Call to Avakianists: Defend Luis Arce Borja!

Maoist Internationalist Movement mim3 at
Mon Jun 3 15:34:37 MDT 1996

Sympathizing with Luis Arce Borja's Anger at Capitulation: A Call to
Those under Avakian's Sway

The purpose of this article is to start the process of understanding why Luis
Arce is angry with capitulation and why he wouldn't want something
counted as "ROL" (right opportunist line) when it was outright

Let us be clear that we do not want a response from Quispe about matters
of politics; cops should have no say. This is for those readers having a hard
time sorting out the political smokescreen that Quispe and others have
thrown out to hide their retreat into the Avakian/capitulator camp.

To confuse those with no knowledge of Maoism, Quispe makes it out like
AO and LAB divide the supporters of the People's War for no purpose.
They would like it to appear that these people are just angry for no reason,
the same way the CIA, SIN and FBI would tarnish AO and LAB. Yet
while Quispe does raise petty reasons for people to break with each other
(e.g. imagined "MIM profits" from PCP lit sales), Luis Arce Borja (LAB)
does not engage in such activity.

By way of example, read the A World to Win printed by the Co-RIM led
by the RCP-USA. In the most recent issue dated 1995 #21, the capitulators
have their documents included. Included amongst the statements (pp. 64-5)
are the following words:

"II. Basic Approach
1. Sign a peace agreement whose application would lead to the ending of
the war the country is experiencing.
2. End the people's war begun 17 May 1980, in all its four forms of
guerrilla actions. Disband the People's Guerrilla Army, destroying its arms
and combat material; likewise, dissolve the People's Committee and the
revolutionary base areas of the People's New Democratic Republic."

The Co-RIM calls the above "written in the latter part of 1993 by leaders
of the Right Opportunist Line." Comrades! We must put ourselves in the
shoes of Luis Arce Borja and the real successors of Comrade Norah!
Would you want your vote in a party to count equally with people who
propose its dissolution and laying down arms?! If not, then you are with us;
you are in the AO/LAB/MIM camp. It's not a matter of LAB being mean
or something psychological like that. People who put themselves on the
line don't want their efforts wasted by those who are abandoning the
struggle. Such capitulator people who said the above are NOT in any
Maoist party. Their vote doesn't count and they should have no say in the
internal discussions of the party.

At MIM we have a phrase for this. We ask: "is it in the Maoist ballpark?"
Is it ballpark? The above statement from the capitulators is a home-run for
counter-revolution. It's out of the ballpark and cannot be considered within
the party.

Right opportunists historically are retained in the party and made to go
through self-criticism measures. They are not purged. In the case of the
above capitulators, such self-criticism is not sufficient. They must leave.
Perhaps some of the people who signed on the document are really people
belonging to the democratic forces, but we do know for sure they are not

The only thing that can be said for the capitulators is that the RIM backed
them up with their call for saving Gonzalo "above all else" as the principal
task of the whole RIM and the centennial celebration of Mao. So
capitulators could claim they were following directions from the "emerging
international center."

Politically, the "MPP-USA" backed the RIM up by reprinting the RIM
document and refusing to retract or criticize it, which if anybody in Peru
picked it up, would have reasoned that the "emerging international center"
said it was OK to lay down arms, make any deal possible to leave the
country and work for the IEC as an example of how to save Gonzalo.

 Contrary to what some would say, MIM is focussing its fire on the
leadership of the so-called MPP-USA. We still call the duped comrade in
Australia "comrade;" even though we increasingly doubt his willingness to
sort out the genuine from the fake. (*)

 By the way, if we had taken the Australian comrade's way of thinking, we
would have been running around the last two years calling ourselves "the
red fraction of the RIM" and bragging often and loudly in public how the
PCP-CC endorsed MIM over RCP-USA and Quispe would be yelling
"Long Live the RCP Australia and Long Live MIM!" MIM did not take
that self-serving course, because as even the private letter to Quispe that
Quispe reprints says, we had doubts about Quispe's willingness to leave the
old spouse (RCP-USA) for the new spouse (MIM) and we had doubts
about Quispe more generally. Now those doubts are completely confirmed
as Quispe's mask is now to be loyal RCP-USA stalwart--endorsing all the
projects the capitulators and Avakian cooked up AFTER the arrest of
Gonzalo and puking on the genuine projects set up while Gonzalo was still


Postscript on MIM's "October 16, 1994" letter to "MPP-USA"

Quispe tries to present that letter as evidence that MIM supports
capitulation, because he needs to return to political issues to distract
attention from his fabrication of documents from various sources and his
attempt to split the MPPs. Yet, by printing our letter, Quispe is admitting
that all along MIM had the right idea to suspect him and be careful. That
letter refers to the RIM document calling for Gonzalo's life to be saved
"above all else," but once again Quispe makes no retraction or self-criticism
for distributing that document. Hence, even politically, Quispe is showing
the whole world why MIM distrusted Quispe. Now of course MIM has
nailed down the details that prove Quispe is a cop, so it goes beyond
political problems.

The letter also says, "There is no one in MIM that would oppose the PCP's
expelling comrades who advocating laying down arms in principle." Quispe
has thus shown the whole world that as of October 16, 1994, MIM was
already exerting a correct line. To this day, the RCP-USA and Co-RIM
hold no such position. They call blatant capitulators "right opportunist" so
as to keep them in the party.

The same letter Quispe points to as evidence against MIM also excludes
"that handful of individuals who are police agents or provocateurs" from
consideration as part of the PCP--just as Luis Arce Borja is telling us

Let us also remember that the letter in question was just two months after
Quispe said at a public meeting that the letters were real. So anyone who
wants to accuse MIM on this score better go back to Quispe and his claim
at that time to be representing the PCP-CC to MIM. Also, in the case of
the Australian dupe of Quispe who criticizes us for one sentence, which
came from Quispe himself--such a comrade should look at how he is still
supporting Quispe and the many capitulators he has supported as a matter
of infiltration.

On November 3, 1994, MIM said the following about Quispe, a prediction
which turned out perfectly true: "It looks like you are using us to 'reform'
the RCP. Well, we are not going to get on board with someone who is
going to lead us back to the RCP!!! . . . You could be getting this material
>from us to lead us back to the RCP." All along, MIM predicted Quispe
would be headed back to the RCP. The only thing we can add now is that
while that is where his political masks led him, it is still only a political
mask for a cop.

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list