция.

Всички, които сме живели в общество, създадено от този трагичен социален експеримент, знаем и помним каква беше неговата същина – беше ни отнета свободата, правото да изговаряме на глас мислите си. Моята родна страна – България, беше една от държавите, които пострадаха много от това зло. Българските комунисти извършиха едни от най-зловещите атентати в историята на човечеството: взривиха църквата „Св. Неделя“ в София.

Ако искаме да сме свободни, мислещи, ние не трябва да забравяме генезиса на това зло. Ние трябва да лекуваме пораженията в съзнанието на хората с образование, с интелект, защото Европейският съюз е инструмент за решаване на проблемите без насилие. Това е начинът да дадем отпор на територията на злото, което иска да се възроди.

  Elmar Brok (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident! Herr Ratspräsident! 1917 begann die große totalitäre Phase Europas.

Erst mit dem Kommunismus in Russland, in der Sowjetunion, und dann ab 1933 in Deutschland. Totalitarismus heißt die völlige Übernahme der Kontrolle über den Einzelnen. Er bedeutet die Vernichtung der Würde des Einzelnen. Wenn hier einige Leute sagen, die Europäische Union sei damit vergleichbar – wir alle, auch Sie, wären bei Stalin und Hitler schon im Gefängnis, weil wir eine unterschiedliche Meinung haben! Wenn es uns gut ginge, wären wir im Gefängnis, sonst wären wir völlig vernichtet worden. Solche Vergleiche anzustellen ist unerträglich.

Ich möchte auch zum Ausdruck bringen, dass es die Kooperation des Nationalsozialismus und des Stalinismus gibt. Der Überfall auf die baltischen Staaten, die Übernahme Polens, die Übergabe der Westukraine an die Sowjetunion und vieles mehr war eine Aufteilung von Gebiet mit Wirkung bis heute durch die beiden totalitären Systeme und mit all den Wirkungen, die wir bis 1989 gehabt haben. Dies sollte man nicht vergessen, das war das Ungeheuerlichste der Geschichte unseres Kontinentes. Mein eigenes Land war daran beteiligt. Deswegen sollten wir alles daransetzen, dass diese Vernichtung der Würde des einzelnen Menschen nie wieder vorkommen kann und auch die Unterjochung von Völkern in Europa nicht wiederkommen kann.

Deswegen ist Europa die Antwort der Freiheit gegen den Krieg und gegen Diktatur! Das ist die Begründung für mich, warum ich Europäer bin.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, sté výročí si připomínáme právě proto, abychom nezapomněli, co to byl komunistický teror. A je vidět, že je to třeba, protože někteří zapomněli, že zde je 94 milionů mrtvých po tomto teroru. Extrémní pravice dokonce si dovoluje srovnat Evropskou unii se Sovětským svazem. Asi proto, že tito poslanci nikdy v komunistické společnosti nežili. Extrémní levice zase naopak volá znovu po komunistické revoluci a po blahu komunismu. Protože tito poslanci nikdy nežili v socialismu a v komunistické diktatuře.

Dámy a pánové, je to tak možné proto, že, bohužel, tyto zločiny nebyly potrestány. Komunismus totiž nebyl jako nacismus poražen ve válce a nebyl tady žádný „norimberský tribunál“. V této souvislosti je skandální, že se zde, v Evropském parlamentu, mohla konat oslava říjnové revoluce jako výstava.

Dámy a pánové, dnes, když jsme hovořili o situaci v Polsku, bylo mi smutno. Vážení demokraté, nedejme se rozdělit. Nenaskočme na tu vlnu populismu a rozdělování demokratických sil v Evropské unii. Bylo by to velmi smutné.

  Cristian-Silviu Bușoi (PPE). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, evenimentul despre care vorbim astăzi este un eveniment nefast al istoriei care a dus la dictatură, suferință, crime teribile care au schimbat soarta oamenilor nu doar din Rusia și din fostul spațiu sovietic, ci și din țări din centrul și estul Europei sau de pe alte continente.

