Position of Sol-Peru Committee in relation to the Peru-Ecuador conflict

Robert Malecki malecki at algonet.se
Wed Aug 21 03:08:56 MDT 1996

Aldolfo writes;
>Pity then that the "worshipers of Trotsky", in Peru, rather managed to get
>on the side of the bourgeois state once again on that issue too.  One thing
>is a Trot without a concrete situation to call his own, and where he can
>afford to let off steam and "be in the right side of the class line"  Since
>he has not got to actually put in practice and neither he is likely to face
>this eventuality it is easy to be in "The right side of the class line".  No
>one is going to condemn him as a "traitor" before a hooded military tribunal
>for taking that stand.

Well Aldolfo, the Trotskyists in fact have a better line on Peru then you
do! But as usual the king thinks that Peru is something that belongs to a
Peruvian exile in London who hardly has his ass on the line anymore then
Malecki does. In fact Aldolfo I am facing some big time in the United States
for my activities and realise that bougeois democracy is quite fragile in
regards to political activists. And in the future even more so. And as far
as putting anything into practice, your sectarian line on Peru linked to the
stage theroy of revolution is hardly any real danger other then a road into
the wilderness and defeat for the Peruvian proletariat.

And events throughout Latin America sees Trotskyism as a far large and
dangerous current for the bougeoisie then your line can ever represent
despite the pick up the gun fireworks that you represent. In fact you can
not even get over the hedge of building a broad solidarity movement with the
workers and peasants in Peru or anywhere else for that matter because of
your line. The "Red front" which you represent is nothing other then a road
to defeat. Both in Peru and in International solidarity. And under the
militant rhetoric and bankrupt politics of the "red front" lies the stage
theory of revolution in which you purpose to make a deal with the local
bourgeoisie when and if you take power in order to fight the real
imperialist. That is not a big step from declaring a national war of defense
with Equador in alliance with the Peruvian bougeoisie if push comes to shove
over mineral resources. So we shall see what the future brings with you
paper declarations when out of power and the practice of Stalinism if they
come to power with its bourgeois partners in Peru!

But the truth is that a deal with the bougeoisie will mean ultimately a
bloodbath and counter revolution in Peru or anywhere else tyhis line is
practiced. That the red army in China came to power had to do with the
incredible destruction and chaos after world war two where all major
imperialist powers could not stop the Maoist takeover. This is hardly the
case today and Peru will hardly be another China! The conditions are not
even near those of the Chinese events. In fact the Americans will not allow
this kind of development and can easily stop the PCP. However it will be far
more difficult to stop working class rebellions in many Latin American
countries led by Trotskyist parties. Ultimately as a maoist from Peru you
have a difficult time in applying a "socialism" in one country line in a
block with the Peruvian bougeoisie.
But some people just never learn. In fact Stalinism is dead and much of its
policies which you represent were dictated by the needs of the Stalinist
bureaucracy in the Soviet Union. Now there is no Soviet Union and no state
power based on these politics to back you up. Take a look at Cuba which is
light years away from our maoists from Peru. Even with state power
consolidated during the time of the existence of the Soviet Union as a
degenerated workers state is in big trouble.

Now without a line of revolutionary internationalism and a program of
struggle in all of the Americas they are relying on pastors and liberals to
defend them against the coming attacks! Ha what a joke! They should be
trying to build parties throughout the Americas and especially in North
America based on a program of working class independence and struggle for
power while defending the gains of the Cuban October despite its deformities!

But Adolfo is even worse off. He is defending a line which might have worked
if the support of the Stalinists in the Soviet Union were forth coming.
However this is not the case any longer. So why bother!

Once again it is only the Leninist and Trotskyist ideas of proletarian
independence and workers struggle for power that can really change things.
Australia is a good example in seeing what happens when the social power of
the class is unleashed. With a vanguard party and a revolutionary program
like the TP standing at the head of these workers it will be a lot more then
the parliment that will be stormed and expropriated under the dictatorship
of the proletariat.

This line is counterposed to the maoist strategy of blocs with the liberal
bourgeoisie and the pipedream of "socialism" in one country that the
Peruvian maoists are fighting for with peasant gurreilla warfare as the only
tactic worth while.

>When people are involved in a concrete revolution and when their words
>really count and actually have to be implemented in practice that Leninist
>principle of "turning reactionary war into revolutionary civil war, into
>revolutionary war, into People's War, then the Trots in the ground sing a
>very different tune: The social-fascist tune of "down with the People's
>War", "down with the Communist party" leading that very war!.  Why is that,

By the way you mis quote Lenin. He never says anything about "people's war".
That is a maoist pipedream. Lenin was always for working class independence
in all things including war. Especially turning imperials wars into


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

More information about the Marxism mailing list