The Shining List

hariette spierings hariette at
Sat Apr 6 11:46:24 MST 1996

>However all is changed, change utterly by the revelation of Olaechea's
>noble lineage.  Why so? well my mother's people were landless Irish
>peasants.  The
>kind of folk that Olaechea describes as the "oppressed masses".  I had an
>aunt for instance who went into service in England.  She died of
>consumption in a poverty stricken slum in the Great Depression.  My mother
>still cries when
>she talks about her.  I won't bore the list with the details of my own
>upbringing.  Suffice to say that it has left me with and abiding hatred
>for my "social betters".
>However now we know all.  Close your eyes in holy dread.  We are in the
>presence of none other than that exalted personage Don Adolfo Olaechea,
>Knight of the Shining Path, come on to this list to lecture us on the
>oppressed.  The revolutionary aristo surrounded by the sighing sycophants
>and backed up by his loyal retainer Louis Godena in the role of Henchman
>to the Oligarchy.
>No wonder Don Adolfo expected us to be grateful and to kiss his ring or
>Strike this poseur down, Lou.  Smite him hip and thigh.

>That is why the kangaroo court in this list failed, and why People's Justice
>in Peru is allowing the long downtrodden, exploited, oppressed and despised
>masses to raise their heads and become the actors in their own social
>I hope you see the difference.
>Adolfo Olaechea
>     --- from list marxism at ---
Spoken like the grand signeur Adolpho.

Hugh Rodwell

"When Adam delved,
and Eve spun.....
Who was then
the gentleman....?

(Digger's rhyme from the Cromwellian times in England)

As the "aristocrats of labour" are now showing their own parchments to
oppose with arguments ad-homini what they cannot deal with otherwise, the
following is intended to put them in their place - by the sculliery, while
awaiting to become Labour Peers in their senior years, after a life-time of
tugging forelocks before the ruling classes.

I have never bothered to reply to Mr. McLelland's many imbecilic assertions
since events were proving - and have already proven - how far off from the
"piss-pot" he was aiming.

However, I will bother with this one mailer, since it raises very
interesting aspects about workerism.

I won't go in here on about Engels and his class origen, or Jenny Marx's
noble connections in Prussia, nor Lenin's condition as a lawyer from a
gentlemany family in Russia, or Chou-En-lai's Mandarinate origin.  Those are
questions that everyone with a bit of Marxist understanding already knows
very well.

Mr. Mcllelan, unlike Rodwell, has given us his family history, and a
illustrious one it is, all the way back to the potato famine and the
oppression of the peasantry in Ireland, the Great Depression, and the slums,
and moreover, he derives great pride on this, and uses it shamelessly as
political capital.

Mr. Macllelan is also an aristocrat, and "aristocrat of labour", the heir of
past struggles and sufferings which he now uses to attack and vilify the
struggles of other peasants and workers.  That is how he uses his political

Hugh Rodwell, on the other hand, is even more aristocratic since he does not
even bother to conceal his disgust about how "ugly" the real revolutionary
movements are. His is more an Oscar Wilde kind of political capital.

Not to be outdone by Mr. Mclleland's openeness about his personal
background, I will then too give some of my own family history.

Although I hold no pride in it since I regard myself as my own individual -
a "self-made man" within the revolutionary movement of the oppressed and
exploited masses if you wish - this history, in the context of Peru, and now
internationally, also constitutes political capital.  I leave to the reader
to draw its own conclussions as to the use that political capital has been
put to.

As far as I know - and the old aunts in my family - maybe like in Mr.
McLlelland's own as well - are the keepers of such records and stories - and
we do have in Peru genealogical publications of the same type as the
Debret's in England that confirm such old spinsters traditions - the first
Olaechea to make it into the gentlemen's class was a bloke - maybe a poor
farmer, or second son himself - from the place of Olaz in the province of
Guipuzcua in the Basque country.

His name was Juan (John) of Olaz and he won distinction and a coat of arms
fighting at the Battle of El Salado in 901, preserving Europe from Islamic
dominance.  I am sure he was just fighting for his overlord, and this same
one was fighting for his king, and so on.  None of them had any idea of
their contribution to Western Civilisation, nor to the development of the
working class and even less of Mr. Macllelland's own claims to nobility
based on the sufferings of that class in the past.

