Hope the CPI(M) party understands what GPD means by the "State and Party controlled capitalism" and do not wait for the day to announce the mistakes done by the Chinese party after the fall as they did in the case of Eastern Europe. If anybody has any doubt on that see how the Indian traditional communist parties looked at Prague 68 or at Solidarity movement or at Comrade President's rule in Romania before his fall. The half baked critique appeared only after everything is over - http://www.cpim.org/documents/1992-14-Cong--ideological-issues.pdf. Why is it half baked ? In few paragraphs of the document, the CPI(M) leadership tried to say that party dictatorship and class dictatorship is not the same. But it is all in hyperbole to save the discredited communist parties. And it was all done due to the pressure of the situation The party never believes this. First of all the party never said this before the people in the eastern Europe rose against the authoritarian rule. The maximum they said is this, "This was combined by an a historical evaluation of the role of Joseph Stalin. The CPI(M), since the Burdwan Plenum in 1968, has repeatedly made clear its assessment of the positive and negative aspects of Stalin's leadership. While being severely critical of certain gross violations of inner-party democracy and socialist legality, he May 1990 C.C. resolution had stated: "The CPI(M) rejected the approach which, in the name of correcting the personality cult, is negating the history of socialism. The uncontestable contribution of Joseph Stalin in
defence of Leninism, against Trotskyism and other ideological deviations, the building of socialism in the USSR, the victory over fascism and the reconstruction of the war-ravaged Soviet, Union enabling it to acquire enough strength to check imperialist aggressive moves, are inerasable from the history." (http://www.cpim.org/documents/1992-14-Cong--ideological-issues.pdf).

The proof that the party has no criticism against one party rule and working class exploitation by the state is the way they looked at the Chinese party rule after the fall of communist parties in Eastern Europe. The party leaders have nothing to say in the last 20 years on the exploitation of the Chinese working class and the common people except some occasional murmurs by CP Chandrasekhar and Jayati Ghosh which are at best paternalistic in nature, no serious discussion. If there is any disturbance in China - Tienanmen to Uighur struggle, the party position is : the creation of anti socialist forces - sarajantrakari. The party has nothing to say against serious human rights violations happening in China and North Korea that can't be the hall mark of socialist societies.