1/4 Comrade Adolfo's & others' mistakes on 4-Gang

Rolf Martens rolf.martens at mailbox.swipnet.se
Sun Jun 16 19:49:34 MDT 1996


1/4 Comrade Adolfo's & others' mistakes on 4-Gang  [Sent.17.06.96]


Hello, comrade Adolfo Olaechea,

In your posting on Mon 10 June '96 on the question of the=20
so-called Gang of Four in China, subject "GANG OF FIVE IS=20
AVAKIAN'S THEORY AND AN OBVIOUS SMOKE SCREEN", you rightly=20
oppose the reactionary lie that Mao Zedong teamed up with the=20
four individuals Jiang Qing, Zhang Chunqiao, Wang Hongwen and=20
Yao Wenyuan against the whole of the Communist Party of China.

But you make a number of other assertions in which some rather
serious errors show up, errors which unfortunately are typical of=20
more or less the entire "Peru-centred" Marxist-Leninist (or Maoist,=20
as you prefer calling it) movement of today and which I, as one
small "still-floating piece of wreckage", so to speak, of the=20
European and international Marxist-Leninist movement of some=20
20 or more years ago, absolutely see it as an important task for=20
me to criticize and, as far as I can, help the comrades correct.

It's really a good thing that those errors showed up, so that now
I and others too can take some pot shots at them and everybody
including yourself can see that they're there. They're not so much
your "private property", I think, as having in one way or other to do
with those weaknesses that there are in the entire ideology of the
PCP, the party that you're one of the best-known and - justly so,
I hold - most respected supporters and representatives of abroad.

The fact that the cops, too, can see those things and our
differences on them IMO is no big drawback to our airing them
openly, since they've certainly known about them for a long time=20
anyway and hardly can find any better way of exploiting them
just because they're out in the open. Our friends need to see them,
not least in connection with the present efforts at setting up the
WMC.

The call which was issued in March of this year, for the setting=20
up of a World Mobilisation Commission (WMC) to defend the
revolution in Peru, in my opinion was an important initiative by=20
you and by comrade Luis Arce Borja and the other comrades=20
concerned in Great Britain and Belgium. I endorsed that call in
the same month and will continue do all I can to contribute towards=20
the successful realization and development of this Commission.=20
One of its tasks, as proposed, is to convene a conference to
unite all genuine supporters abroad, whether Marxist or not, of the
people's war in Peru. Another is "to defend Maoism as the new,=20
third, and superior stage of Marxism, within the context of Marxism-
Leninism-Maoism taken as a unity in development".

This second one is a task of no small dimensions. It entails nothing
less than giving guidance to the international proletariat and the
oppressed peoples in their struggle to overthrow the bourgeoisie
and put an end to imperialism in the whole world. Since many=20
decades back, there has existed no international body genuinely
striving to do that. Let's contribute towards establishing one now.
Let's unite with all forces that can be united with to do this.

We all know that in the circumstances, the setting up of a really
reliable such body is quite difficult, because of the present extreme
scarcity of consistent proletarian revolutionary forces. There seem
to be, at the most, only very few parties in the world at present
which one could call genuinely Marxist-Leninist (or Maoist). Your
statement on this list some weeks ago that if there in the whole of
North America, for instance, were as many as "two or three"=20
"genuine Maoists", that would be fine, in my opinion absolutely
was a perceptive and realistic assessment of how, approximately,=20
things in this respect stand today.=20

That reservation has to be made of course that, because of the quite=20
fanatical efforts by the reactionaries since many decades back to cut=20
the geniunely revolutionary forces in the world off from each other and
to encircle and suppress them with layers upon layers of arch-
reactionary phoney"Marxist" ones - the black gang of our "old friend"
Quishpie Quashpie in the USA is only one of them - there may be=20
quite a number of such genuine forces which the supporters of the call=20
for the WMC so far haven't been able to contact.  =20

In issuing the call for the WMC, you and the other comrades in fact
are making a bid to escape from that reactionary prison in which
you and others have been contained for more than a decade, the=20
so-called "RIM", which was put together in 1984 by Avakian and his=20
friends and by those reactionary intelligence services which=20
somehow were (and are) behind this whole thing and which in one=20
way or another have manipulated those people and managed to
deceive others and lead them seriously astray. =20

