File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1998/marxism-general.9805, message 320


Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 05:02:54 +0200 (MET DST)
From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens)
Subject: M-G: UNITE! Info #66en: 5/9 Detecting some Net cops, I.


UNITE! Info #66en: 5/9 Detecting some Net cops, I.
[Posted: 23.05.98]

[Continued from part 4/9]

[List posting "Why do I think Chris is a cop?", 30.06.96 - ctd.]

POINT =A45)	Chris, while posing as a "neutral, non-involved
		observer", in reality constantly has tried to
		make the "Quispe" side in the recent conflict
		look good and the opposing side look bad.

Some quotes:


<Date: 05 May 96 15:25:51 EDT
>Subject: The Maoist Wars 1/2

>1. Lets take the personal first. There is personal distrust and
>ill-will between Adolfo and Luis, which neither side is
>bothering now to conceal. Adolfo enjoys having had an extensive
>education and letting it show. Luis claims a less privileged
>background. Adolfo is prepared to range wide with flourishes of
>polemical invective, Luis prefers to duplicate documents of
>others. Adolfo is willing to take a risk with a cynical writer
>like Simon Strong. Luis is suspicious, as he is of Ken.

"'Luis Q'. the proletarian, Adolfo O. the bourgeois".

>2. They have rather different aims on this l'st. Luis would
>like the hard work he and the others behind New Flag do, to
>forward documents that get read at least by some members of
>this l'st about Peru.  Adolfo is more ready to see this l'st
>as an arena for polemic against all forms of revisionism.

"'Luis Q.' the hard-working, even if perhaps not church-going
man." (How Chris found this out he doesn't say.) "Adolfo O. the
person disposed towards brawling."


>Date: 12 May 96 04:14:23 EDT
>Subject: PCP Report  Feb 1994

>New Flag appears to have responded promptly to my request to
>publish the statement of the PCP of February 1994 which
>includes...

"A small applause for the New Flag and its chief editor
'Quispe'" (whom so "unfortunately" some people are pointing out
[is] an agent).


>Date: 01 Jun 96 13:05:23 EDT
>Subject: " WE WILL NOT WASTE TIME "


>Quispe:
>>WITH THIS WE WILL NOT WASTE TIME ANYMORE
>>RESPONDING

>- Do you mean this? I suggest it would enhance your credibility
>if you do, quite independently of what Olaechea may do.

Some friendly advice to "Quispe" about how to "enhance his cre-
dibility", namely: "Keep your mouth shut!" Not such a bad piece
of advice either, in the circumstances. Only, at that point,
nothing could help the "Qu/Cco" any more.


>Date: 02 Jun 96 03:37:27 EDT
>Subject: Gina-Adolfo polemic

>Adolfo has said twice previously that he will have nothing to
>do with Gina except on his terms. His credibility is further at
>stake by this polemic.

"No nice person, this Adolfo" (who opposes "Quispe").

>As a l'st member I welcomed at least that Gina quoted the March
>statement from Adolfo and Borja so it was possible to see
>quietly where they are coming from.

"Gina, on the other hand" (who's supporting "Quispe") "is good
at some things such as clarification".


>Date: 11 Jun 96 03:12:28 EDT
>Subject: Evidence for Adolfo?

>And I continue to find the more likely explanation to do with
>Adolfo's individualistic behaviour. I am not surprised that he
>has never been a member of the PCP

Something which of course Chris "knows for a fact". But perhaps
he also tries to provoke Adolfo into answering the question "Are
you now or were you ever....".


>Date: 17 Jun 96 02:12:26 EDT
>Subject: Authenticity of MPP-Europe

>I suggested on 16th June that neither Adolfo nor Luis
>can claim definite support from within the PCP.

>However the interview between New Flag and Sol Rojo
>on 2nd June was an interesting document. It seems
>unlikely that Sol Rojo would risk claiming it is publishing
>with the approval of the PCP, if that is not the case.

>Exposure might be swift and ignominious.

>Would Adolfo and his supporters care to comment?

"Sol Rojo" is the swindlers' paper of the Avakian-"Quispe" agent
Mr. T.P. (whom I mentioned above) and some of his friends in
Europe. Och course Chris must make some propaganda for it.
Here there also comes in an element which I'll go into in more
detail below: The "argumentation" by Chris with "approval by the
PCP".


>Date: 25 Jun 96 02:22:29 EDT
>Subject: Peru: what its all about

>As El Diario Internacional No 34 puts it in a highly biassed
>way:-

>"Theme 2:

>Which are the genuine generated organisms of the Communist
>Party of Peru (PCP) abroad after October 1993?  The truth about
>mercenaries and individuals who have been fabricating
>counterfeit "Peru People's Movements (MPPs)".  Opportunists,
>mercenaries, mentally derranged people, or infiltrated agents?"

