REPORT FROM NEW FLAG SICK BAY: AFTER VOMITING, NOW DIARROEAH!

hariette spierings hariette at easynet.co.uk
Fri May 3 12:51:00 MDT 1996


NEW FLAG IMPOSTORS ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH "BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ARGUMENT"


>From the report of Rolf Martens in Malmo:
>>
The clique led by Mr. T.P. ..... disseminated a leaflet and a
small pamphlet. The leaflet contained an undated but obviously recent
so-called "statement" by "CoRIM" ....pretended to "support" the initiation
of people's war in Nepal and the armed struggle of the Peruvian people. The
"CoRIM"

To which Quispe's sidekick answers:

>The PCP has not officially withdraw from RIM nor the largest organizations
>did (Turkish, Nepal, etc.). Our communique published in this list call for
>the development of the struggle within RIM to overthrow the opportunist
>leadership of Co-RIM. It is pur revolutionary duty to support the
>still incipient armed struggle in Nepal. To distribute the Co-RIM
>statement should be condenmed. That's our position.

Clear enough then!  Quispe is for developing STRUGGLE WITHIN RIM.  However
these people themselves have expressed that "without the PCP RIM is nothing"
(New Flag).  So who are they to develop "struggle" with? With Bobby Avakian
and no other over a glass of sherry no doubt!

The Turkish Party, the Nepalese Party are AGAINST Co-Rim and for a World
Mobilisation Commission, as are all sincere revolutionaries an enemies of
revisionism.

However, in the middle of all that "diarreah" is good to know finally what
the "wrigglers" at New Flag have as a political line: Develop struggle
within Co-RIM - because that is all that RIM is organically at present.

But that is not the position of Chairman Gonzalo and PCP who since October
1986 already said:

".....we reaffirm ourselves in the line adopted at the IV National
Conference of the PCP of October 86 about developing our action as a
fraction WITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT so that
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, be the leading and guiding
ideology of world revolution.......WE ARE FOR THE RECONSTITUTION OF THE
COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL and we consider the RIM as a step in that direction,
a step that will be useful on that account, PROVIDED RIM SUSTAINS ITSELF ON
A JUST AND CORRECT IDEOLOGICAL LINE".

So now Mssrs Quispe&Ccorimanya have to twist again to justify continuing to
struggle within an organisation that sustains itself on a line they have
themselves labelled as REVISIONIST.

On the other hand, the World Mobilisation Commission precisely carries
forward Chairman Gonzalo's and PCP International Line by aiming to take
concrete steps towards the reconstitution of the COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL and
the MPP - the real one and not Quispe's phonies - are properly acting to
develop their ACTION AS A FRACTION WITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT.

More "wriggling" from NF:



Martens Report:

>> here once more repeated its lie about a "two-line struggle" within the
>> PCP concerning the infamous "peace accord" hoax, once more trying to
>> cover up the fact that this hoax from beginning to end was a plot by the
>> intelligence services the SIN and the CIA.
> In their (OWN) pamphlet the T.P. clique, under the name of "MPP, Sweden",
>> which however comrades here have informed me is a phoney
>> designation, once more touched on the "peace accord" hoax, now
>> saying it was *both* an intelligence service plot *and* a "Right
>> opportunist  line", with which the intelligence service "cooperated"
>> - but this is only an "improved" version of the same old lie.


To which, the "half dozen of this, half dozen of the other" "maoists" reply:

>To say that the "contrarrevolutionary hoax" is a 100% police hoax is a 100%
stupidity.  (Ccorimanya)

Now you will notice that the words COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY HOAX are put by
Ccorimanya in inverted commas.  So now it turns out it is only a "kind of a
hoax", a "semi-hoax", just like Avakian is "a kind of revisionist" and a
"semi-revisionist".


-------------- next part --------------
QUISPE'S "NEW CONCOCTION" - "FUJIMORI'S "PEACE LETTERS" FRAUD = POLICE PLOT+TWO LINE STRUGGLE  - OR THE HALF AND A HALF SOLUTION OF:

'The opportunist, because of his very nature, always avoids approaching problems definitely and precisely.  He seeks the aggregate result. He wriggles like a snake between mutually exclusive points of view. He makes efforts 'to agree' with both sides of every argument, while reducing his differences to small amendments, doubts, innocent good wishes, etc., etc.'
V.I. Lenin, One Step Forward Two Steps Back, February-May 1904.