You may not today agree with my assertion that the "RIM" was a
prison from its very beginning and, on the part of its initiators, not
at all intended to prepare for a genuine International but precisely
intended to prevent one, by the setting up of a trap. But I can prove
to all comrades that it was a prison, a trap, all along. My 12.08.94
article "Why Does the RIM Help U.S. Imperialism Encircle the=20
PCP?", which was posted on the Net on 01.01.96 as "UNITE!
Info #3en", already contains some rather conclusive proof of this,
I hold.=20

This article above all points  to the reactionary character of the=20
very basic document of the "RIM", its "Declaration" of 1984, which=20
has since been translated into more than 20 languages and which=20
vilely attacks the brilliantly correct proletarian revolutionary line of=20
Chairman Mao and tries to pass the Avakianists' distortion of it as=20
the line which the international proletariat and the oppressed
peoples should follow. I also already have written certain other
things, i.a. containing information which the reactionaries=20
obviously have succeeded in suppressing for a long time and
witholding from most comrades in the movement of today, in
order to make this fact about the "RIM" even clearer. I've done all I=20
can to try to contact the leading comrades of the PCP in Peru in=20
order to urge them to investigate once more the "RIM Declaration"=20
and cease the PCP's erroneous endorsement of that reactionary=20
document.

The attempt at reversing the correct verdict, of now almost 20
years ago, in China and in the entire world, on the counter-
revolutionary Gang of Four in China in fact is one of the
cornerstones of Avakianism, which is very closely connectedthe ideology of=
=20
that phoney"leftist" Gang. We need
to keep that ideology, as far as at all possible, out of the WMC.=20
The proletariat absolutely has no need for another "RIM" or "MIM",
such as, working our way further backwards through the alfabet, we
might end up with if we don't take care, a "HIM" or a "GFIM", say:
the "Hopelessly Internationalism-free Movement" or the "Gang-of-
Four-ist Infernal Machination". We need to move forwards.

In commenting in detail on your posting, where should I begin?
"'Where shall I begin?', the Walrus said. - 'Begin at the beginning,
go on to the end, then stop'." I think in this case I'll do approximately=20
the opposite and begin with some of the things you wrote towards=20
the end of your posting and which seem to be main points in what=20
you're arguing. Here, first, are=20


MY MAIN POINTS OF CRITICISM (POINTS =A41. - =A46.):=20


=A41.	You're saying that the question of the character of the Gang
	of Four led by Jiang Qing has "not" been settled in the
	international communist movement, in the same manner in
	which e.g. the question of Trotskyism has been settled.=09

	But certainly it *has* been settled. It was settled, very=20
	decisively, both in China itself and in the international=20
	Marxist-Leninist movement, some 20 years ago. The=20
	evidence was and still is overwhelming.=20

	The problems which we're confronted with today in this
	respect are due to the fact that, firstly, the defeat of the=20
	Gang's phoney"left" revisionism was very soon followed
	by the - temporary - victory of the Deng Xiaoping / Hua=20
	Guofeng openly-Rightist revisionism for which it had helped
	prepare the ground in China, and secondly, that the
	imperialists and their Avakianist agents later have tried to
	reopen the case, utilizing the isolation of the various=20
	revolutionary forces in different parts of the world from each
	other and massively suppressing the information which the
	movement of the mid-'70:s, later largely smashed into pieces
	with only small parts remaining, precisely in connection with
	the 1976-78 overthrow of socialism in China, did possess,
	so that, obviously, most comrades today simply are unaware
	of the most elementary historical facts in this connection.

	That's why I, who happen to know these historical facts and
	have access to the vital documents from which all comrades=20
	can ascertain the truth in this matter, have started (beginning
	on 13.05.96) to post a series on them, entitled "'The Four'
	& events in China 1976". You may not have read the items
	or all of them so far. I'll mail them to you, including the items
	(11) - (12) which I've just recently posted.=09


=A42.	At the same time as you're saying that the issue of the
	4-Gang "hasn't been settled", you also say that in your=20
	opinoin, it's "unjust to label" Jiang Qing, the leader of that
	Gang, as a counter-revolutionary "because of her 'Left'
	tendencies".=20

