Point by point.

Matt D. afn02065 at afn.org
Tue Apr 2 13:08:04 MST 1996


Chris Faatz wrote:

>1) I am for the revolution in Peru.

OK.  So far so good.

>2) From all that I've read, I'm opposed to the PCP-SL.

Oops!  I'm afraid you've moved from Marxism to idealism here, C2.  The
revolution in Peru is being made by the masses under the leadership of
the PCP.

>3) I don't believe in terror as communist politics.

And?  What's your point here?

>4) I don't take Nueva Bandera, El Diario, or any of the other pro-PCP
>mouthpieces as being objective elements in this discussion.

You prefer the New York Times?  NACLA?  What do you mean by an
"objective" element?  Does the fact that the New Flag and El Diario are
committed to the struggle mean that the information contained in them
is untrue?  It seems to me that one could make a case for just the
opposite proposition.

>5) I await
>the appearance of a '90s Edgar Snow to help demonstrate to me that the
>revolution in Peru is something more than a pseudo-marxist, pseudo-maoist
>terror show, implemented from above, whose idea of putting politics in
>command is exemplified by a) calling a general strike, then b) threatening
>to kill (rather than debate) any worker who violates it.

Your Edgar Snow comment helps to illuminate (4) above, but not, I'm
afraid, to your credit.  Why does the metropolitan master have to give
the nod to the People's War?  Is not the movement of the masses an
endorsment a million times more powerful than a bourgeois journalist?

You also completely misunderstand the nature of the armed strike, but
I suspect you know that.

>6) I emphatically
>*don't* think that the Peruvian revolution is the world-center of the
>revolution today. I agree that it's a backwater country, wholly owned
>and subsidized by US imperialism. I'm much more interested, for strategic
>and global reasons, in, for example, the revolution in the Philippines,
>or the progress of the Zapatistas in Mexico.

Your would-be "realpolitik" has blinded you to the development of the
authentic communist revolutionary tide active in the world today.  Perhaps
you could clarify what "strategic and global reasons" motivate you here.

>and, lastly, 7), I find it
>highly amusing that the "victors" of this list find it necessary to gauge
>someone's politics by her or his position on the key question of the day:
>are they pro- or anti-PCP.

Ironically, that became _the_ dividing line issue because of the vicious
attacks of the Trotskyists and revisionists.  Their vile slanders against
the Peruvian revolution revealed quite clearly their stance -- against
revolution in general.  And I say this as someone who considered some
of them potential comrades.  I actually was surprised that many of them
lined up w/ the bourgeoisie and imperialism, against the masses and
communism.

>I stand with Rahul. In the absence of anything equating objective
>evidence, I oppose the PCP-SL, although I'm willing to learn more.
>
>As for the revolution in Peru, I have much more confidence in the self-
>activity of the masses and of their organizations then I do in the
>mechanistic fervor of MLM-GT.

The "self-activity of the masses and their organizations" _is_ the substance
of the People's War under the leadership of the PCP.  What do you think
it is?

-- Matt D.



     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list