Gina-Adolfo polemic

Chris, London 100423.2040 at compuserve.com
Sun Jun 2 01:37:27 MDT 1996


Adolfo has said twice previously that he will have nothing to
do with Gina except on his terms. His credibility is further at
stake by this polemic.

As a l'st member I welcomed at least that Gina quoted the March
statement from Adolfo and Borja so it was possible to see quietly
where they are coming from.

As for Gina trying to pinpoint the problem as one of ideological
defeatism, I think it is a bit different from that but I think I
can see why she puts it that way.

The PCP suffered a serious blow in the early 90's with the capture
of its main leaders. This may happen to any revolutionary organisation.
Its enemy then from a position of strength tries to make out that
those leaders are prepared to talk to it on its terms. This is all
part of the battle. What response to make?

Now as I understand it the PCP line, as forwarded by
New Flag, never gets itself into a position of implying that
genuine revolutionaries would under all circumstances refuse to
talk with their captors, and says that yes of course there was
debate, no doubt extensive debate, within the party, about
whether to believe and what to do about the reported statements
of Guzman. That I understand is why Quispe insists that it cannot
all be dismissed as a police plot.

Adolfo I suggest however approaches the challenge as one in which
the ideological approach of the cultural revolution should be
used in a loose international network of support groups. On the one
hand the intensity of the approach implies that it is an unthinkable
disaster if any member or supporter of the party, incorrectly
considers the possibility of peace negotiations. From that point of view
I can see why
Gina suggests the call of the WMC comes over as defeatist.
>From the other point of view Adolfo and colleagues' approach is to
see the challenge as an opportunity to intensify ideological struggle
and unmask all those people in prominent positions whose wavering
showed them to be contaminated with the ideas of the bourgeoisie and
imperialism.

Considering that Mao himself came to the view that the Cultural Revolution
was 30% bad in conditions in which the Chinese Party had been in
power 25 years, it seems to me from the outside that these methods
are much more disruptive to a movement of international solidarity
inadequately funded and organised, with communications with
the mother party weak and under attack. But this will all
come out in the wash.

The statement by the PSC/Detroit is a striking illustration of the effects.
Although much of what happens on this list could be seen as froth, here
there is evidence of how the interchanges have almost led to the
split of a support committee. Although the statement is brief, it is
likely to have taken at least several evenings to hammer out, time
taken away from other work. No wonder the Financial Times thought
it newsworthy to carry Simon Strong's recent piece about a war of
words had broken out on the internet between "Shining Path" supporters.

For the sake of the l'st but also for the sake of PCP supporters
themselves, I would again request that protagonists cool it. Let
Adolfo argue the case and gather support for the WMC, and draw his lines
of demarcation. Let Quispe continue to report on information from
the PCP. Everyone knows that Adolfo and supporters mistrust him totally.
He, they, and we, will have to live with that. Is it so unbearable?


Chris
London.


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




More information about the Marxism mailing list