THE HUMMMINGS AND PUFFFINGS FROM GINA!

hariette spierings hariette at easynet.co.uk
Sat May 11 04:06:43 MDT 1996


>Hmmmm--a few weeks ago Adolfo Oleachea was making common
>cause with the New Flag against the enemies of the Peruvian
>revolution; now he's denouncing NF as essentially a bogus publication,
>filled with plagerized articles,etc....  A few weeks ago AO said he'd
>never met Luis Quispe or Marcelina Ccorimanya; now he claims to
>know beyond a doubt that this is one and the same person, and
>furthermore s/he is an anarchist/avakianist whose whole political
>history back to 1985 is known to him!  And all this without even
>claiming to have set foot in New York City, or indeed in all of North
>America.  What gives here?

A week ago the New Flag was praising the role of El Diario and Committee Sol
Peru - etc, etc. etc.  Now, when the MPP in Belgium launches a correct
ideological and practical initiative, what is the response of the so-called
director of New Flag and of their backer Dan Axtell - to raise ideological o
political objections?  No. To denigrate the people who they perceive -
instead of as comrades, as rivals.  Do Gina, Axtell or "Quispe-Ccorimanya"
have ever met Luis Arce or Adolfo Olaechea?.  No, however they call them
glory seekers on the strenght of a mere supposition THAT HAS ALREADY PROVEN
FALSE because neither Olaechea nor Arce Borja have ever asked a single
journalist any where in the world to give them an interview.  It seems more
like the so called "glory" rather seeks them!.  Any self-criticism. No.
Accuse the witness of a MATERIAL FACT of being a CIA agent! How does that
further the cause of winning public opinion for the Revolution?  CERO, in
fact BELOW CERO!




>According to AO's scenario, this "LQ/MC" first  got close "to those
>proven leaders and intellectuals who have...won the respect of all
>those who see in the People's War in Peru a hope for the oppressed
>peoples of the world." (like AO and LAB, presumably), and using
>this connection as political capital got some "angels" to obtain a
>web page and thus accumulate more political capital.

Is that not the case?  Why was the "muppet" then publishing articles from
glory seekers?   Has any one ever ask him to publish anything about us?  It
seems to me Gina that you are blind in one eye if you can not see who is
playing possum here since the attack of "Quispe" against his "beloved"
comrades was totally unprovoked and done only to protect his bogus claim to
speak for the PCP when in fact he is at the same time defending Avakian's
leaflet handlers in Sweden, while condemning their actions. Is that got any
thing with logic?  With sanity even?

What entitles Quispe to his opportunism?  What entitles him to slander the
reputation of others?  To call anyone who disagrees with him a CIA agent?
Is that of any service to the revolution in Peru? And what entitles Gina to
play the ignorant fool when she obviously can read and knows the facts as
well as everyone in this list?


>Then this "LQ/MC" after being chided for his/her bogus publication is
>further chided for "unnecessary clandestinity" in this wonderful free and
>democratic USA (which just passed a draconian "anti-terrorist" law
>BTW).  Then any "followers" of LQ/MC are dismissed as simply afraid
>to lose face by admitting to the bogus nature of their leader(s).

Are you then defending Quispe's behaviour?  Are you speaking for who?  For a
local Committee, or for the New Flag?  Why so much evasiveness?  Is that a
Marxist attitude?

A press organ - moreover, a press organ that supports the Revolution in Peru
- can be, and MUST BE responsible, and does not need to have a "director"
who is so much handicapped that he must be clandestine in a country where
still freedom of expression is the law of the land, where you can mobilise
public opinion precisely in defense of liberties and freedoms that are dear
to the hearts of the workers and masses of the people of all walks of life.

We don't need "Inca Princesses" which cannot be touched without screaming
COP against all and sundry.

Moreover, where is it written that to have a revolutionary political line, a
magazine needs a Peruvian director who speaks and behaves like Khruschov and
has the manners of a lumpen, insults his critics with slanderous allegations
- in defense of no other principle, no other ideology, than to save his own
skin?.

