From the Era of Slavery Until 1960 – The Khmer Rouge, 1977

Republished from Angkar’s official publication The Revolutionary Flag

Our Kampuchea Has a History of More Than 2,000 Years Our Kampuchea has a history of more than 2,000
years. This history shows that Kampuchean society, like every other society, has gone through many different
social stages. Kampuchean society passed through a stage of primitive communism. After primitive comm-
unism, it entered a slave society. After the slave society, it moved into a feudal period. After the feudal period,
it entered capitalist society. Most recently, after the capitalist period, Kampuchean society has entered a new
era — the era of socialist society. Thus, we have passed through all these stages of societal development.
Within the framework of primitive communism, there were not yet any classes. Consequently, there was no
class struggle. When Kampuchean society entered the slave society period, it divided into two classes: the
slave owners and the slaves. In feudal society, there were the feudal landowners and the peasants. In capi-
talist society, there were the capitalists and the workers. This is the essential reality of each society that our
country has passed through. During the slave, feudal, and capitalist periods — particularly during the feudal
and capitalist eras — our country was also subject to foreign domination. For example, in the recent period,
Kampuchean society was a colonial and semi-colonial society under the domination of the French, Japanese,
and American imperialists. Foreigners came to exploit our country. Were there class contradictions in slave,
feudal, and capitalist societies? Yes, there were! A number of comrades have studied the history of Kampuchea
from the beginning. Our history clearly shows that there was class struggle for a very long time between the
exploited and the exploiting classes. 1. Slave Society During the slave society, there was struggle between the
exploiters (the slave owners) and the exploited (the slaves). These two classes were adversaries locked in a
life-and-death conflict. Slaves who refused to be exploited joined together to fight against the slave owners.

Did this actually occur? Certainly it did. This is confirmed by the study of society, exploitation, and the social
sciences, as well as by our own history. In slave society, the exploited class struggled against the exploiting
class. However, these struggles were not guided by a correct political line, nor based on a correct path. History
shows that the struggles of that time sometimes failed and sometimes succeeded. Some slaves became leaders
of armies, defeated the slave owners, and then made themselves into new slave owners and kings in order
to exploit others in turn. This was not a path that served the masses or the exploited slave class. It served
only the personal interests of certain individuals and their cliques. The exploited did not accept this new expl
-oitation. They fought back because they were not truly liberated. From this experience, we can see that
although there was struggle, it did not culminate in real success because it was not based on a line that
served the masses and the exploited classes. In the beginning, some leaders were able to deceive the
masses. But the exploited quickly realized when they were being exploited and rose up against their expl
-oiters. The essential reality of our revolution today is the elimination of exploiting classes and the liberation
of the exploited. We study this historical experience so that we understand the following: now that our Party
is in power, if it ever follows the path of the slave era, it will be fought against and overthrown by the worker
-peasant masses. When the political line serves the workers, the peasants, and the broad masses of the
people, it receives broad support. It becomes a powerful force that assures strong national defense, rapid
development of the country, and a steady rise in the people’s living standards. The Party is the true repre
-sentative of the poor classes. If the Party were to oppress and harm the people, the people would fight
back and reject it. This is the lesson of history.

We must constantly assess ourselves. It is not only the Party as a whole that must do this — the factories,
the ports, the energy sector, the salt fields, and every location must assess itself. If this Party ceases to rep
-resent the fundamental interests of the exploited people, it would become meaningless. The Party members,
cadres, and leaders would lose their meaning because they would no longer represent the proletariat. Such
a party would change its class nature and enter into contradiction with the proletariat. Lessons from the stru
-ggles during slave society: A positive point is that the exploited people — the slaves — struggled against
the exploiting class, the slave owners. The slaves were practiced and tempered through successive struggles.
This is the great lesson we must all learn from our poor people who have made every sacrifice to liberate
the exploited class and eliminate the exploiting classes. However, another important lesson is that there was
not yet a correct political line to lead the struggle onto the right path. 2. Feudal Society During the feudal
period, the history of our country clearly shows the existence of two classes: the feudal landlord class and
the peasant class. The feudal landowners were warlords who exploited the peasant class in every way. As
a result, the exploited peasantry entered into contradiction with the feudal landlord class and fought back
against them. This struggle developed everywhere in the country. Some peasant movements were crushed,
but others achieved victory over the feudal landowners and warlords. However, the peasant movements
that gained victory did not possess a correct political line that could truly serve and liberate the exploited
peasant class. In many cases, the victorious peasants turned themselves into new feudal landowners or
warlords and became the new exploiters of the peasant class.