To counter the shameless new reactionary plot hatched by a handful of adveturers and mountebanks working to defend Fujimori's "Peace Letters Plot" as "partly police plot, partly two line struggle", Committee Sol Peru here republishes part of an article by Luis Arce Borja, the Editor of El Diario IN PERU and IN BRUSSELS which deal magisterialy with this issue.  Any one who wants a complete version, please E-Mail us a request.  

 (EXTRACTS FROM IN DEFENSE OF THE PERUVIAN REVOLUTION by: Luis Arce Borja)



TWO-LINE STRUGGLE OR COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY FRAUD?


It is a mistake to hold that the 'peace letters' belong in essence to a process of two-line struggle within the CPP.  This question is erroneously formulated. The analysis of the leading Committee of RIM is trundling in the wrong direction.  The assertion that the 'peace letters' are a product of the 'two-line struggle' within the CPP falls into the following deviations and dangers:

1. 	If one considers the 'peace letters' as an external manifestation of contradictions within the CPP, one is denying that these are in reality but a montage set-up by the Peruvian regime and US Imperialism.  Thus, this fraud is given the category of an inner Party contradiction.  If one is to adopt this position, it then becomes logical to draw the conclusion that it is not right to treat this as a police plot.  That one should demand, as the leaders of RIM do, to be 'cautious and restrained' in dealing with this problem.  In this fashion, one would not only be overlooking Fujimori's fraud, but also the counter-revolutionary and criminal aims of the 'peace agreement'.  To hold that the 'peace agreement' is part of a process of internal conflict within the CPP, portrays it as an organisation corroded by an scandalous division, an organisation divided and undermined and on the very verge of destruction.  This point of view is similar to that of the die-hard enemies of the revolution.  Merely as an example we are going to quote a 'senderologist' and visceral enemy of the CPP:

"Internal documents of the terrorist organisation reveal that the factional struggle between those who support the Peace Agreement and those who support Feliciano is ending with a clear victor: Abimael Guzm?n". (3)

Now, consciously or unconsciously, the leaders of RIM are sliding into the bog of conciliation with the enemies of the People's War in Peru.  This conciliation is evident, not only in the content of the documents we have mentioned, but also in their attitude of keeping at arms length from the struggle against the so called 'Peace Agreement' fraud.  Here lies the explanation for the protracted silence that the leaders of RIM have been keeping for over a year.

2. 	The leaders of RIM are confusing a police plot with a two-line struggle.  In history we can find many cases of revolutionaries having to face frauds concocted by experts in anti-insurgency struggle.  The most elementary manual of counter-insurgency procedures shows the two main methods for destroying a communist organisation or a revolutionary process.  The first method is to use violence and outright repression.  This method makes use of the military superiority and the ample resources of the state.  The second method uses the system of psychological warfare. It makes use of the enormous publicity machine in the hands of the reactionary state. This method aims at weakening and undermining the ideological and organisational capacity of the party leading the revolution. Its objectives are: Dividing, disorganising and slandering the revolutionary organisation, isolating it from the masses while generating capitulationism.  Usually, psychological warfare makes use of infiltrated agents within the party, or renegades and turncoats that have gone over to the ranks of the enemy.  Both methods are generally used in combination within a single counter-insurgency strategy.

It is an ideological and political error not to differentiate between a police plot and a two-line struggle. What is the gist of the 'peace letters'?  Where and how were these concocted?.  The 'peace letters' were fabricated in the offices of the Intelligence Service of the Peruvian state (SIN).  These letters did not originate in any Party organism, nor are these the product of any internal process of debate within the Communist Party of Peru.  It is an error to hold, as the leaders of RIM do, that this is 'a two-line struggle within the ranks of the Communist Party of Peru'.  The authors of these letters are functionaries of SIN, police agents, high ranking army officers, and specialists from the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  A police plot is not the same thing as an inner party struggle. The fact that some capitulators have participated in the elaboration and distribution of this montage, does not make this a two-line struggle within the CPP.                  

