There are still a number of communist parties active in the world, among them those in China and Cyprus, which, in their different ways kept the red flag flying after what was once called the end of history.

The end of history was how the American political scientist and economist Francis Fukuyama described the defeat of communism and the triumph of liberal democracy following the collapse of the Soviet Union in an essay he wrote in 1989.

What he meant was not that historical events would cease to happen, but that the collapse of Soviet communism marked the end of the historical process which Karl Marx believed would lead to a classless communist society based on freedom and equality.

But Fukuyama largely left out of account the communist regimes that remained in power, including the People’s Republic of China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba which are still communist. He also ignored the existence of a number of communist parties in liberal democracies, including Cyprus, that take part in elections under the Marxist banner to advance the interests of working people.

Marx believed that history was not static but a process driven by changes in economic relations in society that cause historical change – think about the historical change now on the cards on account of the material changes in communication and connectivity brought about by easy air travel, the internet and artificial intelligence.

Marx argued that the Industrial Revolution in 19th century Europe produced conditions ripe for political revolution in a class struggle of the proletariat that would overthrow capitalism and create a socialist society and ultimately a classless communist utopia. Marx’s vision was less a concrete destination than a distant horizon.

Fukuyama must have known that Soviet Union was nowhere near such a society and that his triumphalism was premature. Besides communist China, which was at the time the most populous country in the world with a population of more than a billion, was still communist.

Marx had accepted that in the UK the class struggle could be fought politically by the creation of the Labour Party, that Marx and his friend Frederich Engels encouraged as the way forward for the British working class. So even Marx himself believed in the evolutionary improvement of the condition of working people in a liberal democracy like Britain.

For Tsarist Russia, however, the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 was the only way forward. Vladimir Lenin made it possible through the formation of a communist party to lead the revolution in place of Marx’s reliance on organic spontaneity driven by the thrust of history. 

The communist party of the Soviet Union which developed into the organ of a totalitarian state under Joseph Stalin in the 1930s favoured a command economy that fell apart by the end of the 1980s not because Marx got the thrust of history wrong, but because of Soviet society’s own internal conflicts between its people and their moribund bureaucracy. 

When the Soviet Union began its downward spiral in 1989 there was turbulence in communist China too, but it overcame a brief clamour for liberal democracy and has famously thrived as a socialist state with Chinese characteristics.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) maintained its monopoly on political power but it was clever enough to understand that the market economy was not inconsistent with running a socialist economy and highly efficient in the pursuit of economic growth – as China’s former leader Deng Xiaoping humorously put it “it does not matter if a cat is black or white, provided it catches mice.”

Current President Xi Jinping has gone even further, arguing that the market economy in China works more effectively under the political control of the CCP than it would in any liberal democracy.

Like the CCP, the communist party of Cyprus Akel – Greek acronym for progressive party of working people – retained its communist party label and an anti-Western tilt in foreign affairs of what used to be called the Non-Aligned Movement – what is now often referred to as the Global South.

The similarities, however, largely end there. Unlike the CCP which governs a one-party state, Akel operates within and accepts the rules of liberal democracy. It supports the market economy, albeit one tempered by policies designed to protect working people, and to relinquish power if defeated in democratic elections.

Akel did well in the legislative elections in RoC last week, which is good news for progressive people across the whole island. Its policy of supporting independent presidential candidates worked well when it helped elect the businessman George Vasiliou as president in 1988 whose most enduring legacy was setting Cyprus on the path towards membership of the European Union.

It did not work so well for Akel when its own leader the late Demetris Christofias was elected president in 2008.  Alas, he was not up to the task of managing Cyprus’ capitalist economy during the major international banking crisis caused by the collapse of Lehman Brothers in the same year he took office.

In 2023 Akel supported the international diplomat Andreas Mavroyiannis for president who lost narrowly and is apparently keen to have another go if Akel is prepared to support him – why not if he shows he can win it?

Akel survived after the collapse of Soviet communism because, despite its label and historical roots as a communist party, it has evolved into something much closer to a social democratic party. Like Britain’s Labour Party, it still keeps the red flag flying – though nowadays more in song than in practice.