File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1997/marxism-general.9707, message 124


Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 19:05:37 +0200 (MET DST)
From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens)
Subject: M-G: UNITE! Info #12en: 1/6 China - NE (Germany), '75-'77 


UNITE! Info #12en: 1/6 China - NE (Germany), '75-'77 
[Sent: 08.07.96]

Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmaerkning:
On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / !UNIOS! / 
FOERENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der letzten
Seite / Verrez information a* la dernie*re page / Ver informacio'n en
la u'ltima pa'gina / Se information paa sista sidan.


AN INTRO NOTE: 

In this posting, I bring in translation an article originally 
published as a pamphlet by the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) 
in Germany in 1979:

"Why Our Party Had to Reject the Interference by the 
International Liaison Department and Other Chinese 
Organs - Aspects -".

The title of the original is:

"Warum unsere Partei die Einmischung von seiten der 
Abteilung fuer internationale Verbindungen und anderer 
chinesischen Organe ablehnen musste - Aspekte -".

This article IMO today still remains a quite important one
for all genuine adherents of the political line of Marx, Lenin
and Mao Zedong, since it clarifies a number of questions of 
principle and of recent history on which clarity is essential.

On the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), its very important role in the
1970:s and a large part of the 1980:s and its later bourgeois
degeneration, see my posting of 01.01.96 "UNITE! Info #3en" 
and others. 

One question on which this article brings important further
information is that of the role of the so-called Gang of Four 
(and also of other forces) in the overthrow of socialism in China
and in the activities by the bourgeoisie to subvert the international 
Marxist-Leninist movement, activities which, for instance in the 
shape of the so-called "RIM" ("Revolutionary Internationalist
Movement"), still today are being massively continued.

On this group in China in the mid-'70:s, the "4-Gang", whose
counter-revolutionary ideology rather precisely corresponds
to that of the present-day "RIM", I've already posted 12 items 
of a series, "'The Four' & events in China 1976". I'm going to 
post item (13) of it, endline "German stands", in connection 
with this article, which also deals with the whys and wherefores 
of those different standpoints as to the "4-Gang" which in 
October-November 1976 were taken up by the different 
forces in Germany. A note in this item (13) will refer to the 
present reproduced article, which follows here:


WHY OUR PARTY HAD TO REJECT THE INTERFERENCE
BY THE INTERNATIONAL LIAISON DEPARTMENT AND
OTHER CHINESE ORGANS 

*- Aspects -*

The article i.a. contains the following chapters:

- Some Points Concerning the Initial Develpoment of the Party
- On the Question of the Class Differentiation and the "Theory
   of the Three Worlds"
- The Turn in the Year 1975 and the Interference by the
   International Liaison Department
- Once More on the Importance of the Question of the Party
- What Emerged into Daylight in November 1976?
- What Class Character Do These Things in China Have and in
  What Relation Do We See Them in Connection with the 'KPD'?

(September 1977 / Beginning of 1978 / Summer 1978)

Publisher: KOMMUNISTISCHE PARTEI DEUTSCHLANDS /
MARXISTEN-LENINISTEN (NEUE EINHEIT)

Printed: 1979


INTRODUCTORY NOTE:

The following article in its fundamental idea and in its most
important parts is based on an outlining speech by comrade
Klaus Sender on 11 September 1977 and also on various
inner-party discussion contributions from the time between
the beginning of 1978 and the summer of 1978. It came out
of the necessity in the then situation to combat the repeated
influencing on the part of Chinese organs in the question of the
Party in our country and to counter their attempts by means of 
the phoney"Marxists", at that time in particular the 'KPD', to
act against our Party.

The article summarizes the conflict with the machinations of 
certain forces in the International Liaison Department of the 
CC of the Communist Party of China from 1975 on, and in
particular from November 1976 until the summer of 1977, a
conflict which on our part has already on various points been
mentioned publicly. It above all in its last part very importantly 
deals with our assessment of those forces in their connection
to the 'KPD' and with the reason why we had to reject this
connection. Finally, the article also deals with the complete
disregard for basic Party questions on the part of these organs
in China, with why we had to reject this and why we also have 
seen it as a means to undermine the political line of Mao Tsetung. 

This article by no means deals with all aspects of this conflict
during that time. Quite a number of basic points, such as the
connection to and the alliance with the secretly-working 
anti-Party subversive elements and opportunists of the type of
a Maegdefessel (Otto M.) & friends, on the part of those
forces mentioned, is not dealt with here. The exposition here
is limited to a series of facts which were at the time already
publicly known and publicly visible and which therefore it would 
also have been possible to take into account.

In the meantime, that situation which was summarized in this
article of course has changed considerably, since the conflict 
has gone further and the revisionists have exposed themselves
further. The core points of the conflict of that time, however,
which so quickly have been made, it might seem, superfluous
because of their abandonment of their earlier position, in spite
of this still are worth being made clear. 

It is not unimportant to see with what demagoguery and what 
manipulations these forces have been working in order to split 
the representatives of the proletariat and of Marxism-Leninism
on the international level from each other, with the methods of
wrong combining and the suppression of information. These 
events also are a constituent part of the background of the 
present development in China.

G.H. 


WHY OUR PARTY HAD TO REJECT THE INTERFERENCE
BY THE INTERNATIONAL LIAISON DEPARTMENT AND
OTHER CHINESE ORGANS 

In the past, Chinese organs in various ways came out supporting
in a totally impermissible way the 'Roter Morgen' and the 'KPD'.
[Note: On these organizations, see later in the article text. - RM]
Against this interference in the internal affairs of our movement 
which was engaged in since many years back, in a pressure-
exerting and flagrant manner, and which didn't even shy away 
from the conscious and manipulative making of false reports 
concerning the struggle in our country, finally, our Party could no 
longer desist from defending itself also publicly, since this activity 
has had extremely harmful effects, had been publicly refuted and 
despite this was being continued with the same callousness.