To illustrate this point we shall refer to certain instances in history where police plots have been notoriously used.  Between 1901 and 1904, the people's revolutionary movement in Russia was in full swing.  Then the Czarist police organised within the proletariat's ranks several bogus workers' organisations.  The brains behind this scheme was police Colonel Zubatov. Although these organisms claimed to be working class they were in fact led by police agents. Their aim was to arrest the growing influence of the revolutionary social democrats upon the workers and oppressed masses.  Later, also in Russia, this time in 1917, another plot was hatched: Lenin arrived in Petrograd in the German sealed train.  Then, all the enemies of the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks and the provisional government itself took the opportunity for a furious campaign to depict Lenin as 'a German imperialist agent'.  Four months later, in July, the Kerensky government issued an order to arrest Lenin and charged him with 'treason'.  The objective of this plot was to undermine the prestige of the Bolsheviks and to assassinate the great leader of the October revolution.

In Peru, police frauds can be counted by the dozen. Since 1980, different Peruvian regimes have included within their counter-insurgency policies the fabrication of lies against the CPP and the People's War.  Among the most widespread fabrications we shall mention three in particular: The first is the lie that links the CPP to the international drug dealing gangs. The second is the portrayal of the Maoists as brutal and bloodthirsty murderers of the people: They accuse the CPP of being a fanatic sect led by lunatics. The third lie refers to the so-called 'internal weaknesses of Shining Path', specifically its ideological weakness. All kinds of fabrications are put in motion purporting to show that the CPP is an organisation on the verge of collapse due to 'intense internal struggle'. All this slander is based on sheer lies while promoting different personalities who contribute to lend credibility to these farcical charges. Here, propaganda is used as the principal means in attempting to destabilise the Party.  The strategic aim is the same as that of the military actions directed against the revolution.

3.	The leaders of RIM hold that the 'peace agreement' is a two-line struggle.  By doing this, they cast aside the analysis and position of the CPP's  Central Committee in relation to this issue.  The CPP, by means of various documents, characterised and denounced the 'peace letters' as vile slander fabricated by the Fujimori regime and by US imperialism.  There is nothing that can justify contradicting the Party that is leading the People's War, especially if we consider that their analysis was carried out in the very field of operations, at the very centre of the fray. One of these CPP documents, dated February 1994, clearly states the following:

"The purported letters presented by Fujimori, the bogus international telephone call, and all other subsequent concoctions are counter-revolutionary plots.  These are fabricated by US imperialism and the mass-murderers quisling dictatorship in combination with the sinister actions of the black gang of turncoats.  This plot is aimed at winning elections, to impede the celebration of the Centenary of Chairman Mao in December and to cover-up the Cantuta scandal.  These are its immediate aims.  Its essential objectives are the defeat of the People's War.  In this context, they are continuing their plans to assassinate Chairman Gonzalo.  We must denounce, condemn and smash the black gang who are promoting revisionism and capitulation.  We must point out that they are a group of infiltrated agents, turncoats, capitulators and rotten old revisionists. This handful of traitors are a group directly linked to the reactionary camp'. (4)

Since the presentation of the first letter (October 1993), the Central Committee of the CPP has decidedly fought against the 'peace agreement' plot.  This struggle took place at both national and international level.  In Peru, the emphasis was on strengthening the development of the People's War and on unmasking the individuals who from inside the prisons were appealing for capitulation.  Abroad, precise directives were issued:  To oppose those individuals members of the black gang working in Sweden, Paris, Germany and Mexico.  To stop them peddling the 'peace letters' and the purported telephone instructions by Chairman Gonzalo.  Why are the 'investigators' of RIM ignoring these facts?.  

