UNITE! Info #3en, Part 3/3 (fwd)
spoons at jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Thu Apr 18 12:13:38 MDT 1996
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 11:51:54 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Rolf Martens <rolf.martens at mailbox.swipnet.se>
To: marxism at jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: UNITE! Info #3en, Part 3/3
UNITE! Info #3en, Part 3/3 [First posted: 01.01.96]
Article "WHY DOES THE RIM H[E]LP U.S. IMPERIALISM
ENCIRCLE THE PCP?", originally published by RM in leaflet
INFORMATIONSBLAD No. 24 Eng, 12.8.1994, Part 3/3
(Continued from Part 2/3)
*The Revolutionary Line of Mao Zedong and of the Former KPD/ML
(NEUE EINHEIT), and the Phoney"Marxist" Declaration of the RIM*
The RIM Declaration of 1984 contains some vicious open attacks
on (at least formerly) well-known correct principles of Marxism and
some flagrant untruths about the then existing situation in the world
and recent history, including omissions of vital facts. It's difficult
to see how these things could have been the results of even gross
ignorance on the part of its authors.
With particular fury, the Declaration attacks Mao Zedong's
extremely successful foreign policy of a united front against
imperialism in general and against one or two superpowers in
particular. By the 1960:s, U.S. imperialism had long been the main
protagonist of reaction. Such imperialist former big powers as Great
Britain, Germany, France and Japan could no longer compete for
hegemony. Mao Zedong correctly analyzed them as belonging to an
intermidary zone between the then only hegemonic power and the
socialist countries. In the well-known "A Proposal Concerning the
General Line of the International Communist Movement" of 1963,
one of the CPC documents of "the Great Polemics" unmasking
Soviet revisionism, he correctly urged the working-class in the
capitalist countries which U.S. imperialism was controlling or trying
to control to "direct their attacks mainly against U.S. imperialism but
also against their own monopoly capitalists and other reactionary
forces who are betraying the national interests".
For heaven's sake, no!, the Declaration cries out (p. 23, English
version). We're all for Mao Zedong, of course, but that was one of his
mistakes! Imperialist countries, you see, can have *no* legitimate
"national interests" but *only* imperialist ones. Mao Zedong's
"erroneous" view "seriously affected the development of the Marxist-
Leninist movement in these countries". It also "had a long history in
the international communist movement", and it definitely "should be
broken with" (p. 23). You must never advocate such united fronts
against one or two superpowers!
Mao Zedong's view did have a long history in the communist
movement. As all who have had to use Marxism to fight back against
the attacks by phoney"Marxist" helpers of imperialism and social-
imperialism on this point know, it was precisely the correct view of
Lenin, too. His "The Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up",
for instance (in Collected Works, Vol. 22), written in 1916 in the
middle of the then raging imperialist war, was aimed precisely at
refuting the view of some Dutch and Polish socialists that there could
be "no" *national* wars, at least not in Europe, in the imperialist
period and that it was "impermissible" ever to support the national
independence of an imperialist country. He wrote, i.a.:
"If Belgium, let us say, is annexed by Germany in 1917, and in
1918 revolts to secure her liberation, the Polish comrades will be
against her revolt on the grounds that the Belgian bourgeoisie
posess 'the right to oppress foreign peoples'! - There is nothing
Marxist or even revolutionary in this argument. If we do not want to
betray socialism we *must* support *every* revolt against our chief
enemy, the bourgeoisie of the big states, provided it is not the revolt
of a reactionary class."
Was this unknown to the RIM Declaration's authors? If you read
some of the many articles and books by the chairman of and one
other "theoretician" (RW/OR) of the RCP, USA, comrades Bob
Avakian and Raymond Lotta, you can see that they at least are very
well read in the works of Marx and Lenin. Did they have a hand in,
in 1984? This is unknown but does seem likely. Anyway, calling
that Declaration "Marxist-Leninist" is a lie.
China's successful foreign policy under the leadership of Mao
Zedong, which helped the proletariat in the world and the oppressed
peoples and nations enormously and which gave China itself an
international prestige which was never greater than in 1976, was one
of the important achievements of the Chinese revolution in general
and of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, 1966-1976, in
particular, which made the leadership remain in the hands of the
The last five years even have seen an enormous "posthumous
victory", so to speak, of that foreign policy. By 1974, the situation in
the world described above had developed further so that, against a
rising tide of national liberation struggles in or by countries of the
third world, of revolutionary struggles by the masses in many other
countries as well and even some struggles by capitalist/imperialist
countries to shake off foreign domination, the entire imperialist
system was being upheld mainly by two superpowers, which also
were contending with each other for hegemony, Soviet social-
imperialism and U.S. imperialism.