To say the list, such a director is a total incompetent as a director of ANY
PUBLICATION, and certainly is not responsible before the masses or even its
own supporters, since they - and I suppose you must be one - either chide
him or ignore his accussations against us, since, like you, they now pretend
to be seeking unity with those he is at the same time calling "revisionist
snitches" .  What is the role of a director who "steps down from his
directorship in order to "speak in a personal (or double persona) capacity"
and proceeds to heap all sort of counter-revolutionary garbage that fully
coincides with Fujimori's allegations against people like Arce Borja and
myself?.

So, if you are not endorsing "Quispe's" insults - insults which long
preceded any of my conclussions reached in all honesty on the base of data
supplied by the MPP and El Diario Internacional AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO
ACTUALLY KNOW THE SITUATION FIRST HAND in the USA - A FACTUAL situation
that, I see, you have not dared to deny, and therefore still stands.

And all this while you give the benefit of the doubt to the vile
accussations of an irresponsible party repeating what proven enemies of the
people always have claimed?. Or do you think Fujimori has not made the same
charges as Quispe a thousand times against Arce and Olaechea?

Should I not believe - although I have never met Quispe from Adam - the
reports of responsible people who I respect, such as Arce Borja, the MPP
when confirmed besides by people who I also have come to consider reliable
and honest, and who KNOWING THE SITUATION FIRST HAND also confirm it?,

Who is the only one denying my charges?  Only "Quispe", a wooden doll with
no responsible identity prepared to scream cop at any one who corners him in
his web of contradictions is denying it.  His closest backer is in hiding,
and you - his admirer (and I be frank, a person with a suspicious aspect as
a possible RCP USA plant"), a person who has never even acknowledged that
she was calling me a liar even when I showed her up in public, meaning that
such a person has no sense of self-criticism or even revolutionary and
proletarian responsibility - or have you already forgotten, in your
selective memory the question of the horns" which you practically accussed
me of making up)

You don't even bother to state in black and white that Arce, myself, and
other comrades are "making things up" any more.  But you continue to put a
slur on people on the strenght of a proven liars assertions.

Somehow, Gina I don't find your call for unity credible.  Unity with whom?
Between the revolutionary people yes!  Between those who are sincerily for
the People's war yes.  But the question mark over Quispe is much too big
already, his lies are so childish and preposterous that no can can take him
seriously anymore.



>Then another great secret is revealed: this LQ/MC imposter is claiming,
>to us  the paltry followers, in private and in secret (the great Adolfo
>KNOWS these things, I guess) that s/he "is the 'supervisor' appointed
>by the PCP to 'control' the 'intellectual glory seekers' Arce Borja and
>Oleachea,..." etc. etc. etc.

You seem to not to have read what has been posted by this dummy Gina or be a
person of extremely short memory.  Read it again and you will see. I believe
that his actions speak louder even!


>All I can say is, Adolfo, this is bullshit! There is no truth in this
>scenario

Is that a Marxist argument?  That is your lumpen Avakian style coming
through again.  Use it once more, and you are into my kill file for good.


>at all.

Are you denying that Ccorimanya and Quispe are the same person?  Say that in
black and white and we can start calling up the witnesses.

  Your ego is bruised because the NF would not endorse your
>World Mobilization Call "without reservations and preconditions", and
>further, people around the NF have raised questions about how this
>Mobilization will be structured and led.  I'd like to point out that the
>PCP itself has not offered an endorsement of the WMC either.
>Does that make the Party anarchist/ avakianists too?

The PCP is leading this call by means of its MPP or are you now denying the
MPP as a Party generated organism?.  The MPP in Belgium, unlike the Quispe
creature, guides itself by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and not by opportunism.
It serves to win public opinion for the Peruvain revolution as any one with
a tiny bit of sense can see.  And finally the MPP in Belgium (and of course
all the others that have already closed ranks with it and you shall learn
>from El Diario's next edition, rules itself by democratic centralism, unlike
the Quispe creature which has no means to make a Frankenstein accountable to
any one but himself.

Or does the wooden doll also speak for you when he says - just taking one of
the funnier bits of the muppet show that I am both 52 - when insulting the
Stalin veterans, and now 65 when he just doesn't know what else to say in
his surmenage?