To understand the 'peace agreement' and its political and repressive implications, any person or political group must consider the position of the Central Committee of the CPP.  It is not possible to overlook the solid reasons of the organisation carrying out the armed struggle in practice, the principal protagonist in this conflict. Those who, while proclaiming themselves of the Left, fail to take on board the position of the CPP, inevitably slide into opportunism.  It is worth noting what Lenin said about the manner in which opportunism approaches problems:

'The opportunist, because of his very nature, always avoids approaching problems definitely and precisely.  He seeks the aggregate result. He wriggles like a snake between mutually exclusive points of view. He makes efforts 'to agree' with both sides of every argument, while reducing his differences to small amendments, doubts, innocent good wishes, etc., etc.'. (5) 

4.	 To promote at international level the view that the 'peace agreement' is a 'two-line struggle' within the CPP, leads directly into the camp of the enemies of the Peruvian revolution.  The foreign media, at the service of the imperialist powers, permanently make propaganda about a purported 'division of Shining Path into two factions'.  According to them, 'one is led by Feliciano and is a diehard ultra-Left line' and the other is headed by the 'peace loving Gonzalo'. This propaganda is aimed at slandering the CPP and at isolating it internationally.  To isolate the Party in the face of all the imperialists powers of the world.  In Peru, the armed struggle is the centre and the highest expression of the class struggle, leaving no room for doubt about the revolution's continuation. Thanks to the scope of the revolution, in Peru it was not difficult to smash this plot very rapidly.
    
The international movement of support and solidarity with the People's War abroad, however, is characterised by an uneven level of development.  This movement is composed by communists and non-communists, by friends and sympathizers, Maoists and non-Maoists, and even by the advanced masses of the Third World.  Its development has a wave character and its prospects depend directly upon the strength of the revolutionary process in Peru. Experience confirms that there is a close link between cause and effect, between the people's war and the international tasks of support.  In this field, proletarian internationalist action is still in its beginnings.  It is easy to fall into idleness and to become demoralised. Any setback of the revolution, and even the imperialist propaganda itself generates doubts and suspicions.  Basing ourselves upon this reality, the way of dealing with the 'peace letters' should be unequivocal.  Those who speak of 'two-line struggle' only impede the struggle against the capitulators.  Thus the erroneous position of the leaders of RIM confuses and spreads doubt among the less advanced sections of the people at the international level.

5. 	Reducing the affair of the 'peace letters' to a two-line struggle within the CPP amounts to opting out, avoiding to take up a position and evading the struggle against Fujimori's fraud.  Basing oneself upon this false premise, one ends up conciliating with all those in Peru and abroad who are promoting the 'peace agreement'. The tactics of keeping silent is a conciliators' charter, its ideological and political roots are to be found in opportunism and revisionism.  In this fashion, those individuals in Europe and America who are distributing the documents about the 'peace agreement' are allowed to cause maximum damage.  If we consider the 'peace letters' as a problem of 'two-line struggle' we cannot but conclude that this is a purely internal affair of the Communist Party of Peru.  We must conclude that this is a case in which it is better not to meddle.  A problem in which, as the leaders of RIM assert, we should not interfere 'irresponsibly'.

What conclusion can we draw from the idea floated by the RIM investigators of 'not acting irresponsibly' and that we should merely take up investigation?.  Following their example, there would be no reason to struggle against the 'peace agreement'.  We should wait for the outcome of their investigations.  Meanwhile, it would not have been correct to launch attacks against the gang that is distributing the 'peace letters' abroad. It would have been even less correct to brand them as Fujimori agents and capitulators.  We should not have defended the Peruvian revolution.  We should have remained silent while the media was portraying Chairman Gonzalo as a vulgar politician trading off the People's War.  According to the point of view of the leaders of RIM, it is a bad and negative factor that many organisations and political parties abroad have taken position and are struggling against Fujimori's plot.  These comrades should have been labelled 'irresponsible people' and held to account for 'talking without investigating'!.

Looking at it from this angle, the conduct of El Diario Internacional can be deemed as worse than 'irresponsible'.  We have dedicated several editions to the unmasking of Fujimori's fraud.  In this context, and since October 1993, some organisms closely linked with the leadership of RIM have initiated an underhand struggle against El Diario. In some cases, they have even prevented its distribution. El Diario Internacional is a publication translated into several languages and well known nearly all over the world. It is, and will indeed continue to be a serious obstacle for the enemies of the Peruvian revolution.  It is because of this that the Peruvian regime and imperialism are attempting to boycott and obliterate it.

