Lima 1963 and Adolfo

Hugh Rodwell m-14970 at mailbox.swipnet.se
Thu Oct 3 17:17:12 MDT 1996


I've been asked to forward the following reply to Adolfo concerning the
events in Lima in 1963.

Cheers,

Hugh

________________________________________________________________


I sent some questions to Adolfo but he didn't reply to them.

>Could you enrich my knowledge of history and write more about that Lima
>Soviet.
>1- Which factories and shanty town were around it?
>2- Which was their main base?
>3- Who were their leaders? Whiuch was their programme and platform?
>4- In which date it happened?
>Thanks
>J. Ponce


What he showed in his answer was:
It was mainly a pure student movement. It was a combative action of the San
Marcos university which was from the early 1960s until the early 1980s a
strong base for militant actions. Nevertheless, the student radicalism was
not always linked with the workers and shanty towns.

We defended and participated in many mass actions of that university. But, a
soviet is very much different from a student confrontation with the state.
The soviets were created in 1905 as committees which linked factories
and workers communities. It was based in rank and file delegate assemblies.
Olaechea identifies a workers power institution with a militant student petty
bourgeois series of actions.

Olaechea said that in that student action, he proposed a very authoritarian
measure:
>One of the first actions of that Committee was to expel the Trotskyst
>provocateurs and the known police agents with a kick up their behind.  Why
>have a 5th column behind your back?

A soviet is a united front organisation based in workers democracy. For
Olaechea everybody who were not an Stalinist had to be expelled. There is
nothing of proletarian democracy and united front.

Olaechea, who nobody can remember in the history of the class struggle in
Peru, think that at his 20 years he was like Trotsky in his 26. But he was
only a STUDENT leader of an student occupation. Very good, but he could not
compare with the creation of a dual power workers council!

> The PCP, as such, did not support Belaunde!  "Unidad" (Del Prado's
>anti-Stalin, anti-Mao revisionist publication usurped the Central
>Committee's authority to endorse Belaunde) and many Trotskysts also did vote
>for Belaunde too.
>It was due to that usurpation of the Party name that Del Prado was expelled
>from the Party.  Your history seems to be much influenced by the bourgeois
>outside observer school or that of the Military High command run United
>Left.

The PCP was united until 1964. The PCP supported Belaunde in the 1956 and
1963 elections. It also supported Bedoya in the first municipal elections
(1964).

In 1964 the PCP was divided between del Prado's pro-Moscow "Unidad" and
Paredes pro-Beijing "BanderA Roja".

Adolfo is very proud bvecause he was the "Secretary General of San Marcos
University's Revolutionary Students Front and as a ranking member of San
Marcos University Students Union and the Federation of Peruvian Students, to
act as President of the Seizure Committee."

In 1963 the FER (Revolutionary Student Front) was united and around the
united PCP. The FER supported Belaunde in the elections. On the other hand, the
Trotskyists voted against Belaunde. Even more, in the early 1960s, while the
PCP was supporting general Pando and the priest Bolo, the trotskyists were
organising a MASS peasant armed rebellion in Cuzco. Adolfo was in favour of
expelling from the student occupations the supporters of the peasant
rebellion!

J. Ponce




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




More information about the Marxism mailing list