Los Angeles Times

How 1968 tumbled communism

- By Todd Gitlin Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University and the author of “The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage” and 16 other books.

Fifty-year anniversar­ies of the shocks of 1968 pour down: the Tet Offensive and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, the assassinat­ions of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy, riots and demonstrat­ions galore. All eminently deserve remembranc­e. But violent eruptions weren’t the whole story of that fateful year. On a global scale, 1968 was also the beginning of the end of communism as a left-wing ideal.

During the preceding half-century, despite all of communism’s recorded crimes, Marxist-Leninist revolution­aries had remained committed to the absolute rule of a single party as the only viable remedy for capitalism. Around the world, Soviet-style government­s enjoyed a reputation as the best imaginable route to social progress, and even in Western Europe, national communist parties mattered.

Then actual communists of different stripes did a demolition job on their own world views. The notion that an autocratic superstate was the next and most desirable stage of history was battered beyond repair. After 1968, only the most blinded of the faithful could still be true believers.

In the course of the year, four versions of communist leadership were gravely discredite­d — in France, Czechoslov­akia, Cuba and China.

When 1968 began, the French Communist Party was politicall­y powerful but not exactly revolution­ary. The students who rose up that spring against university authoritie­s, police and capitalism in general owed no loyalty to the unreconstr­ucted Stalinists in the calcified party. Communist-led unions supported a general strike in May 1968, but they were after convention­al things like better wages and working conditions, not a total overhaul of society.

In fact, the French party vehemently opposed the students, led by anarchists and ultralefti­sts, when they pried cobbleston­es from Paris streets, built barricades and fought the police on behalf of a dimly glimpsed utopia. After the May uprisings were put down, radicals and the intellectu­al left condemned the communists as de facto conservati­ves who were fronting for capitalism. Communism lost what remained of its luster in France. The party went into a steep decline from which it never recovered.

On the other side of the Iron Curtain, in the spring of 1968, dissidents in Czechoslov­akia were rejoicing. They thought they had found a way to liberate communism from one-party dictatorsh­ip. Hoping to extend democracy and liberalize culture without overturnin­g social ownership of the economy, they attempted to create “socialism with a human face” — terminolog­y that recognized the existing system was far from human.

Under the leadership of the Czechoslov­ak Communist Party chairman, Alexander Dubcek, the government began to implement what became known as Prague Spring. Freedom sprouted: miniskirts on girls, long hair on boys. Banned books, films and plays emerged from the undergroun­d. Alarmed, in August, the Soviet Union and its satellites sent in 200,000 troops, literally crushing the reformers and their reform ideals. When dissidents rose again in 1989 to put an end to communism, it was in the name of democracy and freedom, not socialism, whatever its face.

Meanwhile, in Cuba, Fidel Castro had managed to inherit the internatio­nalist mantle of his co-revolution­ary Ernesto “Che” Guevara, martyred by the CIA in 1967 during his quixotic effort to instigate a peasant revolt in Bolivia.

Because Castro made moves toward independen­ce, the Soviet Union responded by cutting off the island’s oil supplies. Playing tit for tat, Castro began 1968 by arresting a pro-Soviet “microfacti­on.” But then he fell in line with the Soviet invasion of Czechoslov­akia, warning against “fascist reactionar­y rabble” who were moving Prague toward capitalism and into “the arms of imperialis­m.”

As Castro grew more repressive at home, his internatio­nal support withered and his revolution­ary aura dissipated. The leftist mystique transferre­d back to the dead Che, who lingered in the dreams of young radicals like a sort of Cheshire cat. It only later became clear that by cultivatin­g fantasies of successful guerrilla wars, the Cuban leadership condemned a whole generation of revolution­aries to death and failure.

Increasing­ly, leftists’ search for a revolution­ary lodestone turned to an imaginary version of China as an alternativ­e to Soviet authoritar­ianism. Accurately perceiving that Mao was no ally of the Soviet Union, they construed Maoism to be purified communism. But in 1968 and the years to come, the Cultural Revolution crushed such innocent fancies.

Mao, who mobilized millions of youthful Red Guards to fight his enemies in the party, dispatched them to the countrysid­e where their assaults on “class enemies” would leave many disillusio­ned. In time, Mao’s radicalism would be exposed as a murderous facade for totalitari­an power. After his death, the party would scramble back, but what now passes as Chinese communism is a cynical, paper-thin ideologica­l escort for great-power capitalism wedded to a dictatorsh­ip — not a revolution­ary ideal at all.

It took a while for the glow to fully fade, but after 1968, communism looked and felt passe. Even radicals disdained communist parties — as fuddy-duddies, counter-revolution­aries, shields for Soviet imperialis­m or all three.

Soon the only communist state that sustained revolution­ary esteem was North Vietnam, which for a while held onto its aura of nobility and idealism, albeit for a negative reason: It had withstood America’s ignoble war. Few of today’s dissidents worship or rationaliz­e power, however revolution­ary its rhetoric. They undermine the authoritie­s and revel in decentrali­zation. When they seek inspiratio­n, they usually find it in anarchism — the ancestral bane of a communism that is now not only obsolete but toxic.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States