This explains why an important base of RIM in the USA in charge of translating El Diario into English stopped doing this work.  Moreover, they also suspended their sales of El Diario.  How do the leaders of RIM explain this fact?  How do they justify that a founding organisations of RIM in Colombia has undertaken to distribute the publication of the bogus 'Sol-Peru' Committee based in France?.  This publication is edited by the capitulators. Its exclusive aim is to promote the 'peace agreement' while furiously attacking the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Peru (CPP).  The editors of 'Contradiction' magazine, from Bogot?, Colombia, have denounced this in the following terms:

"We want to make clear our opinion on the contents of the bogus 'directive' and the 'secret document attributed to Chairman Gonzalo".  ....  "Some people have remained silent and thus contributed to the disinformation and slanderous campaign undertaken by the reactionaries". .... "However, the problem goes beyond this issue: The comrades from the Communist Organisation of Colombia, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist (OCCmlm) and the Revolutionary Communist Group (GCR), have distributed the publication SOL PERU (France) without clarifying anything.  Moreover, they have kept silent". (6)

6.	The leaders of RIM chose to ignore this problem:  If it were true that there is a very important struggle within the CPP, why do they then not point out the character of this contradiction and the interests served by both lines?  Why do they avoid taking up a position in relation to this problem, even though more than a year has elapsed since it first arose?.  Suopposing that the 'peace agreement' were indeed a problem of two-line struggle within the CPP, what is there to prevent RIM, a political organisation organically linked to the CPP and claiming to be a defender of the Peruvian revolution, from condemning the incorrect line?. Here there is no room for intermediate or eclectic positions.  The counter-revolutionary content and aims of the 'peace agreement' are absolutely clear and cannot be denied.  In any event, whether police plot or two-line struggle, this position must be fought vigorously.  No one claiming to belong to the camp of revolution can stay aloof from this struggle. To what political principle are the RIM leaders adhering in demanding that the revolutionary organisations and forces supporting the People's War remain aloof from this problem?.  Chairman Mao has said:

"Whoever takes the side of the revolutionary people only in words, but not in deeds, is but a revolutionary in words.  Whoever takes the side of the revolutionary people not merely in words but also in deeds, is a real revolutionary".  (7)

There is no precedent, ancient or modern, to back up the behaviour of the 'investigators' of the RIM leadership.  The struggle against all kinds of bourgeois deviations within the ranks of the proletariat has always had both a national and international character.  This is true from the time of the Communist League led by Marx and Engels.  The International Communist Movement has never undertaken specific tasks or struggles in isolation from their struggles and tasks at international level.  The unbreakable link between communist parties and revolutionary organisations is a historic law relating to the current stage of human development.  It corresponds with the objective conditions generated by the world wide capitalist system and is principally linked to the process of the world proletarian revolution.  The history of the three Communist Internationals confirm the international links of the class struggle.  The First was led by Marx and Engels (1864), the Second by Engels (1889) and the Third by Lenin (1919).  The history of these Internationals fully prove this unity in the struggle against revisionism, opportunism and class conciliation. 

The complete failure of the 'peace agreement' and their promoters abroad, proves that those who, from the very moment of the first 'peace letter' fought against the enemies of the Peruvian revolution, had the correct line in dealing with this problem.  That those who are still 'waiting for Godot' are profoundly in error. The leaders of RIM say that the struggle against the police plot serves the interests of the enemies of the people. This is utterly false.  On the contrary, what objectively benefits Fujimori's regime and its imperialist masters is to give a free hand to the defenders of the 'peace agreement'.  What really serves international reaction is the adoption of a conciliating and opportunist position with regard to this issue.

How should we understand what makes up a two-line struggle within a revolutionary organisation or Party?  How does this differ from a police plot?