România, țara mea, a avut de suferit din pricina comunismului, elitele sociale și politice au fost distruse, cei care se opuneau colectivizării au fost încarcerați sau omorâți, reminiscențele, din păcate, nu au dispărut nici astăzi în mentalitatea unor politicieni care mai au rol de conducere.

În final, din fericire, voința popoarelor nu a putut fi înfrântă de o ideologie și de o formă de guvernământ. Fără să facem neapărat o paralelă și păstrând, desigur, proporțiile nu putem totuși să nu ne gândim, în contextul dezbaterii de astăzi, la radicalismul, extremismul, populismul care bântuie astăzi Europa. Vedem astăzi partide populiste și naționaliste care vin cu soluții care mai mult înrăutățesc realitatea socială decât să creeze bunăstare. Societățile în care trăim sunt puse la încercare de campanii populiste și emoționale care încearcă să exacerbeze temerile și nemulțumirile justificate ale oamenilor, care prin dezinformări și reflectări falsificate ale realității încearcă, de fapt, să profite pentru un interes politic.

Soluția este să continuăm să promovăm democrația, libertatea individuală, statul de drept, să promovăm solidaritatea și nu ura, toleranța și nu totalitarismul.

  Frans Timmermans, First Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, we are not a gathering of historians. We look at history because we are politicians and we want to learn from history. It is quite a miracle that we are now in a hemicycle with the directly elected representatives of 500 million Europeans who were never this close to each other at any time in our history. It is a miracle. This place is a miracle. If we revisit our history, we do it for our own benefit, but especially for the benefit of our children so that we do not make the mistakes of the past again.

So I would say just in conclusion: how did we get, in the 20th century, into this totalitarian quagmire that cost hundreds of millions of Europeans their lives through repression and through war? How did we get there? Totalitarian regimes do not just fall from the sky. The ground is prepared for them. That is what we see.

What are the lessons I draw today? Just a few thoughts, and I will end on that. If politicians claim that they, and only they, represent the will of the people, if they brand anyone who disagrees with them as enemies of the people, if politicians try to limit, or even abolish, the freedom of the media, if they believe they have the right to instruct and control judges, if they constantly look for internal and external enemies who they then turn into scapegoats when they themselves fail miserably in delivering the illusions they peddled to the people – always Jews at the receiving end of this, always Roma at the receiving end of this, always minorities at the receiving end of this – if you see all of this happening, please be vigilant. If you see that happen, please do not look away. We are duty bound to speak up and to act so that the victims of totalitarian regimes have not died in vain.

(Applause)

  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, thank you all for this enlightening debate today. To paraphrase former Estonian President Lennart Meri: ‘they say that Bolshevism is dead but has anybody seen its dead body?’ This discussion today shows again that the search for it still continues. We conduct this search best by education, by developing democratic resilience, media literacy, tolerance and of course, by staying vigilant.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Ramona Nicole Mănescu (PPE), in writing. – Let me share with you, in 60 seconds, what the legacy of the Bolshevik revolution meant for my country - Romania! Executions, physical suppression of political opponents, terror campaigns, expropriations and possessions’ confiscation, famine, labor camps. 300.000 killed, starting with 1945. Still, the loss of human lives is just one of the many ways Communism destroyed countries and destinies. Hundreds of thousands more were deported, arrested, imprisoned, sent to force labor, tortured. For some of these victims there are no records. The Second World War ended in 1945. For Romania, it continued until august 1958. The Red Army came in 1944 to liberate Romania and it kept on doing so for 14 years! Romania was forced to abolish a world-recognised and flourishing monarchy and change it with an isolated and decaying communist dictatorship. The terror did not end in 1958. The dictatorship and repression carried on until December 1989. Let me conclude by adding that one of the most despicable crimes of these 45 years of communism in Romania was the physical elimination of the elites. Elites that formed over 200 years of history!