The exploited peasants did not accept these new exploiters. They fought to overthrow them just as they had
fought the previous ones. Lessons from the struggles against the feudal landowners and warlords: The peasant
class, which was exploited and oppressed in every way, rose up and struggled. These struggles continued
over a long period and developed into successive movements, mainly in the form of armed struggle. Through
these struggles, the exploited peasant class was trained and tempered in blood and fire. They fought with
courage and skill and were often victorious over the enemy. Nevertheless, despite their heroism, the struggles
of the exploited peasantry repeatedly ended in defeat. The reason was that there was no correct political line
capable of gathering the broad forces of the exploited peasant class into a mighty force strong enough to com
-pletely smash the exploiting class — the feudal landowners and warlords. During this same feudal era, foreign
enemies also invaded Kampuchea. Foreign reactionary feudalists and colonialists created antagonistic contra
-dictions with the Kampuchean nation and people. They invaded, exploited, and oppressed our nation, espe-
cially the peasant class. Therefore, the Kampuchean nation and people — particularly the peasant class —
rose up to drive out the foreign invaders in order to liberate the country and the people. These resistance
movements emerged everywhere, primarily in the form of armed struggle. Some were defeated, while others
achieved temporary victories. However, these victories did not last because the victors lacked the correct
political line to truly liberate the country and the exploited masses. Once victorious, they pursued only their
own interests and those of their cliques. They turned themselves into warlords and ruled like kings and
viceroys in various regions. Later, they became new exploiters of the peasantry. When the people turned
against them, they often fled and collaborated with foreign feudalists, reactionaries, and colonialists.

They sold off national territory and helped the foreigners exploit the peasantry so they could continue to rule
as petty kings. This was the reality of the national and peasant struggles during the feudal era. There was
great heroism, but the struggles ended in repeated defeats because there was no correct political line that
could serve the true interests of the nation and the genuine liberation of the exploited people. 3. The Post-
World War II Period (Feudal-Capitalist Era under Colonialism) After World War II, there were many move-
ments among the people of Kampuchea. These movements differed significantly from those of earlier eras
because colonialism and international imperialism had gained more experience in sabotaging the struggles
of exploited nations and peoples. We can summarize the resistance movements of our people into the foll
-owing categories: First, the so-called “struggle for national independence” carried out by several political
parties such as the Democratic Party, the Freedom Party, the Mother Earth Party, the Hanuman Party, the
Arrow Party, and others formed later. These parties competed in elections for what they called “independence.”
In reality, these parties were created under French colonial law, had compromised with the French colonialists,
and represented the interests of the feudalists, aristocrats, major landowners, capitalists, and other upper
strata. Their struggle was not genuinely for the people or for true national independence. It was aimed at
obtaining a form of “independence” that served the interests of the privileged classes. This form of struggle
confused and deceived the masses for a short time, but later the people rejected and opposed it. Second,
the Japanese fascists and the American CIA created a movement called the “Popular Movement” or “Khmer
Serei,” led by Son Ngoc Thanh. The slogan “Demand independence from the French” fooled some students
for a while. However, this movement was eventually condemned and rejected by the Kampuchean nation
and people because its leader was a traitor to the nation.

In truth, Son Ngoc Thanh’s movement sought to replace French colonialism with American imperialism, turning
Kampuchea into a military base and neo-colony for the Americans. Third, there was the authentic revolutionary
struggle of our people — particularly the poor peasants — to wrest independence from the French imperialists.
This struggle was carried out in many parts of the country. It involved great sacrifices, armed resistance, and
gradually developed its own army and base areas. However, the revolutionary struggle and the fruits it had gai
-ned disappeared with the 1954 Geneva Accords. The reason was the absence of a clear-sighted and correct
political line regarding how to wage the revolutionary struggle — including tactics, strategy, direction, which
forces to rely on, and the proper form of struggle. Specifically, there was no independence, mastery, or self-
reliance. Not having a correct political line can be compared to being blind. Even with great strength and det
-ermination, one cannot win. Instead, one loses direction in the dark and heads toward certain defeat. Summary
of Historical Lessons Our people have struggled for a very long time — from the slave period up to the struggle
against the French — but they met one defeat after another. Throughout this long history, the movements of
our people have taught us two major lessons: First — the best and most important lesson: Our people are cou
-rageous. They possess a fierce patriotism. They dare to struggle and dare to sacrifice themselves to fight
against the enemies of the nation, the aggressors, and the class exploiters. This is an especially good quality
of our people. We must recognize this clearly. If we fail to see it, we gravely underestimate our people. From
generation to generation, our people have always struggled and shed their blood. They dared to wage armed
struggle — the highest form of struggle — and even fought bare-handed when necessary.

Our people have struggled, they still struggle, and they will continue to struggle forever. They are truly a
brave people with a strong tradition of resistance. We must uphold and emulate this fine tradition.Second
— no matter how valiant the people are, if the struggle is misdirected, it will fail. In the past, we did not
have a correct line. Our people were very courageous and made immense sacrifices, but they repeatedly
suffered defeat because they lacked a correct political line. There was no line capable of resisting foreign
invaders or defeating the class enemies who exploited the people from within. Without a correct line, the
forces of the people could not be effectively gathered to carry out revolution. From this negative experience,
we draw a positive lesson: We must have a correct political line. We must have the leadership of a true
party of the working class armed with a correct line. When we possess such a line that can gather the
forces of the people, those forces become extremely powerful. This line must not be copied from others.
It must be based on independence, mastery, and self-determination of our own destiny. Self-reliance
means relying principally on our own people, our own army, our own Party, and the concrete revolutionary
movement in our country. Therefore, we must prepare a correct line in order to win victory. This is why
we have drawn up the strategic and tactical lines of our national democratic revolution.