In theory and practice, the two-line struggle is the confrontation between the proletarian and the non-proletarian line within the Party. By means of the two-line struggle the internal contradictions of a political-ideological character within a revolutionary party are resolved.   Essentially, the two-line struggle serves for fighting against and eradicating opportunism, revisionism, rightism and capitulation, and all anti-party phenomena harming the revolution.  The process of unity and struggle of opposites within a Party is related to the law of the universality of contradiction within things, in nature and social phenomena.   Unlike revisionism and opportunism that denies the two-line struggle, Marxism promotes it as the motive force for the party's development.  Chairman Mao Tse-tung points out:

"The opposition and struggle between different ideas occurs constantly within the Party.  This is the consequence of contradictions between classes within the Party and between the new and the old within society.  If there were no contradictions or ideological struggles to resolve these, the life of the Party would end. There is nothing that does not contain contradiction. If there was no contradiction the world would not exist". (8)

Assuming that the phenomena of unity and struggle of opposites is inherent to the Party's development, it then becomes important to establish the nature of each contradiction.  To establish with exactitude if this contradiction is or is not antagonistic.  The character of the contradiction depends on the historical conditions the Party is undergoing.  In a party like the CPP, involved in a civil war, contradictions sharpen and their struggle also tends to become more acute. In our specific case, the different contradictions are centred on the armed struggle and the road to the conquest of political power.  Within the same phenomena of the struggle of opposites, a non-antagonistic contradiction will turn into an antagonistic one.  Chairman Mao notes that some contradictions do not initially manifest themselves as antagonistic, but that in the course of the class struggle these contradictions become antagonistic.  Moreover, Mao also teaches the importance of correctly establishing the character of these contradictions.  He teaches us to use Marxist analysis and to adopt the specific methods of struggle needed to resolve them.  There are no contradictions nor two-line struggles of an abstract character.  If one fails to establish the character of a contradiction, and moreover, fails to point out the interests served by the opposite lines, one goes against dialectics. 

The limit of contradiction

The limit of non-antagonistic contradiction relates to the issue of whether its development goes against the ideological and programmatic principles of the Party.  Whatever the particularity of this contradiction may be, it must remain consistent with the interests of the proletariat and the revolution. In other words, the opposite line would remain non-antagonistic while it does not develop as a complete negation of the Party and the revolution.  A non-antagonistic contradiction is resolved by means of criticism and self-criticism. This method of struggle is related to the task of persuading those comrades expressing damaging and erroneous ideas to return to the correct line.  With the two-line struggle, the Party strengthens itself and advances, consolidating its class line. The principal contradictions are resolved by means of unity and struggle.  Chairman Mao points out that the application of this method is based upon the necessity of finding the unity of opposites.

"Currently the contradiction between the correct and the incorrect ideas within our Party does not manifest itself as antagonistic.  If the comrades that have committed errors can correct them, it will then not turn into an antagonistic one". (9)

On his part, Lenin says:  "The struggle of different tendencies is inevitable and necessary within the Party if it does not lead to anarchy and splits and if it is carried out within the framework commonly accepted by all comrades and members of the Party". (10)

Under the impulse of class struggle and internal and external factors the contradiction within a Party may turn antagonistic - thus expressing irreconcilable interests.  Then the solution of such a contradiction can only come about by frontal class struggle.  Class antagonism, a manifestation of the struggle of opposites, by its own nature, cannot remain and develop indefinitely within the confines of a organisation or revolutionary Party. Its permanence, by its very nature, is the negation of the fundamental principles of the Party, principally democratic centralism and the basis for Party unity.  If the movement of such an antagonistic contradiction is not detained, it will lead to the ideological and organisational destruction of the working class organization.

The history of the International Communist Movement is rich in examples of how a non-antagonistic contradiction can turn into an antagonistic one.  Lenin led a protracted struggle against opportunism and other anti-Marxist tendencies within the SDLP of Russia.  The contradictions between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were at first non-antagonistic, later turning into antagonistic ones.  Another example is the struggle within the II International.  For instance, the struggle between Lenin and the Right wing opportunists led by Kautsky, Plekhanov, Axelrod and others who openly went over to the side of the class enemy.  The struggle of comrade Stalin against the trends of Bukharin, Trotsky, Rykov, Tomski, Kamenev, and others, was non-antagonistic at its onset.  This struggle also became antagonistic when these 'old Bolsheviks' turned criminal and sided with international counter-revolution.  In China, the Communist Party fought against and smashed several antagonistic trends headed by revisionists, opportunists and adventurers. One of these struggles took place in 1927.  Then Chairman Mao had to fight for the eradication of the opportunist line responsible for a serious defeat of the Chinese Communists and the people's movement.