Mao Zedong in that year presented his famous and correct
analysis of the countries' in the world being divided into three groups,
three worlds, neither then nor later forgetting the class struggle
continuing also within the different countries, never ceasing to
advocate revolutionary war as the way for the proletariat to seize
power. And he was at that time already advocating the forging of a
broad international united front against the two superpowers, in
particular against social-imperialism, and later sought to include not
only small and medium-sized imperialist countries, those of the
second world, but even certain forces of U.S. imperialism into a
united front against Soviet social-imperialism as the then most
dangerous source of war, which had put its economy on a military
footing and above all was threatening an aggression against
The danger of a war in Europe being started by social-imperialism
was a very serious threat in the mid-'70:s. Mao Zedong's China and,
in Europe itself, above all the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), whose
genuinely proletarian revolutionary character enabled it to see the
facts, persistently warned about it, while almost the entire bourgeoisie
pretended there was "detente". When the Russian new tsarists could
not realize their hegemonic plans, their entire empire got into
increasing difficulties and by 1989 started to crack. The masses
oppressed by it revolted.
The recent partial downfall of that pillar of reaction, Soviet
social-imperialism and social-fascism, on the whole greatly has
improved the world situation. This upheaval also has caused further
economic misery but it will in the long run be very beneficial for
the peoples of the world. Bourgeois leaders as one man are calling
it "a defeat of communism". That's a good one. Most of those people
licked social-imperialism's boots while Mao Zedong and his adherents
told all how like Hitler fascism it was.
*"Never Unite the Many to Defeat the Few!"*
*"Superpower Lackeys Are the Real Revolutionaries!"*
Even more loudly than at Mao Zedong's correct analysis of the
world situation in the '60:s, the RIM Declaration howls at his correct
analysis of the situation in the '70:s and at the immensely important
foreign policy decisions which followed from it, which were intensely
disliked by that group within U.S. imperialism which had connived at
the social-imperialists' aggressive plans because they suited its
own counterrevolutionary aims.
These decisions weren't Mao Zedongs's at all, you see! It was "the
revisionists" in China who then "to a large degree" "controlled" its
diplomacy! (p. 25) (Precisely when in fact Chairman Mao was
receiving more foreign heads of state than ever, precisely when
more people than ever listened to his words.) And to advocate unity
of the third world was "all wrong"! To portray countries of the second
world as intermidate forces was even - "counterrevolutionary"! "The
Marxist- Leninists" (who? - perhaps the above-mentioned "uncle"
comrades Avakian and Lotta, who both had published books with
such attempts) have "correctly refuted" the "revisionist slander" that
"the 'Three Worlds Theory' was put forward by" Mao Zedong! (p. 25)
It was indeed a "nasty" theory to the superpowers and their helpers.
Here again, one basic principle of this Declaration stands out: By
no means should there be a united front against those reactionary
forces in the world which at the time are the most dangerous! This
"principle" is being upheld by today's "RIMlers", too.
The Declaration does contain many phrases which may look
very revolutionary. It even repeats some important truths, including
*some* of those extremely important principles concerning inner-
party struggle which were stressed by the Documents of the 10th
Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), in 1973.
However, it never refers directly to those Documents, which, like
practically all the other very important CPC documents of the 1966-
76 period, the RIM always has been discouraging people from
studying in the original. And, significantly, it leaves one thing out
which, i.a., precisely hits at the RIM's line:
"It is imperative to note that one tendency covers another. The
opposition to Chen Tu-Hsiu's Right opportunism which advocated 'all
alliance, no struggle' covered Wang Ming's 'Left' opportunism which
advocated 'all struggle, no alliance'. The rectification of
Wang Ming's 'Left' deviation covered Wang Ming's Right deviation. The
struggle against Liu Shao-chi's revisionism covered Lin Piao's
revisionism." (CPC's 10th Congress, Zhou Enlai's report, Peking
Review 35-36/1973, p. 21)
This element, one tendency covering another, also was present in
the struggle within the CPC at that time and played a significant role
in the later overthrow of socialism in China, in 1976-78. Here, too, the
RIM Declaration grossly falsifies the demonstrable facts of what
happened, this time in order to justify the admiration which the RIM
has always tried making people feel for its quite particular "heroes",
the phoney"leftist", in reality ultra-rightist, group of persons who had
degenerated into becoming, i.a., superpower lackeys, known as the
"Gang of Four".
