Carlos A. Rivera
cerejota at optonline.net
Tue Dec 28 06:32:49 MST 2004
----- Original Message -----
> "Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota at optonline.net> wrote:
> If it were a hit list, those named would be long dead.
> Reihana Mohideen replied:
> Not so. Comrade Arturo Tabara was killed by CPP death squads only a few
> weeks ago in a public Mall. Another comrade from Negros (Daniel Batoy) was
> gunned down in Negros recently (before Tabara). His 16 year old daughter
> who was riding with him in the motorcycle was hit. The NPA assasin then
> went back and shot the daughter in the head to make sure she was dead.
> Tabara was with his son-in-law (Stephen Ong) who was also gunned down and
How do these examples make my previous statement a "Not so"? If anything
they would seem to support them!
And, could you please give sources to these killings, and of course if the
NPA claimed responsibility, as they usually do?
> The problem is the Stalinist framework of the CPP. A
> "counter-revolutionary" is open to charges of being an "enemy of the
> people" and tried in the so-called "liberated areas" by a "peoples court".
> Even Sison recognises the implications of this characterisation and has
> issued a statement yesterday that now describes the comrades named as
> "pseudo-revolutionaries" which has different implications.
Which is my point. He has taken great pains to explain that this is not a
hit list, and that if they had one they would say so. I don't pass a moral
judgement on hit list being good or bad. I just want to be factually
> As for killing only "traitors", we are fully aware of the liberal use of
> this term to characterise political opponents in the Stalinist/Maoist
> tradition. Trotsky, Zinoviev, Radek, Kamanev and a majority of the
> Bolshevik party CC during the time of the Russian revolution were
> subsequently characterised as traitors and hounded into exile or murdered.
Radek was a national-bolshevik. Kamenev and Zinoviev should have gotten it
in 1917 for snitching. Trotsky I admit is indeed more problematic, but
beyond this discussion. I re-call the rules specifically ban this type of
> So when the CPP describes someone as a traitor this characterisation has
> to be critically examined.
I thought, maybe I am a bit naive, that we had to examine everything
critically, this being the basis of Marxism.
But yet I fail to see the connection between the real or imagined crimes of
one party in one country a bunch of decades ago and the real or imagined
crimes of another party in another country today.
You provide a good arguement in identifying some concrete examples of crimes
that may have been commited by the CPP, but I don't buy this guilt by
If I were to, I would have to think all trotskyites are murderers, based on
Kronstadt and other such experiences (Bolivia, Argentina, Sri Lanka etc) in
which Trotsky or his followers were engaged.
> As for the Hacienda Luisita massacre the BMP organised a series of mass
> actions last month protesting the killings and has come out in support of
> the workers-peasants demand for land reform.
I meant the "left" outside of Phillippines.
To their credit, even the Internationalist Group, wwhich has an
insignificant grouplet in the Phillippines, quickly and vigurously denounced
the State and Imperialism and expressed solid solidarity with the strikers.
Yet my mailbox if full of mainly wetsern leftists denouncing the "hit list",
the massacre apparently a long forgotten memory.
> Your comment is a mere apology for Stalinist/Maoist thuggery inside the
> revolutionary movement.
This might be the case, but if we are to reduce our arguements to that, I
might as well call you "a pseudo-revolutionary apologist for Trotskiyite
Rejectionists/Liquidationists in cahoots with the State and Criminal
elements". But if I did, it wouldn't be good for the discussion, would it?
More information about the Marxism