On Rolf M.'s contributtions

Hugh Rodwell m-14970 at mailbox.swipnet.se
Tue Oct 15 15:45:19 MDT 1996

I've been asked to forward this.




I read some recent messages from Rolf. We have completely *different*
positions. I am a trotskyists and he is a Maoist. He doesn't think that I am
a CIA but he think that we are having some reactionary role. Nevertheless, I
have to recognise that he is having some honest actions like when he is
writing things like these:

* "It should be pointed out, I think, that Bob on this point is quite
right. Adolfo made this serious charge with no more "evidence"
behind it than this *rumour in the bourgeois press*. Despite those
unjustified attacks which have earlier been made by Bob against
Adolfo, this absolutely is not fair and has nothing to do with
proletarian methods of polemics. It actually proves the correctness
of *one part* - even if a smaller one - of Bob's criticism against

* "Whether you action should rightly be called "mailbombing"
or not - Plant maintains that his mail was blocked and Hugh
Rodwell that the volume of the things were approximately 1 MB;
it's true that those people are not very trustworthy - I
hold that it was quite bad."

I also think that Rolf suffered the effects from these poisonous and
unfounded accusations which we have seen in the marxist-list quite recently.
Rolf have to think that these methods are not divorced from a general
conception. He claims that he wants to defend proletarian democracy against
the WMC manoeuvre. Rolf have to think more because that actions against
proletarian democracy are the essence of the PCP/SL and its ideology.

Other point. Rolf wrote:

* "Marxism, Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought would even be somewhat
more invincible still if you {Olaechea}, for instance, would criticise and
not defend that reactionary document, the "Declaration of the RIM",
of 1984, which your party, the PCP, so unfortunately is still
endorsing. I hope I don't have to repeat one more time exactly
*how* it vilely is *attacking* the proletarian revolutionary
line of Mao Zedong."

* "These things obviously have to do with those grave
waeknesses which have long been evident in the line and
the methods of the PCP - things which have been visible
internationally, ever since that party's association with
the phoney "international" the "RIM", whose organisational
"methods" have been accepted by the PCP too. It's *not*
sufficient for those who defend the PCP only to criticise
and attack the *leaders* of the "RIM". This whole thing has
been rotten from the beginning, and the acceptance of it
shows up a bad tendency which has now been continued in the
manner in which the "WMC" was set up."

Could you explain what are your criticisms to the original RIM declaration?

Finaly, what do you think on my last message with answer your doubts, or you
prefer to think more?

J. Ponce

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

More information about the Marxism mailing list