There are unequivocal facts concerning the two-line struggle in the
Party. These unequivocal facts exist as history, as *development*
in the history of the Party. These one must follow and analyze, in
order to see the actual role of those parties which are designating 
themselves as Marxist-Leninist. If you leave this out, you cannot
see anything. If you judge a party only by that which it says today,
you overlook completely precisely that decisive weapon of the
bourgeoisie, to have parties serving themselves which at certain
points in time are saying certain things, only in order once more to 
betray them.

This is a historical lesson, which must be drawn even from the
behaviour of the opportunists during the first world war and the
time thereafter, those elements who were scourged by Lenin for
their recognizing the dictatorship of the proletariat, in order later
to trample on it and to betray it. They were the most dangerous 
and evil of all of the agents of the bourgeoisie. One therefore must
analyze very carefully what a party is representing and what stands
it takes under the changing conditions in society, and must not
content oneself with just some verbal statements which a party 
is making.

Now what kind of a party is the 'KPD'? What has been its role
in the struggles over the years?


I. SOME POINTS CONCERNING THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT
OF THE PARTY

During the first phase, the representatives of the 'KPD' combated
self-dependent struggle by the proletariat and indeed in general the
very *idea of the Party*, the idea of a Marxist-Leninist party, which
leads an unrelenting  class struggle and an unrelenting ideological
struggle against opportunism, and always made efforts towards
blending together opportunism and Marxism.

They themselves founded their party organization, basing
themselves on semi-governmental organizations such as the
universtities andministration and later the DGB apparatus [DGB:
union of trade unions in West Germany - RM], and created their
organization in connection with a bourgeoisie mob, supported
by certain higher governmental organs such as the culture
apparatus - to which should be added that this of course had a
whole series of complications and turns and twists and didn't
come about in such a straightforward manner as briefly
summarized here, but in its essence it must be described in
this way.

The first 'KPD' members, mostly people who in their class
relations had their origins in the upper and in the uppermost
bourgeoisie (in contrast to those who at that time advocated
Marxism-Leninism), spoke out for Marxism *only from that
point in time on* when the breakthrough for Marxism had been
realized.

And this breakthrough, the facts show clearly, was not realized
by the representatives of the 'KPD'; it was realized by other
people. It was realized by the KPD/ML, it was realized by the
Rote Garde, it was realized, in connection with this, by the
representatives of the later KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), by Klaus
Sender, for instance, who on various points defended himself
against awowed Trotskyites who were sent forward by the
'KPD', and took action against their vilifications.

Not a few of these first 'KPD' representatives were people
who openly applauded Trotsky, while those who at that time
defended Marxism-Leninism and in quite a number of
questions, in the question of the Party and in that of Stalin, for
instance, represented a basically correct standpoint, at first
were in the minority and resolutely went against the entire
bourgeois propaganda.

The representatives of the 'KPD' were people who at first
came out against Marxism and against materialism; they
more or less openly advocated liberalism, came out with
theses such as "the liberalisation of the judicial apparatus",
and it was characteristic for them that they basically always
denounced the entire materialist standpoint as "dogmatic".
They came out with propositions such as "In Vietnam lies
the centre of world revolution", with which they tried to draw
people's attention away from the situation and in particular
from the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, for
instance.

They came out with various theses against us, for instance,
that one mustn't characterize Soviet revisionism as social-
imperialism and, as late as in connection with 1 May 1971,
presented papers which they wanted us to co-endorse, in
which they only accused Soviet revisionism of having 
capitulated to U.S. imperialism and refused the designation
social-imperialism, and attacked us, when we declined this,
for "splitting".

A basic element in the construction of the 'KPD' out of
intellectual circles, from which it in general from the beginning,
and also today in the main, has been recruiting, was the then
Rotzeg (Rote Zelle Germanistik) principle and in general the
Rote-Zellen principle, a Trotskyite-revisionist principle, which
was put up against the Party at the universities and which was
even to be acted on in the factories.

When in 1969 Marxism broke through in an even stronger way
and when there was also an intensive two-line struggle within
the KDP/ML, the representatives of the 'KPD', respectively, the
representatives of the Rote-Zellen principle, suddenly changed
their standpoint and with wind speed, in the beginning of 1970,
constructed their party like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. This can
be seen from the documents, e.g. the RPK (Rote Presse
Korrespondenz) of that time.

The founding document of the 'KPD/AO' ('Kommunistische
Partei Deutschlands / Aufbauorganisation'), which they called 
themselves at that time, absolutely is useful as a negative
example, since it cannot even by the furthest stretch in any way
be taken seriously as compared to the programmatic declaration
of the KPD/ML (of 31.12.1968).

It's really a bad joke, when in this document intellectuals of the 
big bourgeoisie are telling each other how they want to "train 
themselves into" applying democratic centralism and want to train 
discipline and point out that this prejudice and that which they have 
must be combated. Such a thing perhaps is not wrong as self-
criticism, and it may be that many intellectuals can remould 
themselves in such a direction, but the publishing by some people
of such a thing as a *party programmatic declaration* was an
enormous presumptiosness, since the Marxist-Leninist movement
at that time had already advanced much further than that, and the
'KPD/AO' representatives were, exept for the anarchists and
awowed revisionists, among the most backward that there 
existed at that time. It is therefore no wonder that the 'KPD' has
swept these documents under the rug.

[Continued in part 2/6]



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005