Poder Obrero vs PCP-SL No 3

Jon Flanders 72763.2240 at compuserve.com
Wed Oct 9 14:50:53 MDT 1996

 >> No doubt that I am much more in agreement with the principles of the
 peruvian trotskyists than with those of Oleachea.
 But also take a look: I think we have had much more information on the
 state of the *mass organizations*, especially *workers'* organizations from
their quite few posts than we have had from the *hundreds* of posts of
Oleachea. I *have* read a lot of his posts - too many - but *very* little is
said about the state of the workers' mass organizations.

 Of course this rests on *politics* - and as a worker I think you should
reconsider this.

 What I find most provoking is the (Oleachea line of) argument that if you
criticize the PCP_SL then you are objectively an agent of Fujimoro. Please
rethink this from a class perspective - and not from a guerilla war
perspective (this is also to you Jon F.!) <<Jorn A


   I completely agree that labeling anyone that disagrees with you as a
counter-revolutionary is wrong. This is the heart of the problem of the method
that Adolpho uses. It leads him to the extremes that we have witnessed in the
last few days. While I agree with Gary about the poisonous turn of the last
period of debate, I think it would of been fairer of him to acknoweldge that
more than Hugh and co. have been culpable.

   I also think it is wrong to lightly throw the term Menshevik around.

   My reading of history tells me that the working class advances when great
events, like WW1 for example, energize the class and push former leadership
antagonists like Lenin and Trotsky to work together. This is what must happen
in Peru, for example.

  I don't think that any workers that I know will sign up for some narrow
Maoist or Trotskyist revolution. I do know that when they want to do something
they will demand that sectarian point scoring take a back seat to serious
organizing and action.

  One other thing I wanted to comment on is the point Louis P  raised about
Comintern intervention in member organizations. Vladimir rightly picked up on
the lack of context in Louis's post.

  But I think there is a larger consideration. The Bolsheviks were scarred by
the Second International's capitulation to war frenzy, and were determined at
all costs to prevent that in the the Third.

  By using organizational means to achieve a political goal, however, I think
they created a greater problem in the end. I don't see any substitute for
workers learning from experience, even if that means that they elect the
"wrong" people.

  Sorry to deal with so many things in one post. Unfortunately this is all I
have time for right now.

 Best, Jon F

  E-mail from: Jonathan E. Flanders, 09-Oct-1996

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

More information about the Marxism mailing list