In Peru, Chairman Gonzalo, as leader of the red fraction, fought since 1962 against opportunists, liquidators and all kinds of opposite lines within the CPP.  In the midst of an acute two-line struggle he reconstituted the CPP and initiated the armed struggle in 1980.   The protracted road of the two-line struggle within the CPP, personally led by Chairman Gonzalo, is proof of three concrete facts: First, that a two-line struggle carried out under the guidance of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist principles, serves for the consolidation of the Party, strengthens its ideological and political foundations and promotes the revolutionary process.  Second, when the contradiction within the Party reaches its antagonistic level, it turns into the main problem that the communists must resolve. That this contradiction is resolved is the fundamental condition for the attainment of the strategic objectives of the Party in relation to the seizure of power.  Third, to sweep away 'the colossal mountain of garbage' because the tools for resolution of non-antagonistic contradictions within the Party, criticism and self-criticism, are no longer effective.  In such cases, it is obligatory to take radical measures of struggle, such as purges, and a rigorous screening of cadres and militants.

"It is by means of persistent, determined and wise two-line struggle in defense of the proletarian line and defeating the opposite lines, that Gonzalo Thought was generated and established". (11)   

If we consider that both kinds of contradictions, antagonistic and non-antagonistic, have their origins within the party, the latter develops as a permanent phenomena implicit in matter and thought.  It exists as a reflection of the class struggle and it experiences changes and mutations during its process of development.  However, an antagonistic contradiction, because of its very character, dissolves the relative unity of opposites and thus excludes itself from the Party. By clashing openly with the Party's nature, it loses any identity with its opposites within the organisation. In this respect it is worth quoting what Chairman Mao states in relation to the exact character of the antagonistic phenomena:

"Before a bomb explodes, it is a single whole within which the opposites co-exist due to the presence of certain conditions.  The explosion only occurs when a new condition presents itself: ignition". (12)

Where is the bomb that has exploded within the CPP?

We should ask ourselves where the bomb is that has exploded within the Communist Party of Peru?.  It is true that the 'peace agreement' was set-up as a kind of sinister bomb by the secret services of the Peruvian state and of US imperialism.  However, this explosion - in reality more like a big noise - took place outside and not inside the Party.  This is a fact, despite the claims of the low-intensity warfare strategists of reaction.

The fact that some traitors and capitulators participated in priming and igniting this bomb (the 'peace fraud")  does not mean that this is an internal conflict within the CPP.  Even less can we speak of this as a 'two-line struggle within the CPP'. In El Diario Internacional of September 24, 1994, we have explained in detail how the fraud of 'peace agreement' was planned and carried out.  In that article we proved that this fraud was concocted at the behest of the National Intelligence Service of the Peruvian state (SIN, with the US secret services.  We also showed that its counter-revolutionary objectives aim at destroying the CPP, arresting the People's War, assassinating Chairman Gonzalo and liquidating Gonzalo Thought.  


BIBLIOGRAPHY


(1) 	V.I. Lenin, Thesis on The Fundamental Tasks of the Second Congress of the Comintern,Selected Works, page 135.
(2) 	Chairman Gonzalo, Speech at Plenary Session of the Second Plenum of the Central 		Committee, August 1990, page 9.
(3) 	Carlos Tapia, 'Diario La Rep?blica' August 18 1994.
(4) 	Central Committee of the Communist Party of Peru, February 1994 Report.
(5) 	V.I. Lenin, One Step Forward Two Steps Back, February-May 1904.
(6)  	Revista Contradicci?n, Bogot?, Colombia, N?15, November 1994. 
(7)  	Chairman Mao Tse-tung, Speech at II Session of the First National Committee of theChinese People's Consultative Assembly, June 1950.
8)   	Chairman Mao Tse-tung, On Contradiction, SW, Vol 1, page 340
9)	Selected Works of Chairman Mao Tse-tung, 1976, On Contradiction, Vol 1, page 366
10)	V.I. Lenin, One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, SW, page 15.
11)	Fundamental Documents of the CPP, The Forge Amid The Two-Line Struggle, 1990Edition.
12)	Chairman Mao Tse-tung, SW, Vol 1, 1976 Edition, page 366

Translated and Published by:

Committee Sol Peru - London











 


More information about the Marxism mailing list