The "gang" was named so by Mao Zedong, who in 1974
repeatedly urged them to stop functioning as a such. Their leader,
Jiang Qing, in 1972 already, through a series of secret unauthorized
interviews with historian Roxane Witke, had started seeking U.S.
support for herself as "Dowager Empress" after Mao Zedong's death.
Even better suited their line social-imperialism. The CPC's CC's two
decisions, proposed by Mao Zedong, on 7.4.1976 to dismiss the
publicly criticized openly-rightist Deng Xiaoping and to appoint Hua
Guofeng First Vice-Chairman also hit the "gang", whose member
Zhang Chunqiao had "outranked" Hua Guofeng but was "bypassed"
as less to be trusted.
Mao Zedong at CPC meetings towards the end of his life
repeatedly sharply criticized not only Deng Xiaoping and his "right
deviationist wind to reverse correct verdicts" of 1975-76 but also
Jiang Qing's phoney"left" reactionary line, explicitly warning against
her "wild ambitions" of "becoming CPC chairman" and even saying:
"After I die, she will make trouble".
This the Gang of Four did. Less than a month after Mao Zedong's
death (9.9.1976) they attempted a coup to seize power.
*How Was Socialism Overthrown in China, How Did the Marxist-
Leninists Analyze This and What Has Been the RIM's Fairy Tale
The phoney"left" gang was dealt a decisive blow and its coup
attempt foiled when all its four members were arrested on 6.10.
1976 by the forces of of Hua Guofeng, who publicly promised to
continue Mao Zedong's line completely and thus also continue the
criticism against the "traditional"-rightist Deng Xiaoping.
This blow against the long-hated Gang of Four, therefore, received
massive and enthusiastic support from the Chinese people and also
>from genuinely Marxist-Leninist forces abroad.
But the RIM, e.g. in its Declaration (pp. 25-27), portrays this blow
as "the counterrevolutionary coup d'e'tat in China". This "theory" is
not only obviously very strange, it also defies the facts. How could
suddenly, in revolutionary China, a coup d'e'tat have succeeded
without at least great turmoil; why wasn't there mass resistance
against the action hitting Mao Zedong's "closest comrades in
arms"(!), as the Declaration calls the gang? What really is inferred
here, together with the untruth that China's diplomacy "to a large
degree" was controlled by revisionists, is: The great beacon of the
early '70:s, China, was "half revisionist". It's pure fantasy, aimed at
promoting "Gang-of-Four-ism" today.
What actually took place was that Deng Xiaoping's right-
deviationist group utilized the damage caused and threatened by the
phoney"left" clique and the intense hatred it caused, to further their
own purposes step by step, secretly being joined by Hua Guofeng's
group, who as early as in November, 1976, started breaking their
promise wholly to uphold Mao Zedong's line.
One revolutionary party in the world - as far as I know - analyzed
this correctly: the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) in Germany. Comrade
Gonzalo's PCP (fraction), for instance, never did show an
understanding of it. It never distanced itself from the Gang of Four
and, even before its "RIM days", held some correspondingly
phoney"left" views on international issues.
Such a stand, as taken by an isolated revolutionary party in a
comparatively backward country like Peru, may well be judged to
be an honest and relatively harmless mistake.
It takes on a different character when propagandized
internationally and systematically since 1984 by an entity such as
the RIM. This all comrades inside or outside the RIM must see.
*The RIM's Utter Silence on a Historic Reverse by the Bourgeoisie,
Led by U.S. Imperialism, and What This Reverse Must Mean*
During the decade before the RIM Declaration was written, a
series of mutually interconnected issues had risen to great
importance, at least in Europe: The extremely reactionary anti-growth,
anti-nuclear-energy, anti-science, anti-technology and anti-industry
campaigns instigated by the most right-wing bourgeoisie, including
the revisionists, in general and by U.S. imperialism in particular. And
it was the preceding phoney"Marxists" who had provided and misled
those groups of ignorant people who supported these assaults on
vital interests of the masses, mainly under the upside-down pretext of
These attacks, which continue today, with ever more bourgeois
forces behind them, stem from the bourgeoisie's fear that the
technological and industrial development might make conditions
ripe for a revolutionary workers' movement which would endanger
their entire rule in the world. Marx even noted the beginnings of this
fear some 140 years ago, pointing out: "Steam, electricity and
spinning machine were revolutionaries of a much more dangerous
character than even the citizens Barbe*s, Raspail and Blanqui."