	Besides being inconsistent, this is an erroneous
	judgement on your part. You only advance one argument
	in favour of it:, Jiang Qing's "defence of Mao Zedong"
	when she was no longer in a position of power but was
	"put on trial" in late 1980 by the then ruling contending
	revisionist clique, that of Deng Xiaoping. This by no
	means can reverse the verdict on Jiang Qing, whose
	counter-revolutionary crimes were committed when she
	*was* in a position of power and to whom a pretence at
	the later, of course likewise phoney "trial", of "defending
	Mao" didn't cost much.
=09
	Here one must ask you: Are you really unaware of the=20
	massive evidence on the counter-revolutionary character=20
	of the 4-Gang? You yourself have correctly characterized
	as "jesuitical" the standpoint of "denying the evidence in
	front of people's eyes". You're old enough, I believe, to have
	followed the 1976 events in China on the hand of reports
	from various sources, more reliable or less, and to have
	noted the massive condemnation of the 4-Gang also by
	the international Marxist-Leninist movement of that time.

	Despite this, I cannot in fairness accuse you of "denying the
	evidence in front of your eyes". But I do urge you to study
	my postings, where very concrete evidence is now brought,=20
	and also to consult such other sources as may be available=20
	to you, on this matter.=20


=A43.	You're saying - if I understand you correctly; I'll quote your
	exact statements below - that I shouldn't now be publicly
	putting forward the issue of the real character of the Gang of=20
	Four as an important one at this stage.=20

	But it *is* an important one, precisely today. This isn't my
	fault. I on my part during more than a decade saw no reason
	at all to engage in any discussion about it, since I was unaware
	of the very existence on the "RIM" until 1992 and only then read
	some documents from the PCP, in which, as I saw,=20
	propaganda was made in favour of the long-since-refuted
	4-Gang, or of two of its infamous members, to be more precise.

	In my posting (12) on the 4-Gang, you'll see some of the many
	statements by such parties and other organizations all over the
	world at the time, end of October etc 1976, with which the then 	Communist=
=20
Party of China maintained relations, congratulating=20
	Hua Guofeng on his assuming the post as Chairman and on the=20
	great victory by the CPC and the Chinese people over the Gang=20
	of Four.=20

	Among them is a statement by the PCP, too - at least, that's what=20
	the Peking Review issue No. 52/1976 maintains. Now the PCP=20
	of later years has maintained that the leadership of that party at 	that=20
time was opportunist. But I've seen no documents whatsoever=20
	by comrade Gonzalo's later leadership of the PCP arguing the 	       =20
correctness of that attempt at reversing the earlier verdict on=20
        the Gang of Four which they've supported and are continuing to=20
	support to this day.

	In fact the PCP, publicly and for more than 12 years, and in later
	years in more than 20 languages, has been supporting the
	Avakianists' attempts at reversing the correct verdict on the
	Gang of Four, through its continued endorsement of the 1984
	"RIM Declaration" where this is being made, which is just as bad
	as if some comrades were to support attempts at reversing the
	correct verdict on Trotskyism or on, say, on the revisionism of
	Bernstein, Kautsky, Khrushchov, Liu Shaoqi, Lin Biao or Hodxa.

	It's the PCP comrades and, with them, many comrades who
	support the PCP, who're publicly raising the question of the
	counter-revolutionary, long-since refuted Gang of Four. I'm not
	the one who's raised that question. By its support of that Gang,=20
	the PCP, at the same time as it's leading a people's war=20
	against the reactionary regime in Peru and thus is giving fire=20
	support to the struggle of the entire international proletariat=20
	and the other oppressed peoples, in fact also is mistakenly=20
	directing some of its fire precisely at its allies in the world.

	Under those circumstances, what should I - who as an=20
	adherent of the ideology of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong=20
	must consider myself to be responsible to the proletariat here=20
	in Sweden (where there's no Marxist-Leninist party) and to the
	international proletariat as well - try to do? I obviously have=20
        to shout, as loudly as I can, firstly: "TAKE COVER! WE'RE BEING
	FIRED ON BY SOME OF OUR ALLIES!" and, secondly: "PCP COMRADES,=20
   SOME OF YOUR SHELLS ARE LANDING ON OUR POSITIONS - PLEASE=20
IMMEDIATELY STOP THIS!"

	So, concerning that point in your posting, I'll reply to you of
	course that I certainly will *not* stop shouting this. And I also=20
	must tell you that this "criticism" of yours against me, even if=20
	stated, as it was, in quite polite terms, was totally misdirected.=20
	I ask you, comrade Adolfo, please turn it around 180 degrees=20
	as soon as you possibly can!=20

[Continued in part 2/4]








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




More information about the Marxism mailing list