Look at the paper trail - I know revisionist have no memory (that is a well
know tenet of Marxism) - but fortunately here in the list, there is a paper
trail and people can look at it at any time to keep them on the straight and
narrow.

To say something like that is a lie (a little one, admittedly, but we all
know that from little acorns big trees grow) that can easily be disproved
since I am a public person.  Anyone is welcome to meet me in London - you
know I cannot travel to the USA - but you Yankees have the freedom of the
world and no one can stop you from coming here.

So, since you are STILL ARE CALLING ME A LIAR, despite everything and your
own experience with the horns, if it is so important to you to establish the
truth, as it should be if you sincerely want to serve the revolution, name a
delegation from your Committee, and come to London to see if it is true what
Quispe claims.

Come and see if this is a ghost Committee with no support from the masses.
Come to see if the IEC can mobilise a 100% of the support we can mobilise
and not just in numbers but in quality, despite our meagre economic means.

Come meet what the "dummy" calls the "real Committee Sol Peru" and have a
good laugh at a couple of Avakian leaflet handlers who dance for the Labour
Party gigs and have no the slightest idea of communist discipline and never
were able to fit into a mere Committee, let alone an MPP.

One of our comrades can take you to see these people.  People who are not
altogether bad, it is true, but are bitter because they were suspended from
our Committee for not participating in mass actions, for grevious
indiscipline, lack of responsibility, and moreover - among a litany of petty
bourgeois justifications - causing grevious economic damage to the Committee
due to their unprincipled and self-serving behaviour - we are not saying
they stole any money personally, mind you.

We are just:  their action was to deceive two good comrades into putting up
security for someone who they mis-represented as a "comrade" from Peru that
when he came to explain himself turned out to be non-political, in fact
hostile to the revolution and who eventually jumped bailed.  Is that
something that is OK? It has its "causes both in the action of the
revolution and the actions of reaction"?  It is not a 100% stupid thing to
do to the economy of the Committee only because they thought they could
personally profit from other people sense of proletarian internationalism?
In Peru, they call that "criollismo" and is a 100% per-cent lumpen attitude
more akin to Fujimori supporters than to anything remotely associated with
the PCP.

Of all that there is proof and witnesses here in London, not one or two, or
even a dozen, but a whole movement, Peruvian comrades, Turkish comrades,
democratic people, Maoists, people from all walks of life.


>In fact, the New Flag is the ONLY reliable source of information about
>the People's War in English in the US, and probably in the world.
>This is due to a lot of hard work on the part of quite a few comrades.
>The PCP documents you claim were "otherwise widely available within
>the Movement" in fact were NOT available widely (or even narrowly) in
>the US, in English.  These documents are now available on the web
>page, not due to "angels" but again to very human comrades doing a
>lot of hard work, and they are available there ONLY because of the
>New Flag.

What is realiable about New Flag?  Not much - and now even the accuracy of
translations must be put in doubt and we will go over them with a fine tooth
comb before releasing any in print.

When you consider that supporting the People's War is a lot more than
cheerleading, translating documents, and setting a web page you realise that
such things, important as they can be, can only be tainted when the ideas
that are put across are negated by the behaviour and moral qualities that
the bearers show in front of people.  To effectively support the revolution
in Peru, or anywhre for that matter, you must establish a reputation for
truthfulness which is even more important than a million translations which
result of dubious value except as raw material for an editing operation
undertaken by those who can be trusted by the masses and not just by the say
so of vagabonds who pass themselves as Peruvian "exiles" in some places.

And those who lie are not believed. If a proven liar is in charge of an
operation suppossedly there to tell the truth about the People's war who is
going to believe it?

>ONLY the New Flag has publicly criticized RCP/CoRIM, in English,
>in the US, their headquarters of operation.  ONLY the New Flag
>has published the most important PCP documents in English, and
>made them available on the web. ONLY the New Flag, in the past 3
>years, has made available IN ENGLISH the most important articles
>from Luis Arce Borja's El Diario Internacional.  Now you're saying
>this is not a service to the international proletariat and the world
>revolution, but rather a crime against bourgeois intellectual property
>rights, that is, plagerism?


If New Flag was to limit itself to translating documents of PCP, all fine
and dandy. But that is not all they do.  They also plagiariarise, as they
did originally with Fascism the Old and the New which they published
incomplete and without acknowledgement.

