Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 20:49:09 -0500
Subject: M-TH: Re: M-I: Peruvian Maoism
From: farmelantj-AT-juno.com (James Farmelant)


First of all I would like to commend Louis Proyect for presenting to us
such a succinct account of the Marxist analysis that underlies the 
politics of the Peruvian Marxists. Seldom have the supporters of the
PCP been able to for whatever reason been able to provide us with
such a readable and articulate account of their politics.  Lou quite
correctly suggests that  most debates over the PCP have
focussed on the human rights aspects of the Peruvian struggle rather
engaging the Peruvian Maoists on their own terms.  Lou suggests
that we take a serious look at the Maoists' analysis of class  struggle
in Peru.  He notes that a basic component of the Maoists' analysis of
Peru is the thesis that Peru remains a semi-feudal country-- that in
effect
the work of the bourgeois revolution remains unfinished in Peru.  Lou 
has
ably shown how the Maoists have managed to deduce from this thesis
a rationale for a politics geared towards a "People's War" not unlike the
one that led to the overthrow of the Kuomintang but he fails to deal with
the paradox that this same thesis has long provided a rationale
for reformist politics.  Most of the former pro-Soviet Communist
parties long categorized Latin American countries as semi-feudal
states where unproductive agriculture has thwarted industrialization
and the development of the proletariat.  Therefore they argued for 
the formation of an alliance between the bourgeoisie on the one
hand and the workers and peasants on the other to strip power
from the landlords, who ruled in collusion with foreign interests.
The PCP itself seems to hold to a variant of this political
strategy insomuch as they look hope to one day establish an
alliance with certain sections of the Peruvian bourgeoisie against
the existing regime.

The thesis that Peru (like other Latin American countries) is
semi-feudal is open to question not only on the grounds that
it experienced significan land reforms in the 1960s but that
this analysis fails to situate Peru within the global capitalist
economy.  In this view the landlords are a part of the broader
capitalist economy and the ways in which they have developed
(or failed to develop) agriculture sre best understood as
a part of capitalism rather than as an obstacle to its development.
Thus it would seem unrealistic to expect that any section of
the Peruvian bourgeoisie will defect to a serious anti-imperialist
position. One need not start quoting from Immanuel Wallerstein to see
that the semi-feudalist thesis is open to question in a world
where capitalism increasingly operates on a global basis.
Even supposing that the PCP should win power in Peru it
rather unlikely that "socialism in one country" will be a more
realistic option for Peru than it was ultimately for Stalin's
Russia.

		Jim Farmelant 

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]



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