Response to Ken's a-d.

Ken Howard kenhow at werple.mira.net.au
Wed Apr 3 06:25:00 MST 1996


>Ken Howard wrote:
>
>>a. A significant section of the PCP on the ground is opposed to the current
>>unflinching line of the leadership faction.
>
>Yes, I deny this absolutely.  Accept for a few craven capitulators who have
>sold the revolution for the 30 pieces of silver necessary to improve their
>prison conditions or buy tickets out of the country, there is no support at
>the bases for the counter-revolutionary police fraud of the "peace accords."
>
>>b.The PCP leadership faction has only ever allowed one congress of members
>>in 14 years.
>
>Under the conditions of the People's War in Peru, a full Congress cannot but
>be an extraordinary event.  Given that there has been no objective develop-
>ments that would suggest the need for a substantial revision of the line set
>out at the First Congress, what do you think justifies the extreme danger to
>the party of convening another?
>
>>c. Homosexuality is considered by the leadership faction of the PCP to be a
>>corrupter of youth
>
>What is your source for this?  I've heard this a number of times from enemies
>of the Peruvian revolution, but none have been able to cite a credible source.
>
>Is this the position of Queer Nation here in the US?
>
>>d.The debacles of the PKI in Indonesia,the CCP in Phillipines, the
>>Naxalites in India, all who followed the "peoples war line" to the
>>exclusion of mass work led to the needless slaughter of hundreds of
>>thousands if not millions of people.
>
>The PCP does an immense amount of mass work.  Party-related organizations
>exist in every sector of society.
>
>When will you ever learn?
>
>-- Matt D.
>
>
>
>     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Ken :I don't know wheter your response is developed from your own knowledge
or is the implementation of the bureacratically determined two line
struggle, but facts and the documents of the PCP leadership faction
themselves contradict you.

On point a.
"A group of people historically associated with the PCP centered mainly in
the prisons but finding at least some support from PCP members and
sympathisers outside of prison and abroad called upon the whole party to
"fight for a peace accord." (Rally to the defence of our red flag in Peru.
28March 1995.)

"A group of people who historically had played leading roles in the PCP
have been vigorously promoting a line of "peace conversations to reach a
Peace Agreement'" (let the lessons of the past fire the way forward. June
1994º

Leader Olachea however also disagrees with you, where you claim no support,
he claims 350.

The point is that the PCP does not allow any view other then that of the
leadership faction to exist. And anyone who disagrees must be subject to
the most rigourous anti-rightist hounding,including elimination. But here's
the problem, the lack of internal democracy in any organisation and the
opportunism of the zealots to quash any dissent is both a parody of marxism
and socialist democracy.

Point b.Well have any "objective developments" occured, Again according to
Let the lessons " The current debate in the PCP is no mere academic dispute
over the advisability of negotiations. It is a debate touching fundemental
questions of the assessment of the current situation in Peru and
internationally, of the capacity of the party to maintain and advance the
Peoples War." Now if that is not an "objective development" I wonder what
is, but surely it is in reality a matter of  the substitution of the
leadership for the party and the party for the masses. Socialist democracy
is not about expediency but something much more fundemental. The CCp in
China did not suspend congresses holding seven between the founding of the
CCp and 1945. The Bolshevics did not set the line in 1903 then suspend
congresses until 1917.So why does the PCP?

Point c. You all (Olchea, Quispe and yourself) just simply refuse to answer
the questions.And no I'm not such an imbecile as to add another name to
your assasination lists.

Point d. There again you car'nt agree amongst yourselves. Quipe in his
reply states." TRUE"

The meaning of these points is to clearly show that despite the arragance
of the PCP leadership faction the fundemental issues at stake here are not
the PCP making the revolution in Peru ( I mistakenly thought that masses
made revolutions not bureacratic sects) but rather the false and
treacherous path the PCP has embarked upon, the path of mechanical
"marxism" of transposing the "encircling of the cities from the
countryside" of China 1927 to Peru 1996




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




More information about the Marxism mailing list