I know such things may seem "bourgeois" to you "New Marxists educated in
Avakian style sloppiness", but these things are basic for real Marxists,
real Maoists.
You must respect the historical record, otherwise black can be turned into
white and scoundrels get away with deception.  Moreover, the attacks of NF
against Avakian were really unprincipled and never centered on any questions
of ideological differences.  These were attacks far removed from the spirit
of diagnosing the patient in order to try to cure him. They were quack
medicine, unconvincing and superficial, geared to "bleed the patient", i.e.
to force them to carry their magazine in their shops. A merchants quarrel
fought over accussations of profiting.  Yes, at that point even a fishwives
attack on the reactionary conduct of Co-Rim was justified, moreover if the
fishwive was actually distributing the documents from the Central Committee
which Avakian had banned.

Even yourself admitted openly that it was Two Line Struggle that actually
convinced you.  And that is either because our critique was in fact Marxist,
or because you are only putting it on for show.  You tell us, because with
you, one never knows.


>It is ONLY because of the efforts of the New Flag that scattered
>supporters of the People's War have been able to begin to coalesce,
>share experience and analysis, not only about the PW but about
>the necessity and possibility of building new MLM communist parties
>in SEVERAL COUNTRIES.

And, all this endangered because some one has delussions of grandeur, is
dying of jealousy and hates other comrades who never have done him any harm?

As to the necessity of building new MLM parties that is very fine too.  But
those must be real parties and not bogus, because of those there is a
surfeit already.  Moreover, the MPPs are not only for serving for the
development of totally new parties.  They must be also for the
reconstitution and advance of the real existing parties.  A case in point is
for example the Communist Party of Philippines, a true Marxist-Leninist
Party which is advancing in its rectification along Maoist lines.  The
Belgian Party of Labour, The Communist Party of Greece, are also cases in
point that are openly siding with the PW in Peru and for communist
mobilisation outside the clutches of Avakian's various interchangeable
outfits.


The PCP was not a "totally new party" either, but a Party reconstituted upon
its founding principles and with many of its old militants and leaders,
among them Chairman Gonzalo himself having come out from the "old apparatus"
too.  Was not such a Party able to advance in incorporating the
contributions of Maoism which, as Chairman Gonzalo himself points in his
Interview, was already regarded in the SIXTIES "as our atomic bomb".

It is only Avakianists who write off the traditions of the Communist Parties
and want to instill their "new ideas" which are nothing but the old
anarchist/zinoviev ideas which we branded and established for even a person
like you to see.  That is already a point that could have been debated
seriously, had not a smear campaign of the most classical Menshevik form
began behind closed doors against the Call for a WMC.  And such a debate
would have been extremely positive, because that is another further proof of
the need of the WMC, since NO serious party in the world today is prepared
to march under the lead of Avakian, and I seriously doubt that anyone will
even step forward even in this list to say that they can see Quispe and the
leaflet handlers of Avakian in Malmo leading anything anywhere with Gina
trailing behind them!  THOSE ARE THE FACTS, and not equivocations.


>This is the PRACTICE, in the real, material world, of those you call
>"anarchist gone absolutely wild".  Mao Tsetung said in "On Practice":
>"The dialectical-materialist theory of knowledge places practice in
>the primary position, holding that human knowledge can in no way be
>separated from practice and repudiating all the erroneous theories
>which deny the importance of practice or separate knowledge from
>practice."  Unfortunately, you seem to have forgotten this principle,
>as your lengthy and convoluted accusations against the New Flag
>are based on "knowledge" that has ablolutely nothing to do with the
>actual practice of these comrades.

We have all have first hand experience of the practice of the ONE AND ONLY
"comrade Q", Gina, and yours, is not that brilliant either, unless you think
that throwing a quotation here and there eximes you from reality itself. The
Internet is also part of the material world. I have already expererience
enough of "Quispe" to write a book about it.  Somehow, I think I won't have
time for it myself, but there will be plenty of people to do the postmortem.
The practice is also here and that is there for 350 or more people to see.
>
>So someone called you "glory seeker" (while at the same time
>acknowledging that you have done some excellent work, may I
>remind you).  GET OVER IT ALREADY!  So not everyone has
>chosen to endorse your WMC.  DEAL WITH IT.  Even endorsers
>of the Call have raised questions and asked for clarification about
>how it will be led, who will be included, who will not; what will
>the structure be, etc. Why have you not addressed these
>completely rational and legitimate questions?

