Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 11:54:05 +0100 (MET)
From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens)
Subject: Re: M-G: Peru?: Who's true - Bob 1 or Bob 2?


Bob Malecki wrote, on 18.12:

>The new spectacular occupation of the Japanese enemy and taking of 100's of 
>hostages including the Peruvian foreign minister by a "city gurriella" group 
>other then the PCP Maoists?
...........
>Is this the end of the PCP?
...............
>Nothing would please me better then the political defeat of the maoist PCP.
........
>Bob Malecki

There seems to be a complicted case of "split poisonality" here.

On the one hand, there was a message from Bob Malecki on 17.05.96
or thereabouts, on the occasion of the celebrating of the 16th
anniversary of the initiation of people's war in Peru by the PCP,
in which Bob M. (Bob 1?) sent a message of congratulation too,
directed, if I remember rightly, above all to the "fighters on the
ground", obviously those led by the PCP, then.

Now, on the other hand, there's somebody with the same name
(Bob 2?) saying that "nothing would please him better" than
"the political defeat" of precisely that same PCP.

Which one is the real Bob M.? Or does he know himself?

To be noted once again in this context is the suspicion, which
has presented itself to Amy E. Knaggs (a historian, it seems)
and to other people including myself, that this still ongoing
hostage-taking had some fishy elements about it, such as the
US ambassadors' leaving the place 30 minutes before the start
of the action - the one which Bob (or Bob 2) reflects might even 
be "the end of the PCP"(!). 

Well, if that were the case, it would demonstrate a new and quite 
easy way for the reactionaries of getting rid of an armed 
insurrection, wouldn't it? (Another Trot, Vladimir B., it seems 
does *not* have any suspicions about ulterior motives behind this 
action; he disapproved of my pointing at the reactionary standpoints
of the MRTA on international questions as indicating their
being a fake.)

Now there still are some points on which you and I agree, Bob,
such as opposing the suppression of discussion on the Spoon
lists, a not unimportant matter. But it would still be interesting 
to know which one of the Bobs that's the true on Peru - Bob 1 
or Bob 2?

"Being a liberal", some politicians here in Sweden have said,
"means being a split person". Agreed. And the same applies to
being a Trotskyite, doesn't it? (I'm not mainly after some persons
here; I'm above all after that reactionary ideology, Trotskyism, 
which does nasty things to those poor sods who take it upon 
themselves to embrace and defend it.)

Rolf M.
 




     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---