Godena on Gina's Response to the WMC

Louis R Godena louisgodena at ids.net
Mon Jun 3 10:21:37 MDT 1996


 Gina, on Monday, June 3rd, you wrote

... the WMC is much more
>focused on fighting against "fake supporters" of the PCP and the
>People's War than it is on either defeating the ideology that leads
>to capitulation, or to doing general work among the masses to
>spread understanding and support for the Peruvian revolution.

I see the work of the WMC encompassing all of those objectives
simultaneously; they cannot be separated.    Doing "general work" among the
"masses", by its very nature, is a struggle against the anarchism/trotskyism
of MIM, Avakian, and the New Flag.    The trajectory of "ultra-leftism" is
always the same, and has been since the days of the Russian Socialist
Revolutionaries; left opportunism always in the end leads to capitulation.


>No, not a few hours, Lou, it was a couple of weeks, in early april if
>I'm not mistaken.

Yes, Gina, as a matter of fact you are mistaken.    The WMC Call was issued
on March 28th; you had already endorsed it when you showed up in Rhode
Island on the evening of the 29th.

Yes, I was jazzed by the anti-Avakian stand it
>took.

Yes, Gina, you were.    I remember that; I also recall discussing with you
that the "anti-Avakian" "stand" was not the gist of the Call, though it
represented an important component of it.    The thrust of the WMC is to
BROADEN support for the People's War and to pick up the flag of the support
movement from where it has fallen into the clutches of opportunists and
traffickers like MIM, Avakian, and "Quispe".

(You will remember that PSC/Detroit added a paragraph
>indicting the RCP-USA as the representative of the "2 line struggle"
>hoax in the US) That focus blinded me to the shortcomings of the
>call itself, and when I re-read the call a month later, those
>shortcomings stood out sharply.

Perhaps, Gina, you should not have waited a "month" to "re-read" it.    Your
excuses sound a little disingenuous.

>Also, the manner in which the main representative of WMC on this
>list,Adolfo Oleachea, handled the questions that were raised about
>the line and leadership of the WMC showed me that something was
>indeed very wrong with its focus.

So you signed a document a few hours after it was released knowing nothing
about its "line and leadership", only bringing up the matter a "month" or so
later.    This sounds a little like adventurism.



>I certainly agree that broadening support for the People's War and the
>PCP is the key task of all those who want to see justice in the world,
>especially those who want to see world proletarian revolution.  That is
>precisely where I see the shortcomings of the WMC: it is much too
>narrowly focused on one issue: defeating the "2-line struggle over
>peace talks" hoax.

Again, Gina, the movement against the two-line struggle, against the
opportunists and traffickers, against those who would turn the struggle of
the PCP into a Cult of Scientology with a High Priest and Infallible
Doctrines, all of this cannot be separated from the struggle to BROADEN
SUPPORT FOR THE PEOPLE'S WAR
>
>The focus of support work needs to be on the LINE and IDEOLOGY
>of the PCP: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; and on the
>events on the ground that they lead and are responsible for bringing
>into being: the political and military advances of the People's War, and
>the building of the New Power in the countryside; the preparation for
>the seizure of power throughout the country.

Without reaching out to the broad masses in the West and elsewhere, to
progressives, communists, the working class, this is just empty
sloganeering.

>To attempt to "expose" and "unmask" the "fake supporters" without
>promoting these things is doomed to failure. Not only will it NOT
>defeat those whose support is only skin deep, or is covering more
>opportunist or even sinister motives; it will inevitably point the finger
>at many whose errors have nothing to do with how genuine is their
>support for the People's War in Peru and for the world revolution.
>That, in my opinion, is what we have seen borne out on this list
>very vividly in the past two months.

Gina, in a very important sense, the Call of the WMC, far from being "doomed
to failure" has already accomplished a number of salutary exercises,
including unmasking "Quispe" and his so-called New Flag.    First Avakian,
and now "Quispe".    Gina, you need to choose your allegiances more
carefully.

>Did I miss something?  Wasn't Red Star Books his own organization,
>the precursor of Committee Sol Peru in London?  What would be the
>problem with them publishing his essay?

You're thinking of Red Star Information Bureau.    Red Star Books are
published in the US, wholly independent of Oleachea.

>Sorry, Lou, but Oleachea himself has characterized his concern as
>beingover "plagerism", i.e. bourgeois property rights to intellectual
>property.  He was not concerned that Janet Talavera (who gave her
>young life for the revolution) be credited for her role in the "Interview
>With Chairman Gonzalo", just his colleague in the WMC, Luis Arce
>Borja.  That's not simply a principled concern for proper attribution.

Gina, it was Luis Arce Borja and Janet  Talavera who conducted the interview
with President Gonzalo.   Oleachea only pointed out Luis Arce's role after
"Quispe" took it upon himself to publish excerpts without giving proper
credit. In fact, the impression was created that it was "Quispe" himself who
did the interview--this at a time when he was a paid employee of the PCP's
most bitter enemy on the left--and while carrying on a sustained campaign of
slander against Luis Arce on this list and elsewhere.

>I don't know what you're looking at to come up with that characterization.
>I see exerpts from PCP documents, news briefs about the military actions
>of the People's War, analysis of the political and economic situation in
>Peru, an article about the imperialist hand in ex-Yugoslavia, one about
>the role of women in the revolution, focusing on Comrade Norah, an
>interview with Luis Arce Borja, and letters from many parts of the world.
>Frankly, I didn't see a single wide-eyed fanatic in there.
>
There is practically nothing in New Flag to relate the struggle being waged
by the PCP IN PERU, NOT IN QUEENS, with the struggles of the American
working class.   It is more or less a collection of "news"--many months old
and culled from the reactionary Peruvian press--badly translated PCP
documents,  semi-literate "editorials" by "Quispe" (encompassing everything
>from trotskyism, anarchism, and New Age), and distortions and even outright
forgeries of "letters" and other documents.    It is about on the level, as
a useful political document, with Rupert Murdoch's Weekly World News, and
not nearly as entertaining.

I will repeat what I said in my earlier post:
The workers in the US, atleast here in New England, are not maoist
revolutionaries; they are ordinary
people who want to be told the truth about what is happening in a
cogent,respectful, and understanding way.   That is the role that a magazine
like New Flag needed to fill.

As for Chris "B".   We all remember his taking a series of sound thrashings
>from AO a while back.   He has gone off to sulk and now returns, in his
familiar garb as "objective observer", to become an ally of "Quispe".    If
AO had not exposed this swindler,  Mr Burford would have had no use for
"Quispe" at all.




          Louis Godena



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




More information about the Marxism mailing list