Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 08:46:36 +0200 (MET DST)
From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens)
Subject: UNITE! Info #12en: 5/6 China - NE (Germany), '75-'77


UNITE! Info #12en: 5/6 China - NE (Germany), '75-'77 [Sent: 08.07.96]


[Continued from part 4/6]

VIII. NOW WHAT CLASS CHARACTER DO THESE THINGS 
IN CHINA HAVE AND IN WHAT RELATION DO WE SEE 
THEM IN CONNECTION WITH THE 'KPD'?

There here exist some facts which show that the reporting on
the two-line struggle in this country, on the position of the
different parties in our country in this two-line struggle, has
been massively manipulated, and this obviously with a very
definite object in view.

In the time when the 'Gang of Four' was struck down, then,
extremely brilliantly and causing great enthusiasm in the masses, 
the following correct line was in force: Smashing of the 'Gang of
Four', continuation of the criticism of the Right deviationist wind
to reverse correct verdicts and the criticism of Teng Hsiao-ping.
That was the line of October 1976, under which the 'Gang of
Four' forcefully was defeated. Our Party wholeheartedly 
combated the current of the 'Gang of Four' and had, even
previously, always rejected it. The only ones in our Party who
had been for the 'Gang of Four' were precisely the agents of the
type of Otto M., who today are with the 'KPD'.

	[Note: On the conflict with the anti-Party element Otto M.,
	see other writings by the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT). It's
	not necessary to go into this further here. - RM]

The correct line on the international level is a line which criticizes
capitalism in such a way that it hits *both* poles, so to speak, of
the bourgeoisie - and this continues to be true today - and is a
line which upholds the self-dependence of the proletariat and
carries out an irreconciliable struggle against the bourgeoisie.
You can say that in Europe, and for instance in Germany, and in
China this law holds true, that *the main contradiction in the
country is the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the
proletariat*.

This is a basic law, which has to this day not changed, which is a
common factor within the different countries, and therefore, there
is also a two-line struggle which is common to the Marxist-Leninist
parties in Europe and the Party in China. How this is in other parts
of the world, we need not at this point go into; in the Third World,
there does not everywhere exist such a differentiation, since in
a number of countries in the Third World, conditions are such that
the struggle for national liberation still stands in the foreground of
the struggle. This however does not hold true in countries such as
China, which takes up a particular position because of the fact
that China is an advanced country as to class struggle, and it does
not hold true in the industrially developed Europe.   

The abovementioned interference, this behaviour by those organs
in China, is in itself a proof of the fact that there is such a common
two-line struggle, which not, perhaps, is being fought between the
'Roter Morgen' and the 'KPD', but between the KPD/ML(NEUE
EINHEIT) and the 'KPD', while the 'Roter Morgen' clique now
already in many respects is standing apart as an ultra-Rightist
clique, which is being used by certain forces for diversion from
their own main dealings and - it should be added, because of the
most recent facts - after the 'Roter Morgen' clique has now gone
over to the quite open vilification of Mao Tsetung, there is in fact
no longer any place for its position.

	[Note: As already pointed out in my posting (11) on the
	question of the Gang of Four, the "Roter Morgen", which
	in October 1976 openly supported this Gang, in 1978
	cut off Mao Zedong's head from the image of "the five
	classics" on the front page of its paper and openly
	declared its support for the revisionism of Hodxa.  - In 
	that posting, I by error failed to note that, in addition to
	the "Roter Morgen" and the infamous "RCP" of the USA,
	Hodxa's party, the Albanian Party of Labour, in October 
	1976 likewise openly supported the Gang. - RM]

The present Marxist-Leninist movement has in quite important
respects formed itself as self-dependent movement in 
opposition to modern revisionism and its most important
representative, social-imperialism with its hegemonist underlings.
Against this, the Party has conserved its self-dependence under
extreme exertions; the 'KPD' in this has played only a very small
role. The Marxist-Leninist Party however in extreme struggle has
defended itself against being swallowed up by social-imperialism
and has thereby made an important contribution in the struggle
against modern revisionism.

