In re Oleachea & New Flag
malecki at algonet.se
Thu May 16 23:18:32 MDT 1996
>Louis Godena wrote:
>>I felt at the time, and continue to feel, that any effort of the sort that I
>>understood us to be making--to tell the truth about the people's struggle in
>>a land unfamiliar to most of us--must be grounded firmly in an organization
>>bounded more or less within the limits of democratic centralism.
>Hmm. I don't know about this. It seems to me that our efforts should
>*first and foremost* be in accord, as best we can determine, with the
>international line established by the PCP Central Committee. I am
>not aware that there have been any recommendations from that body
>that "democratic centralist" organizations -- much less a *single* worldwide
>"democratic centralist" organization! -- be established to direct solidarity
>work vis-a-vis the People's War. (I feel we should respect to the best of our
>ability the direction set out by the PCP CC since they are shouldering
>the chief -- to put it mildly -- responsibility for the conduct of the war.)
>>"Quispe's" public and personal attacks on Oleachea and Arce
>>Borja--based solely on personal bias, at best--changed all that, and, with
>>it, the nature of communist and solidarity work in our part of the world.
>It is interesting how folks can remember things differently, isn't it?
>As I recall, the origins of the dispute lie in Oleachea's rage that the MPP-
>USA would dare to raise a few very reasonable questions before affiliating
>itself to Adolpho's and Borja's so-called "World Mobilization Committee".
>The questions they raised are even more pressing since it has become
>clear that for Adolpho, at least, "affiliation" to what he clearly regards as
>his personal organization means nothing less than *subordination* to his
>dictates. To be even more blunt, nothing Adolpho has said has done
>anything to convince me, at least, that the WMC will be anything other
>than a "RIM 2".
>Another problem arises with his unprincipled blocking w/ the pseudo-
>revolutionary and possible provocateur Rolph Martens. It is one thing
>to seek support for the Peruvian struggle outside the ranks of Maoists
>or even communists. That is necessary and appropriate, but should be
>done in a principled manner that keeps distinctions clear while focussing
>on the common goal. The comrades at the New Flag have been exemplary
>in this practice. It is another thing to clutch unto one's bosom any rag-
>tag scribbler, shouter, or saboteur simply because they -- honestly or
>for their own purposes? -- are willing to endorse your bid for power.
>As you know, your regard for Oleachea means a great deal to me. Like
>the MPP-USA, I respect the contributions he has made in the past, and
>am willing to keep an open mind as to what he could contribute in the fut-
>ure. But currently, I am sad to say, it seems he is turning his brilliant wit
>and considerable erudition to the sorry task of trafficking in the People's
>War for the furtherance of his own power and prestige.
>Finally, let me say that I think the recurrent snipes against the New Flag
>comrades for clandestinity is *completely* unprincipled. To pretend that
>their operation is not a risky enterprise only redounds to the discredit of
>-- Matt D.
I must say that i agree with the above. But it is not just the question of
the origins of the present fight which is the decisive arguement against the
maoists. What is decisive is the fundemental ideology of the multi-class
party and revolution. This leads to sooner or later making deals with one
wing of the bourgeoisie against the other both on the National level and the
international level. It is the ideology which will defeat the Peruvian
Naturally the present fight has shown the true character of those claiming
solidarity with the Peruvian revolution. I think that at this point the Red
Flag people have to a lesser degree then Aldolfo and Martens damaged this
solidarity. But both wings have diffently sabotaged this work for the people
on the ground.
Finally the discussion about the "peace negoiations" who all are claiming is
a Fujimora trick. The point is that sooner or later a deal will be made by
the PCP. It is not that i say that the PCP wants to betray the Peruvian
Revolution. It is their ideology which will lead to a betrayal. When a party
sees a wing of the bourgeoisie on the national or international level
playing some sort of anti-imperialist role in the future or present struggle
means that the PCP has a Menshevik maoist ideology which can only mean
defeat for the revolutionary proletariat.
And their ideas of and international. Which directly translated means each
maoist party in every country must fight in relation to their own national
specifics leaves the door wide open to all kinds of strange alliances. If
you think that the present war here is something. Wait intil two maoist
parties decide that just their national bourgeoisie is more progressive
against imperialism then the other. then it won,t be just name calling but
malecki in exile...
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism