Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 02:37:13 GMT
From: hariette-AT-easynet.co.uk (Hariette Spierings)
Subject: M-I: PCP and its Role in the Peruvian Revolution (Part IV)


A TALK AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL
Institute of Latin American Studies

February 21, 1997

by Adolfo Oleachea,  Spokesman for Sol Peru Committee - London

(PART IV)

SOURCES OF THE THESIS OF "MAOISM IN THE ANDES"

However, we shall waste no time on that, but instead we shall deal with the
root ideas advanced in "Maoism in the Andes".  And what is the root idea,
the basic allegation, the cornerstone upon which this entire anti-PCP
edifice rests?  Upon the assertion that the ideology of the Communist Party
of Peru is not Marxist.  That the proletarian ideology does not guide the
PCP:  According to this booklet:  "This blending of Maoism with Andean
millenarianism has also produced a political ideology that is CAMPESINISTA
(peasant inspired) in the extreme".(5)

And how does "Maoism in the Andes" buttress its case? Resorting to giving an
absurd interpretation to certain figures, and introducing along with these
the unsubstantiated and baseless allegation that the PCP has a "vision of
Peru as a predominantly agrarian society".  Here Mr. Taylor:

"If Sendero's estimation of the weight of large-scale landlordism is
incorrect, so too is their vision of Peru as a predominantly agrarian
society.  For example in 1980 the contribution of agriculture to GNP was
approximately 10%, and agriculture's contribution to exports only reached
20%.  Moreover, according to the 1981 National Census 70% of the Peruvian
population live in urban areas, with only the remaining 30% being housed in
the countryside.  Even in backward Ayacucho, the zone where Sendero wield
their greatest influence, some 36.4% of the Department's population in 1981
was urban.  Similarly, the proportion of Peru's population inhabiting the
coastal zone has markedly increased over the past three decades, while
simultaneously the highland population has diminished in proportional
terms.  One outcome of post-war industrial development has been to
transform Peru into a capitalist and urban dominated nation far removed
>from the 'feudal' and agrarian society described by Mariategui and
perceived by Sendero Luminoso to be the nature of Peruvian society today".
(5)

Therefore, for "Maoism in the Andes" - which is a work doubtlessly inspired
by Peruvian revisionist "raw material suppliers" - the PCP is not a
proletarian but a "campesino party" - a peasant party - made out of
backwards and ignorant messianic Incan sectarians, imbued of mad ideas, and
unable to stare reality directly in the eyes, lest their "visions" should
come down crashing to the ground with a thud.

"DISSECTING A SPARROW".

Chairman Mao Tse-tung once advised cadres studying rural life in China, that
if they wanted to find out what village politics was like, they should use
the method of "dissecting a sparrow". He meant that they should investigate
one single village in depth and draw from that general inferences valid for
all.  The case for studying "Maoism in the Andes" is quite similar.  It is
just one of a flock of similar "sparrows" flying all over the world.  By
dealing with this one we shall be dealing with all of them as well.

That is why we must approach this convoluted thesis systematically and in
its various components:

We shall begin by questioning some simple misrepresentations.  It is
absolutely false that Chairman Gonzalo or the Communist Party of Peru speak
of a feudal agrarian society existing today in Peru. 

Mariategui, Chairman Gonzalo and the Communist Party speak of Peru as a
SEMI-FEUDAL and SEMI-COLONIAL society.  This precisely means that it is a
transitional form which has elements of both, coexisting within a single
contradiction.  A society in which capitalism develops - even if a
dependant capitalism, expression of the domination of its economy by
foreign monopoly capital.  A capitalism that is developing within the
framework of Peru's semi-feudal condition, i.e. one where semi-feudal
relations of production permeate society from top to bottom despite the
growing presence of modern instruments of production.

However, from the existence and the recent increase of modern instruments of
production in Peru, "Maoism in the Andes" asserts that the mode of
production of Peruvian society is a capitalist mode of production: "One
outcome of post-war industrial development has been to transform Peru into
a capitalist and urban dominated nation far removed from the 'feudal' and
agrarian society described by Mariategui and perceived by Sendero Luminoso
to be the nature of Peruvian society today". (5)

THE TEACHINGS OF MARXISM IN THIS REGARD

Let us see what the Classics of Marxism have to say in reference to the
question of the characterisation of any mode of production.  In that
framework, let us see if it is true that Peruvian society has in fact been
removed from the semi-feudal condition described by Mariategui by the
introduction of an increased number of instrument of production of a
capitalist nature due to "post-war industrial development".

Let us also see what the restructuring of Peruvian agriculture - and of the
ruling class state itself - instituted from above by an autocratic regime
(the Velasco dictatorship) of which "Maoism in the Andes" - like all works
of its school of thought - makes so much play of, really amounted to:

"But the productive forces are only one aspect of production, only one
aspect of the mode of production, an aspect that expresses the relation of
men to the objects and forces of nature they make use of for the production
of material values.  Another aspect of production, another aspect of the
mode of production, is the relation of men to each other in the process of
production, men's RELATIONS OF PRODUCTION.  Men carry on a struggle against
nature and utilise nature for the production of material values not in
isolation from each other, not as separate individuals, but in common, in
groups, in societies.  Production, therefore, is at all times and under all
conditions SOCIAL production.  In the production of material values men
enter into mutual relations of one kind of another within production, into
relations of production of one kind or another.  These may be relations of
co-operation and mutual help between people who are free from exploitation;
they may be relations of domination and subordination; and, lastly, they
may be transitional from one form of relations of production to another.
But whatever the character of the relations of production may be, always
and in every system, they constitute just as essential element of
production as the productive forces of society". (4)

"In production, men not only act on nature but also on one another.  They
produce only by cooperating in a certain way and mutually exchanging their
activities.  In order to produce, they enter into definite connections and
relations with one another and only within these social connections and
relations does their action on nature, does production take place" (4)

"Consequently, production, the mode of production, embraces both the
productive forces of society and men's relations of production, and is thus
the embodiment of their unity in the process of production of material
values". (4)

THE RELATION OF PRODUCTION WITHIN PERUVIAN SOCIETY

Anyone who has ever been in Peru and ventured outside the tourist hotels in
a few wealthy enclaves such as Miraflores or San Isidro, (in Lima) could
not have but noted that the relations of production in Peru - the way in
which people act upon one another, the definite connections and relations
they mutually hold, the relations of domination and subordination - are not
at all those corresponding to a capitalist society, let alone a democracy
of any kind.

Yes, there is capitalist development in Peru, but this development takes
place not after the old relations of production have changed, but before
and during the process of their change. Peruvian capitalism cannot but be
immersed - and therein hampered and stunted - by the semi-feudal and
semi-colonial relations of the country. That is what a semi-feudal society
means. A transitional form, pregnant therein with violent social
revolution.  Let us see why:

"ONE OF THE FEATURES of production is that it never stays at one point for a
long time and is always in a state of change and development, and that,
furthermore, changes in the mode of production inevitably call forth
changes in the whole social system, social ideas, political views and
political institutions - they call for a reconstruction of the whole social
and political order". (4)

And more:

"Consequently, the productive forces are not only the most mobile and
revolutionary element in production, but also the determining factor in the
development of production.  Whatever the productive forces such must be the
relations of production". (4)

And more crucially:

"A third feature of production is that the rise of new productive forces and
the relations of production corresponding to them does not take place
separately from the old system, after the disappearance of the old system,
but within the old system........" (4)

"This, however, does not mean that changes in the relations of production,
and the transition from old relations of production to new relations of
production proceeds smoothly, without conflicts, without upheavals. On the
contrary, such a transition usually takes place by means of the
revolutionary overthrow of the old relations of production and the
establishment of new relations of production.  Up to a certain period, the
development of the productive forces and the changes in the realm of the
relations of production proceed spontaneously, independent of the will of
men.  But that is only up to a certain moment, until the new and developing
productive forces have reached a proper state of maturity.  After the new
productive forces have matured, the existing relations of production and
their upholders - the ruling classes - become that "insuperable" obstacle
which can only be removed by the conscious action of the new classes, by
the forcible acts of these classes, by revolution". (4)

"Here there stands out in bold relief the TREMENDOUS ROLE of new social
ideas, of new political institutions, of a new political power, whose
mission is to abolish by force the old relations of production.  Out of the
conflict between the new productive forces and the old relations of
production, out of the new economic demands of society, there arise new
ideas; the new ideas organise and mobilise the masses; the masses become
welded into a new political army, create a new revolutionary power, and
make use of it to abolish by force the old system of relations of
production, and to firmly establish the new system.  The spontaneous
development yields place to the conscious actions of men, peaceful
development to violent upheaval, evolution to revolution". (4)

Finally: "Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new
one". (Karl Marx, Capital, Vol I, p. 176)   

(CONTINUES IN PART V)



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