So the backers of New Flag have done some work too.  How elese could they
have built up a reputation? The question is what matters most to them, their
reputation, or serving the cause of the proletariat?  So they have worker
hard. Good, they ought to work harder to put right what their absurd methods
have endangered.

Practical work is good.  But if it is not guided by principles, I say: Big
deal, if a bit of success becomes such a burden to you that you think
yourelf free from the basic tenets of Maoism in regards to a liberal
behaviour - not to gossip behind peoples backs, not to make personal attacks
on people unless they have a political content, to be open and above board,
to investigate before you speak, not to listen to tale bearers who would not
substantiate their charges in person before the masses, etc. It is endless.

>You seem to be using the question of unqualified endorsement of
>the WMC as a dividing line to "invent" enemies out of friends.  What
>is really needed is to unite all who can be united to fight the real
>enemy: imperialism and reaction in general; US imperialism and
>Peruvian reaction in particular with regard to the People's War.

How can you qualify a Call to support the Revolution in Peru? You tell me
Gina. Subject to what are you prepared to sign?  A guarantee that everything
will be hanky-dory?  The Nevsky prospect?

You think - a priori - the WMC is anti-democratic, but has anyone been
rejected from it out of hand yet?  Has anything being agreed - more than
support for the call - behind any of the signatories backs?  What guarantees
you want?  But applications, as stated in the document, are per organisation
and per individual, and we all who have signed have done so unconditionally.
Do you think you must have a privilege?  Why?  Where is your communist
spirit? Or is it because you are from Detroit and that somehow entitles you
to special treatment? We need no Inca Princesses, nor do we need Yankee ones
either.

>You can holler black vomit all you want, and get into silly
>arguements over who kisses queen E's toes, but the PRACTICE
>of the New Flag in building support for the most advanced
>revolutionary struggle in the world today, and for the most advanced
>MLM,PG communist party in the world, speaks for itself.
>
>Gina /Detroit
>


You are wrong about me Gina, I do not gratuitously say things. When somebody
vomits, that is vomiting, and one should say so, if one really wants to cure
the patient.  Otherwise how are you to proceed?  No wonder Avakian was never
cured, since none of his "comrades" ever told him what was wrong with him,
so he never felt quasy enough looking in the mirror behind all that
flanneling and ego boosting praise he so much encourages.  Ask "Chairman
Bob" the genious sin-pareil, after "Q&Cc" of course!

In your case, at present I can only diagnose extreme dizziness in you.  This
is due to a lack of a real grasp of Marxism, confusing dialectics with
scholastics, an "art" in which you are not that bad at all, if things must
be said.  I never criticised, for example, your spirited defence of Maoist
economics, but that any scholastic with a tinge of revolutionary idealism,
can do as you indeed do quite well and holding your own with another Jesuit
>from another school.  But in that, like in other kind of debates I myself
indulge from time to time for the same reasons, to beat back the allegations
of the enemies of Maoism, there is not such a need to reach conclussions
since those are not TODAY the living problems of the revolution.

For the latter, you need to have a grasp of dialectics and be able to see
through the smoke screens.  You fail in that, unlike Jay, for example, who
has a background similar to yours, but who is a person of revolutionary
integrity and therefore able to make progress and shed the old conceptions
and instilled frame of mind of Avakian's concoctions which are beginning to
draw you back into the swamp you so much profess to abhor.  This is also
proof that one divides into two and Maoism is making progress by the method
of confronting revisionism and bringing clarity to muddle thinking of the
sort you have espoused in this mailer.