We even have beaten social-imperialism more and more and
have prevented if from breaking in here with its military force.
[Note: An exaggeration, perhaps, by this extremely small party?
No. We who took part in this struggle at that time are aware of
the extremely important role which the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT)
played in moblising the masses against this military threat, which
was very real above all in the mid -'70:s. - RM] 

At the same time, we have always upheld the basic differentiation 
against the bourgeoisie. Should we now under the cover of a 
theory, which we ourselves have held to be correct as a *by-
product of the class struggle*, engage in capitulation to the 
bourgeoisie here? That comes just as little into the question as
the other thing. Precisely because of this, the differentiation
against the bourgeoisie must be continued in all its acuteness,
preciesly because of this, it is necesssary most decidedly to
consider this fact, that the principal contradiction in the country
is the one between the bourgeoisie.

In China, one could in fact, as we have already dealt with above, 
observe the following. The correct standpoint, the standpoint of
the all-sided struggle against the bourgeoisie and the most 
radical break, the utilization of all positive factors together with
the upholding of irreconiliable class struggle, was abandoned
and a connection with the 'KPD' was achieved, and this in a
manipulative way and under a deceitful reporting. Thus a
thrust direction was chosen which entailed the coalescing with
precisely those forces which had earlier undermined that 
struggle which had been carried out jointly with the Third
World. Therefore, one has to ask oneself, what is the real
content of this present idea of so-called "anti-hegemonistic
struggle", that of the so-called "anti-hegemonistic united
front".

It is a fact that in China the correct line was abandoned and
that an important element of the criticism of capitalism was
abandoned. We wrote on this as early as in our contribution
"Einige Stellungnahmen unserer Partei zu der Entscheidung
der III. Plenartagung des X. Zentralkomitees des 
Kommunistischen Partei Chinas bezueglich Deng Hsiao-ping
vom Juli '77" among other things:

	[Note: This important analysis was originally published
	as (only) a wall poster put up in Berlin(West) in the
	late summer of 1977, and from April 1978 on was
	disseminated on a larger scale as a leaflet. I at that
	time also got to read and discuss it and (only) then 
	understood the fact that revisionism was now in power 
	in China. I published a Swedish translation of this 
	document in the leaflet INFORMATIONSBLAD No. 8, 
	of 13.01.79. I'm planning later to post it in English, 
	under the title "Some Takings of Position by Our Party 
	concerning the Decision by the 3rd Plenum of the 10th
	Central Committee of the Communist Party of China
	on Deng Xiaoping in July '77".  - RM - Here the quote:]

	"What is taking place in China is the following: In the
	first moment, the 'Gang of Four' was smashed and
	class struggle continued, in a correct way under the
	call: Smashing of the 'Gang of Four', continuing of
	class struggle, continuing of the criticism of Teng
	Hsiao-ping and the Right-deviationist wind for the 
	revising of correct verdicts."

	"But, after a comparatively short time, certain phenomena 
	appear in which this line is being abandoned and the 
	criticism of Teng Hsiao-ping very quickly is being ceased, 
	without any reasons for this being made clear publicly, with 
	a number of documents all being changed, on the sly and 
	without any notes on it (so that in fact they are now being 	
	subjected to forgery) and also the 'KPD' is received, the 
	policy as to the phoney'Marxists' is being continued and
	also those practices of sowing confusion concerning the
	conflict in our country are being continued."

	"Thus while, in the first moment, the political line was
	carried out in the correct way, one could after only a very
	brief time, following on this, observe how the policy is
	being divorced from the correct basis, the criticism of
	Teng Hsiao-ping is ceasing completely and the historical 
	fact that the 'Gang of Four' was defeated under the 
	simultaneous call for continuation of the criticism of
	Teng Hsiao-ping, in reality is being distorted."

[Continued in part 6/6]



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