  Csaba Sógor (PPE), írásban. – A bolsevik forradalom hatása a világra és benne Európára óriási, a volt Szovjetunió mellett azonban azokra az országokra a legnagyobb, amelyben a kommunista diktatúrák emberek millióinak okoztak szenvedést. Az Európai Unió 28 tagállamából 11-ben ilyen totalitárius rendszerben és állampárti diktatúrában, a tervutasításos gazdaság körülményei között éltek több mint 40 évig. Ez az örökség ma is rányomja a bélyegét az EU újabb tagállamaira: a gazdasági különbségek nem szűntek meg, ezek a társadalmak és gazdasági rendszerek a kommunista örökség miatt óriási hátrányból indulnak, akár a közös piac versenyszabályait, akár az Unión belüli munkaerő-vándorlás jelenségét nézzük.

A mi társadalomfejlődésünkből hiányzik ez a 40 év, ami alatt Nyugat-Európában kiépült az infrastruktúra, megerősödtek a társadalmak és kialakult a szociális jóléti állam európai modellje. Európa újraegyesítése ezért nem egy pillanat, hanem egy folyamatos tevékenység, és éppen a bolsevik forradalom következményei által okozott károk felszámolását jelenti.

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE), kirjalikult. – Suure Sotsialistliku Oktoobrirevolutsiooni aastapäeva on põhjust muidugi meenutada. Eelkõige sellepärast, et meie Euroopas ei suuda ära mõistatada, mis toimub president Vladimir Putini peas. Ühest küljest oleks ta nagu tšekist, kes sündis Feliks Dzeržinski pintslitõmmete abil oktoobri tuleleekides. Teisalt paistab, nagu tahaks ta olla Nikolai II mantlipärija, tsaar ja imperaator. Kuigi just oktoobrileegid kustutasid nii tsaari kui tema perekonna eluküünla. Nii et peame leppima naabriga, kes on skisofreenik.

Lisaksin siia ka Euroopa Liidu tänaste liikmete vastutuse. On hästi teada, et Lenini viis läbi rindejoone Saksa kindralstaap. Eesmärgiga nõrgestada Venemaad. Aga ka Läti kannab vastutust bolševike vägitükkide eest, sest just bolševiseeritud Läti kütid kaitsesid Leninit isiklikult ja olid selleks relvajõuks, mis bolševike surmava režiimi kehtestas. Ning lõpetuseks – kui meie siin peame sada aastat hiljem arutlema, et oktoobrirevolutsioon oli nii- või naasugune, siis kahtlemata oli sellel sündmusel negatiivseid tagajärgi, mida inimkond siiamaani seedima peab. Ning pangem tähele – ka hitlerism ja Mussolini koos kindral Francoga said võimalikuks ikka ja ainult seepärast, et bolševikud Venemaal võimule tulid.

  Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Cada realização, cada conquista da Revolução de Outubro constitui uma boa razão para fazer dela uma fonte de inspiração para todos os que lutam por um mundo melhor, onde não haja lugar à exploração e à opressão, mas, simultaneamente, cada uma dessas conquistas justifica o ódio que contra ela destilam os que querem perpetuar a exploração e a opressão.

Neste sentido, nenhum acontecimento histórico terá sido alvo de tanta hostilidade e de tantas campanhas de mentiras e calúnias como a Revolução de Outubro. Amplos direitos sociais, entre outros, o direito ao trabalho, a proibição do trabalho infantil, a jornada máxima de oito horas de trabalho, o direito a férias pagas, o pleno emprego, o direito à habitação, à saúde e à educação gratuitas, a proteção na maternidade, a igualdade de direitos entre homens e mulheres na família, na vida e no trabalho. O contributo decisivo para a derrota do nazi-fascismo, para a Paz e para a luta de libertação dos povos oprimidos pelo colonialismo. Nenhuma tentativa de reescrever a História apagará este legado.