Debate needed on M-L general line

Rolf Martens rolf.martens at mailbox.swipnet.se
Sun May 26 17:08:30 MDT 1996


Debate needed on M-L general line [Posted: 26.05.96]

This is part of a discussion on the Jefferson Village Virginia
Marxism list and is also sent to newsgroups.

Today the adherents in several countries of Marxism, Leninism
and Mao Zedong Thought (which many comrades prefer calling
"Maoism") are preparing for the convening of a conference to
create a World Mobilisation Commission to defend the revolution
in Peru. Among the tasks of the proposed WMC outlined in that
Call for it (of March 1996) which many parties and other
organizations as well as some individuals including myself have
already endorsed, is:

>4. To defend Maoism as the new, third, and superior stage of
>Marxism, within the context of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism taken
>as a unity in development.

This raises some important questions. On a number of issues,
what is the genuinely Marxist-Leninist (Maoist) standpoint today?

In my opinion, there is great need for an extensive international
debate on some of these issues - I'll point to three mutually
interrelated ones in this posting.

Many comrades for a long time have been endorsing the so-called
"RIM", "Revolutionary Internationalist Movement". They since late
1993 have been very clearly confronted with the fact that the leading
body of that movement, the Avakianist "CoRIM", was a bunch of
reactionary elements who from then on openly stabbed the PCP,
unfortunately a "participant" of the "RIM" since 1984, in the back.
But what most of those comrades seem still not to have realized is
that the "RIM" was a phoney from its very beginning, that its basic
document, the "RIM Declaration" of March 1984, is a reactionary
document, only rather thinly camouflaged as a revolutionary one.

In an article published on 12.08.1994 and posted on the Net on
01.01.96 as "UNITE! Info #3en", I i.a. pointed out the reactionary
character of that "Declaration", and criticized the PCP for its error
of having signed it. There so far has been very little debate on this
(initial) criticism or on the character of the "Declaration" - which is
regrettable, since that document, today translated into more than
20 languages, has played and still is playing a quite important
- negative - international role.

Writing in reply to someone else on the Marxism list on 08.05,
comrade Adolfo Olaechea of the London Sol-Peru Committee
briefly commented on my criticism in the following paragraph:

>Finally,  I will indeed appreciate if you would further me the quote
>from the PROPOSAL complete. I intend to use this example to try
>to explain to our comrade Rolf that he is deeply mistaken in his
>blaming the PCP or Chairman Gonzalo for the failures of RIM or the
>betrayal of Co-Rim.  You see, the very name PROPOSAL already
>entails a practical compromise upon which many people as
>Chairman Mao used to say who are maybe only 10%, 20% or 50%
>or more Marxists may unite.

But I haven't blamed the PCP or comrade Gonzalo for the "failures"
of the "RIM"! On the contrary, I've criticized them, and I hold that
it's necessary to continue to criticize them, for the "RIM":s
comparative *success*!

For nine long years, 1984-1993, unfortunately, this "Operation
Subversion", which it was from its very beginning, "functioned" quite
"well", because those sincere revolutionaries didn't see through it
but continued to endorse its reactionary basic document. Even now,
apparently, comrade Adolfo hasn't realized the fact that he and
other comrades were hostages to the Avakianists during that entire
time. I hope to be able to convince him and the other comrades on
that point eventually, though.

In my opinion, they still haven't dug up the roots of that very negative
ideological current for which, earlier this year, the comrades of the
Detroit Peru Support Committee coined the term "Avakianism".
I've already posted some further articles with the intention of
contributing towards the digging-up of those roots, and I intend to
post many more still. I happen to have knowledge of the experience
of some formerly very advanced proletarian revolutionary forces.

As for the "treason" of the "CoRIM", this most probably is not the
right word for its actions since late 1993, since all the facts point
to most of those "leaders'" having been insincere from the very
beginning, so that it was really more a case of their now openly
showing their true colour.

On three important issues, above all, the "RIM Declaration" and
similar documents are disinforming the comrades:

1)	The question of the general siutation in the world.

Here it's necessary, above all, to inform the comrades of Mao
Zedung's correct analysis of that situation in the mid-1970:s.
Of course, much has changed since then. But that analysis is
a certain important starting-point, many important elements
pointed to by Mao Zedong at that time still are in existence
today, and apparently, the reactionaries and their Avakianist
helpers so far have managed to keep most comrades from even
knowing about that analysis.

Therefore, I'll soon post to newsgroups and to the Marxism list
a "UNITE! #11en: China on three worlds, 1974" with extracts
>from that UN speech by (the later No. 1 traitor) Deng Xiaoping
where Mao Zedong's important analysis of the world as divided
into three parts was presented for the first time. More will follow.

2)	The question of the role of the "Gang of Four" in China.

This by no means is only a historical question concerning a 1970:s
phenomenon in one country. On the contrary, it's closely connected
to the reactionaries' efforts during a long time and still today, of
deflecting the revolutionaries from the correct orientation and of
subverting the international movement on a large scale. What in
my 1994 article I called "Gang-of-Four-ism" closely corresponds
precisely to that which today is known as Avakianism, a phoney
"Leftism" camouflaging a really ultra-Rightist ideological current.

I've already started a series of postings on this question under
the subject "'The Four' & events in China 1976". More will follow.
This began as a debate with comrade Jay Miles of the Detcom,
who has later written to me that at the moment he hasn't the time
to continue it. In fact some time probably is necessary for other
comrades, too, to check on and analyze those facts I've brought
on this subject so far, which I believe are new to many.

3)	The question of the main reactionaries' "green" stealth
	warfare, since 2-3 decades back, against the peoples of the
	world.

In earlier writings on this, I've sometimes used the term "a 'green'
stealth world war". This has certain drawbacks, since it's not a "war"
separated from international class struggle but a kind of warfare
by the main forces of the bourgeoisie which is very much a part of
that class struggle and a quite important one, too, which the
Marxists absolutely cannot ignore - but this, unfortunately, has been
the case practically everywhere, an intolerable fact and an enormous
success for the subversionist forces, which needs to be put an end
to *immediately*, or as soon as at all possible.

I've posted a few articles on this to newsgroups, here relying to a
great extent on the important analysis by the formerly genuinely
revolutionary party the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) in Germany. I'll
post many more on that subject, too.


I hold that, for the WMC to be successful and to develop further in
the right direction, the broadest possible debates on the above
questions will be a very helpful factor, indeed an essential one.

Rolf M.





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




More information about the Marxism mailing list