One of the underlying reasons why all sorts of silly explanations are been
advanced, sometimes by well intentioned but liberal people, about the "peace
agreement fraud" is because liberals lack integrity and cannot conceive of
those who have it.  That is why they are always increduluos of Chairman
Gonzalo's integrity as a communist. They think, that as they can make the
most extrenous contortions with their principles, everyone must be like
them, so they begin to elucubrate about Chung King negotiations, about "two
line struggle" with turncoats and police agents, curing the sickness in
anyone, irrespective if they have proven to be impervious to treatment, etc.
The great confussion of their minds, whether consciously or uncounsciously,
leads them to "flee the cops" to "come out with a heavy theoretical article"
that in the end says everything thaey said before in an eight legged essay
they polished until it looked alright to them.  It is enough to laugh and
the whole construction comes down and the only thing is left is this:  The
police plot was also a two line struggle = Avakian revisited!

However, Marxism is MUCH MORE about the problems of today and tomorrow than
those of yesterday, as comrade Lenin said, and in that department, you are
really rather high and dry as demonstrated by this mailer of yours which is
typical of someone who is afraid of losing "pots and pans" if justice is
done to the truth and things are called by their real name.

Moreover, I can also see, as a consequence of the above, extreme
shortsightedness due to one eyed vision and allround blurriness. Also a
Jesuit's penchant for splitting hairs and turning black into white, but that
I have already told you in other occassions, i.e. you are not being
objective.  Vomiting, not yet. I hope you don't. There is already enough of
a mess here.

The practice of New Flag, whatever distinction it can have with the practice
of "Quispe", can only improve with a new administration, one that guides
itself by real centralism, fosters true comradely relations, and forgoes
that American imperialist penchant that pervades your country's movement for
thinking themselves the center of the world that is so characteristic of
Avakianism.  The PCP is not the FATHER PARTY of any Party.  It is an equal
Party and behaves like that.  Avakianists have this penchant for running
around countries interfering with other peoples revolutions. For three years
we had report after report about Quispe - serious staff we haven't even
touched upon yet.  But we did not want to interfere and we never did.

It was only when Quispe interfered with the General Line and began showing
his true colours here in Internet - the international territory, that we
were forced to put a stop to his impostures.  Contrary to your baseless
assertion - in Peru we have a saying: Piensa el ladron que todos son de su
condicion (the thief thinks everyone is a thief) - we never acted for
personal motives, and never have.  We acted, as always,because the interests
of the Peruvian and world revolution so require.  If you cannot see it by
now, I doubt you ever will.

Finally: If there is something to New Flag other that a dummy with two heads
and a web page, we have not yet seen anyone speaking in its name. And we
have already waited long enough.  Will anyone responsible who doesn't have
to hide under the bed, stand up and speak for new Flag?

When is Axtell, who was so eager to raise charges behind my back, going to
face the music himself and stop hiding behind irresponsible people?  Even
you Gina, are not assuming any responsibility.  So, who has it?  Why an
American outfit whose only conection with Peru is a faceless hood - that is
how he has come across - and not only to me, but to every right thinking
person in this list, in Peru, in Europe AND in the USA itself, apart of
course from you who has proven such a reliable and unbiassed character
witness, is calling a web page THE PCP page without authorisation? Is that
not a swindle of Avakianist proportions?
Co-Rim also has a page in the web.  Does that give them the right to
contradict the Central Committee with their speculations designed to
accomodate Co-rim leaflet handlers in which Party affairs are interpreted in
an opportunist manner?

If all you want is a theoretical justification for sticking to your known
practice of chatting up Avakian supporters, what is stopping you in the new
orientation of the MPP and El Diario in calling for a WMC from doing that as
part of your contribution?  Nothing.  If that is all you can do, leave the
work of the international relations to those who have proven to know how to
advance them.

Why do you want to swim out of your depth to stop something that will be a
tremendous step forward?  Is nothing really hidden in your virulent
opposition to the WMC than a penchant for peruvians in permanent distress?
How do you even know the fellow is a Peruvian?  Can you vouch for it?  He
now says there are "two Quispe's", one who signed a letter of submission to
the MPP in the case of Maximiliano Durand, and rightly so. Another who today
defends Durand.  However, they sign the same name and from the same address,
and both are faceless.  Is that serious?

So, I am sorry to say but your participation is really useless except as an
expression of relatively "good" wishes. With you, one never knows for sure.


Comradely

Adolfo




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




More information about the Marxism mailing list