The PCP-SL and the Peruvian Trotskyists

hariette spierings hariette at
Sun Oct 6 17:13:35 MDT 1996

>I wrote:
>>>>The trotksyist have a complete different strategy. We are against any kind
>>>>of popular front for the votes (United Left) or for the weapons (PCP-SL &
>>>>MRTA). We are for the working class self-emancipation. We are for organising
>>>>the toilers resistance against capitalist attacks, for rebuilding unions,
>>>>for creating councils and militias and for a future proletarian
>Adolfo was desperate to find an opening and wrote:
>>Rodwell is against "any kind of United Front".  (his words above)
>My words, as Adolfo might have noticed if he could read, were:
>        We are against any kind of popular front
>A popular front, for anybody with any knowledge at all of Marxism and the
>history of our epoch, is not the same as a united front.

And what is the difference, then genius?  A popular front is a type of
United Front.  Can you deny that?  No.  So you are REALLY for a Popular
Front, because a United Front for the Revolution - which a people's Front of
Liberation such as the one being built in Peru by the PCP, can only be a
front of revolutionaries, and not a front with counter-revolutionaries, such
as the "leftist leaders like Moyano and Azcueta, the Union bosses like
Huillca and Chiara, old revisionists, rightists and capitulators of all
sorts.  A Popular Front like that advocated by Poder Obrero.  What Poder
Obrero has in mind is nothing but an electoral front, tactic which does not
correspond to this era, particularly in Peru which lives a completely
different set of concrete conditions than those which existed in Spain in
1936, or in France prior to the Second World War.

What corresponds in Peru is United Front for the Revolution.  Not a United
Front of the counter-revolution as the one you have with malecki and ponce,
and malecki had with Quispe, and you all lot have with the reactionary
Fujimori regime and its CIA mentors.

Let's see what kind of United Front do you have in mind?  Again splitting
words? A United Front of armed organisations?  No.  The armed struggle,
besides being dangerously close to having to actually do something more than
talk, would oblige you to stop sabotaging the war effort of the Communist
Party.  And, nor do you want - or claim not to want - a front for the
electoral struggle, which can only be practised by those willing to deceive
the people with empty promises and real defence of the old state.

What sort of front do you wantthen?  An armed front?  Where are your armed
detachments? How many weapons have your Poder Obrero Trotskyst "comrades"
confiscated from the army in Peru this week?  Tell your "comrade" Ponce to
tell us about that, and not just begin by waving shrouds and confessing to
living in terrified panic from the armed forces of both sides of the class
divide.  What a modest-militant-worker who should be commanding militias is
talking like that?  What kind of Front does he want?  A front of rabbits,
scaredycats and egg-laying hens?

No. Whatever he says, it all boils down to an electoral front - do not come
to us who do not believe that Popular Fronts of the Spanish kind are
appropriate for our concrete conditions, and which are today, in Peru, those
for the resolution of the issue by means of war.  Go to the bogus left and
the tame union bosses and see how many votes you can muster IF THERE ARE

But you, Hugh, do not want either road.  The only thing you want to do is
talk rubbish!


     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list