The mere promise by El Diario Internacional, which i.a. was
among the initiators of the call for the WMC, to deal with these
subjects in its next issue is called "highly biassed" by Chris.


POINT =A46)	Chris has supported the already exposed
		reactionary agent Avakian, and not only this,
		but has consistently supported all reactionary
		tendencies in the earlier communist movement
		too. On China, he's written in favour of the
		present fascist regime there and against the
		earlier, socialist one. On Peru, he's written
		in favour of the "peace letters" hoax and other
		things which suit the reactionary goverment
		there.

These things in themselves wouldn't point very much at a per-
son's actually being a cop, instead of just an "ordinary" reac-
tionary. But they add a little to the picture in this case. Some
quotes:


>Date: 12 May 96 04:14:23 EDT
>Subject: PCP Report  Feb 1994

>Nor does this mean that Avakian or RCP supporters by definition
>are following a revisionist line (whatever their other
>weaknesses) if they want to read the letters that Guzman is
>alleged to have put his name to.

>Date: 11 May 96 17:32:07 EDT
>Subject: Peru: what is wrong with negotiations?

>Avakian may have many defects. One or them would appear to
>be restricting the circulation of documents of the leadership
>of the PCP.

>But it is not clear that trying to analyse the statement put
>out by the Fujimori regime on 1st October 1993 in the name of
>Guzman about negotiations, is one of them.


>Date: 11 May 96 18:35:26 EDT
>Subject: Lessons from the Maoist wars

>The one sided attacks on Avakian are  blows aimed at the sack
>but intended for the ass - any members of the PCP or its
>supporters who might consider that Gonzalo was in favour of
>talks at this stage.


>Date: 12 May 96 10:29:53 EDT
>Subject: Ruthless struggle and merciless blows

>However IMO they give strength to the arguments of Barkley
>Rosser that it is not possible to criticise Stalin, without
>also being prepared to criticise Lenin.

The Chinese communists did criticize Stalin on some points
while not criticizing Lenin. (There is much more that I'd like
to add on this subject but in this context, this would carry too
far.) This "argument" by Chris essentially goes against Mao Ze-
dong's correct criticism of Stalin on certain points, in the
early '60:s.


>It is also interesting IMO that in the later thirties both
>Trotsky and Mao stressed the importance of emphasising
>dialectics in the study of marxism.

Making propaganda for Trotsky, who rightly is infamous as one
of the big traitors to socialism.

>Date: 07 Jun 96 18:05:10 EDT
>Subject: History of CPSU (B)

>Does anyone know the number of copies and the circulation of
>the "History of the CPSU(B) in the 40's and 50's? I would
>suspect it was very influential in prejudicing orthodox
>communists against Trotskyism.

There are in fact some reasons for criticism of this influential
book, the "History of the CPSU(B) - Short Course". But when the
genuine Marxists repudiate Trotskyism, this is correct and by no
means "prejudiced".

>Date: 13 Jun 96 02:02:18 EDT
>Subject: Chinese labour camps

>I have seen Amnesty International say that the number of
>reports of civil rights abuses in China, has *risen* since the
>death of Mao.

>There may be several reasons for this. One is more open
>reporting

Turning things upside-down. Under the earlier dictatorship of
the proletariat in China, only counter-revolutionaries were
suppressed. Under the present fascist dictatorship of the re-
visionist Deng Xiaoping, the revolutionaries and the people in
China are being subjected to suppression.

>Date: 10 Jun 96 03:00:08 EDT
>Subject: re: marxism and border controls

>China's abandonment of egalitarianism between the regions has
>been one of the most dynamic things in its current economic
>growth, with millions migrating from poorer to richer provinces

Again, an upside-down statement.

It was under the Cultural Revolution that China's industrial
production grew by 10% a year and its agricultural production by
4% a year, while the population grew by 2% a year. Things at
that time were advancing very well for the Chinese people.

Under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie (since approximately
1976-78), growth in China has continued only in certain sectors,
such as steel production - today somewhat more than 70 Mtons/
year, compared to 30 Mtons a year in 1976. In oil production,
which during the Cultural Revolution 1966-76 leaped forward to
be *nine-folded* in those 11 years, there has been an almost
complete *stagnation*. And in particular, after the breaking up
of the People's Communes in the mid -'80:s and the total aban-
donment also in other ways of Mao Zedong's programme of mecha-
nization of agriculture in China, that *enormous cathastrophy*
is taking place in China that agricultural production isn't in-
creasing at all but is even decreasing.

[Continued in part 6/9]



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005