(Speech in London, 14.4.1856)
Today the bourgeoisie on certain vital points already completely
have reversed their earlier striving for more and more industry, better
and better technology. In most so-called "advanced" countries, they
are retreating from nuclear energy, in part even from the use of oil;
they are advancing backwards into the coal age, even into the
windmill age, are systematically creating mass unemployment and
tearing down earlier welfare systems.
Clearly, all this calls for radical counterattack by the Marxist-
Leninists. Such has been delivered by one, only one, party, the
KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), which thereby also, when it was still
revolutionary, gruesomely further unmasked the earlier phoney-
"Marxists". And what do the RIM and its Declaration say on this
enormous subject? Not one word. Again, the RIM's standpoint
greatly pleases, above all, U.S. imperialism, which is engineering
anti-nuclear-energy campaigns and other foul things in the world and
greatly fears those counterattacks against them which only our
ideology, actual Marxism, makes possible.
In order also to reverse the reversal, the proletariat must strike
down the bourgeoisie's rule in the world completely, and the genuine
Marxist-Leninists must begin do do some uniting.
1. On the author:
Since decades back, there is no Marxist-Leninist party in Sweden. In
pamphlets, leaflets etc published since 1974 I've been advocating the
creation of one. I've studied CPC writings since 1973 and was even
more influenced by representatives of the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT)
who because of persecution in Berlin(West) and West Germany at the
time were in exile in Malmoe 1972-76. That party's line proved very
effective in practice here. I continued close cooperation with that
party until April, 1990, when I criticized it as now bourgeois. See
my article (in German): "EINE KRITIK der buergerlichen Politik der
KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), oder wie sie nunmehr heisst, und ihres
Vorsitzenden Klaus Sender, 1989 / Mitte 1990", August-September, 1990. Since
1990, some mutual exchange of publications has continued.
2. On the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT):
Adress: Verlag NEUE EINHEIT, Koernebachstrasse 50, 44143
Dortmund, Germany, or: Postfach 309, 10973 Berlin, Germany; tel:
+49 - 231 - 83 89 32; +49 - 30 - 693 74 70. Chairman: Klaus Sender.
Among its earlier publications are some extremely important articles,
urgently recommended for study. Mostly available only in German.
Statement, Oct '78, and article on international situation, '73,
available in English from me. An important series of publications by
Klaus Sender ('86 etc) point out some serious errors by Lenin, i.a. on
3. On other addresses:
Magazine A World to Win, Information Bureau of the RIM, IEC have
BCM World to Win, BCM RIM and BCM IEC respectively, all:
27 Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3XX, U.K. Weekly RCP paper
Revolutionary Worker / Obrero Revolucionario: RCP Publications,
Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL60654, USA
Voie Prole'tarienne (monthly: Partisan, magazines: Cahiers):
BP No. 95, 93803 Epinay/Seine cedex, France
UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / !UNIOS! /
FOERENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
Advocates the political line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong. Each
item # will be posted in one or more language(s). Leaflets in the
INFORMATIONSBLAD series published by me, mainly in Swedish,
since 1975 are available on request.
Befuerwortet die politische Linie von Marx, Lenin und Mao Zedong.
Jedes Nummer # wird in einer oder mehreren Sprache(n) gesandt
werden. Flugblaetter der Reihe INFORMATIONSBLAD, von mir
hauptsaechlich in Schwedisch seit 1975 veroeffentlicht, sind auf
Avocate de la ligne politique de Marx, Le'nine et Mao Zedong.
Chaque nume'ro # sera envoye' en une ou plusieurs langue(s).
Volantes de la se'rie INFORMATIONSBLAD, publie'e par moi,
principalement en sue'dois, depuis 1975, sont accessibles sur
Partidaria de la li'nea poli'tica de Marx, Lenin y Mao Zedong.
Cado nu'mero # sera enviado en una o varias lengua(s).
Se pueden conseguir a la demanda volantes de la serie
INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicada por me principalmente en
sueco desde 1975.
Foerespraakar Marx', Lenins och Mao Zedongs politiska linje.
Varje nummer # kommer att saendas på ett eller flera spraak.
Flygblad i serien INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicerad av mig
huvudsakligen paa svenska sedan 1975, kan faas paa begaeran.
S - 214 33 Malmoe
Tel: +46 - 40 - 124832
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism