Tony: Hail the Great Proletarian Revolutionary UPI

hariette spierings hariette at easynet.co.uk
Fri Aug 16 15:54:32 MDT 1996


>At 8:29 PM 8/16/96, hariette spierings wrote:
>
>>I would say that such organisms in America are "wannabe Maoists" and would
>>appreciate that you bear that distinction very much in mind.
>
>This isn't inconsistent with saying that "Maoism" is not appropriate to a
>highly industrialized country, is it?
>
>Doug



Yes it is Doug.  Maoism is more than "marxism in a peasant society".  Maoism
is a universal doctrine, since it is part and parcel of Marxism.  That
currently the advanced capitalist societies have not yet arrived at their
own form of Maoism, does not mean that there is nothing in Mao which applies
to this kind of societies.

In particular, the question of the universality of contradiction as the
fundamental law of development of matter is brought forth by Chairman Mao as
a great development of Marxism and Marxism-Leninism.  The People's War as
military theory which can and should be applied to all kinds of societies is
also something which puts Maoism - and the study of its fundamental
principles - in the forefront of the needs of the WORLD PROLETARIAT in the
current era.  Moreover, no Marxist leader - not even Lenin or Stalin - had
the advanced experience of Chairman Mao of leading the proletarian
revolution into the realm of the "highest heaven" of bourgeois society, by
means of the Great Proletarian Cultural revolution, nor the insights of Mao
Tse-tung on the practicalities of the class struggle under the conditions of
socialist construction and the dictatorship of the proletariat.

I think that these developments will take time to be accepted and
understood.  In that connection is where "wannabe maoists" play a negative
role.  But this stage of Marxism is young, is new, and is in development.

In that connection, and to be noted how the "bogus maoism" of the USA style
cultists has in fact determined that in the current re-evaluation and
struggle for incorporating Chairman Mao's contributions to the universal
ideology of the proletariat, the US would lag far behind European communists
and revolutionaries, who are also citizens of "highly industrialised countries".

In Europe, Chairman Mao and his contributions to the treasure chest of
Marxism are now taken by the most advanced theoretical workers of the
proletariat as very important - although, in true, as yet not as principal
to the questions at hand.

But things do not remain the same, as all who think in dialectical terms
must recognise, and as the need to develop a truly revolutionary theory
which integrates the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to the
concrete conditions of the developed countries, the relevance of Mao
Tse-tung and Maoism is bound to grow.

To allege that "Maoism" has only relevance to backward countries, is nothing
new.  The same was alleged in its day of Leninism, and that, given the
history of the International Communist Movement also proved to be
shortsighted and essentially a cop out to claim "special circunstances" for
the imperialist countries and smuggle in as given and unchanginh - i.e.
un-Marxist - "verity" that in imperialist countries only the "marxist"
methods of the second international applied.  In fact, the theory which
seeks to confine the lessons of the Marxist experience
(Marxism-Leninism-Maoism) to some parts of the world to the exclusion of
others, are expressions of revisionism, which always seeks to
compartamentalise, and seeks to enshrine the detail and the exception above
the universal law claiming always that circunstances are so different that
the revolution, they conclude, is not possible there where they are standing
and living.  Very convenient, don't you think?

The way I see it, Maoism will overcome both the "caricatures" as well as the
(basically racistic and social-chauvinistic) approach of certain people in
denying Maoism by claiming exceptional circunstances which are bound to
remain unchanged for all time.  And it will do so, among other things,
because it stands as the most radical and combat ready critique by the gun
of the current rotten imperialist system, as witnessed in this list by the
struggle of the PCP and that of other communist Parties, such as the
Philipines, and now too the comeback of Maoism in Indonesia is on the cards
too.  Moreover, China too will follow its own path to Maoism sooner rather
than later, as the logic of current developments tend to show.  And China
will enter, within the next decade or so, into new revolutionary
developments guided by the very same ideology which brought it liberation in
the first place, and no one can call China now a "backward society" any
more.  In fact, the more you look at it, the more Maoist the future looks.

On the other hand, what have the "developed countries" to contribute today
in the theoretical field to resolve the problems of the revolution?  Only
Marxism and Leninism, because revisionism, whether of the Second
International variety or of the modern revisionist
(Khruschev/Brezhnev/Gorbachev) variety are already long bankrupt.  And
Marxism-Leninism is the very basis in which Maoism itself stands.  In that
sense, the closer Marxism-Leninism comes to reconstitute itself and to grow
out from under the ruins of its own revisionists (the Gorbachev/Khruschevs,
etc)(as it is obvious and evident it is already doing) the closer then that
the advanced sections of the Western, Russian and Eastern European
proletariat will come to "merge their roads" with those of truly Maoist
parties such as the PCP and the CP of Philippines and others too, creating
the basis for an advance to full recognition of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as
the most complete expression of the class ideology and experience guiding
the world proletarian revolution.

It is obvious that the unity of the International Communist Movement is a
sine qua non condition for the victory of the world proletarian revolution,
and it is also evident that such a unity requires ideological unity as its
guiding force.
Therefore, one day, per force, all communists and revolutionaries must come
to agree on these theoretical questions and to give due where it should be
given, and nothing would be easier than agreement when our roads have
"merged" already in the struggle.  Only those standing on the side-lines of
the struggle in which the whole world proletariat now is being sucked into
by the maelstrom of reactionary imperialism, will be pedantic enough,
racistic enough, chauvinistic enough to fail to give recognition and take on
board the contributions of the greatest Marxist-Lleninist revolutionary of
the second and most earth shaking part of the 20th Century, if we are to
judge by the impact of his ideas and his actions, Chairman Mao Tse-tung.
Then - and when the "Maoist caricatures" are long forgotten, who would have
any question about recognising the theoretical unity of Marxism, of Leninism
and of Maoism and refuse to understand it and proclaim it as one and the
same revolutionary ideology of the proletariat?  Who would then stand aside
of enshrining Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the embodiment of the theory and
practice of the world proletarian revolution, moreover when such would
contribute to unite all truly revolutionary communists?

Only those who would resist the unity of the International Communist
Movement and would oppose as Talmudists always do the concretion and victory
of the revolution for which that unity is necessary, vital and urgent.

Of course I am talking here long term and I am also talking of a struggle to
achieve that Maoism shall illuminate the revolutionary road in the developed
countries as it is already doing it in the backward ones.  But we have time
and history on our side, and morever we have "Chinese" patience too!  It is
good that we are now taking aim against the "caricatures" of Maoism.  And
that process is also just beginning.  We shall see more of it as time goes by.


Adolfo






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




More information about the Marxism mailing list