Compared to some of the facilities today enjoyed by Mr. Maclelland and even
the lowliest unemployed in advanced countries, these people, from the King
down to the lowliest spear bearer, were rather brutish individuals, full of
medieval superstitions, living short, disease ridden, uncultured lives
interspeced with savage fighting.

A branch of the family of this "John" came to Peru in 1602, also headed by a
John, now styling himself Don Juan de Olaz-echea (echea meaning in Basque:
the house or lineage of Olaz), a Captain in the Spanish Army.

His descendants adquired land and settled in the near South of Peru, in the
region of Ica where they became one of the largest feudal landowning
families by the time the Spanish empire began to collapse.  At the arrival
of the Liberation armies - headed by people of the same class as my
ancesters, Bolivar and San Martin - Don Antonio also raised his provincial
militias - first on the side of the King, for whom he held his holdings and
the entire province, but then switched sides and ended being one of the
signatories of the Act of Independence.

Many of the noble families, loaded as they were with nobiliary titles from
the Spanish Monarchy they had purchased with the "Gold from the Indies",
left the country at that time and "returned" to Spain.  Don Antonio stayed.

In the nineteen century, such feudal Lords were immensely rich in the
Americas and Rockefellers were still digging trenches in Europe, the family
tree then acquired any type of cattle they wnated: including princesses and
duchesses, countesses and other castaway second or third or fourth daughters
of the princelings of Europe, Holenlohe's, Schreibers and others.

In such a family I was born - one of the forty families of the Peruvian
oligarchy (and in that Simon Strong is factual).

On my mother's side, they were Palestinian immigrants who came to the
country during the First War World, established a small textile factory
which grew into a large one - supplying overalls and denim clothes for the
working men and women of a nascent Peruvian proletariat.

Therefore, nobility and MONEY! The dream of every Labour politician, and
Trotskysts are but Labour politicians in waiting, or losers dreaming to take
the Labour Party's place as the "party of the working class"!.

All that "dream" could be mine for the asking, if I would just conform and
claim my "rightful place in society", as the reactionary regime in Peru
keeps suggesting.  In fact their attacks against me are no different than
the attacks of Mclleland.  If I was a "leftist" like the Trots in Peru - no
problem, that can be accomodated and even be useful to the ruling classes no

But it happens that I am my own person, and have been what I am since my
early youth and as soon as I adquired a proper political consciousness.

Therefore, I am not proud of any old parchments or titles.  I am proud (if
pride be a good thing since it always leads to a fall) of being an honorary
tramwayman, title granted to me by the Peruvian proletariat for the role the
student leadership of my days played in militant support in one of the most
bitter strike actions in the early sixties in Peru.

Recently, Fujimori too, has granted me titles and fortune of my own:  A
sentence to life imprisonment - not for leading guerillas or placing car
bombs, mind you - but for writing and speaking out in England in defence of
the revolution in Peru and Chairman Gonzalo in particular.

As for wealth:  A gracious FINE of 500 million US dollars to make me one of
the richest person's in the world in negative terms!  (Negative or positive,
what does it really matter?, one should not look gift horses in the mouth!)

So, who is today the gentleman?  The "scion of aristocrats of old" or the
"workerist hero" who plays the imperialist bourgeosie's game by insulting
the revolutionary leaders who managed to create the new conditions in the
world where the workers of the advanced countries, even the lowliest ones,
today enjoy a thousand times more civilized living that the rogue who
founded our "dinasty" in the Xth Century?

In the old family photographs there is even a great uncle of mine, he was a
famous legal mind and wrote the Peruvian Constitution of 1933.  He was
nearly deaf and had a large metal horn to be able to hear.  It looks funny.
Today, you can get a decent hearing aid on the national health, as a
byproduct of the revolutionary struggle of the working class.  Still, you
hate Stalin with the same bitterness than the imperialist bosses and their

Who is then the gentleman?

Adolfo Olaechea

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list