From: Rubyg580-AT-aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 1996 18:22:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Dissecting the New Flag


In a message dated 96-07-16 03:31:58 EDT,Jay writes:

>On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Rubyg580-AT-aol.com wrote:
>>If Jay or Adolfo thinks not, let them take an article from NF that 
>>exposes the line of RCP on the "peace talks" hoax, and dissect 
>>it paragraph by paragraph, like I did with the WMC call, and show 
>>that its not *really* opposing RCP's line.  Let them "prove" that NF 
>>really supports Avakian and the Fujimori regime, if that's what they 
>>think.  In fact, they cannot do any such thing because the evidence 
>>they will "expose" can only prove the opposite.
>>
>>Gina/ Detroit
>
>Fine, Gina.  Let's see, I'll start with issue #2,
  
Oh, what the hell, why not start with issue #1.  On p. 5 is an article 
" 'Alleged Letters from Chairman Gonzalo to Fujimori': Crude Slander 
of Montages and Falsifications of theYankees and the Peruvian 
Government!"  That's signed, "AEFP", Paris, October 1993.  On P.7 
is the PCP's "Declaration" of Oct. 7, 1993; P.9 "International Directive 
of the Communist Party of Peru (PCP)".  None of these mentions the 
RCP, so I guess they're all shit, huh?

>oh, here is [in v.1#2]
>a good one!  It's on page 9, entitled "The Silence of the Lambs".
>You're right, it is opposing Avakian and Fujimori. 

Actually, it doesn't mention Avakian or any of his organizations at all, 
it just condemns the silence of those who claim to support the People's 
War but don't oppose the "peace talks" hoax. The article on p.7-8 by 
Committee Sol-Peru, London doesn't mention these things explicitly either.

On p. 10-13 is an article by Atelier d'Etudes Franco-Peruviannes, Paris, 
May 1994 that exposes and denounces the peace talks; P. 14, "Peace 
Accords: Reactionary, Liquidationist and Divisive Slander" By PCP-
Northern Regional Committee, March 1994; P. 16, "Message to the 
MPPs, Committees of Support and Solidarity, Committees Sol Peru, 
Emergency Committees, Communist Parties, Progressives and 
Revolutionaries of the World and Members of The RIM" By Communist 
Party of Perú, Lima Base, May 20, 1994.

This last one says, (2nd paragraph), "Today more than ever it is a 
fundamental necessity to crush the reactionary, liquidationist slander, 
to crush the opportunist line of the capitulators." Frankly, it is the 
article by the Franco-Peruviennes group that attempts to do that much 
more than the "Silence of the Lambs" article.  And the only article in 
the whole issue that mentions RIM by name is the one from the PCP, 
which addresses its message to "Members of The RIM" on an equal 
basis with MPPs, Committees...etc.  So does that make the PCP a 
capitulator because they don't denounce RIM?

>But wait a minite, that one [Silence of the Lambs] 
>is written by Luis Arce Borja, who the New Flaggers
>are now denouncing as a traitor to the revolution and calling for
>his overthrow.  Hmmm...guess that doesn't really prove your point,
>does it? 

You seem to forget that what dialectical materialism teaches us is 
that everything consists of contradictions; everything is a unity of
opposites, and what determines the character of something is which 
of the aspects of the contradiction is primary.  This changes and 
develops over time.

Thus, someone with a very strong aspect of individualism and self-
promotion (like AO, or LAB) can play a very positive role when that 
aspect of their character, or their practice, is secondary to the 
aspect of promoting the revolution and its leadership, and exposing 
its enemies.

When that self-promotion aspect becomes primary, as with the 
WMC, then their role can easily become reactionary. Instead of 
primarily promoting the leadership of the revolution (the PCP) they 
promote themselves as better judges of how the party should 
handle  international relationships, with other communist parties 
and organizations (like in the RIM) and with broader supporters.

Instead of uniting all who can be united against the main enemy: 
US imperialism and its puppet Fujimori, they concentrate on 
targetting a secondary enemy for the Peruvian revolution: Yankee 
revisionism.  And further, anyone who doesn't unite wholeheartedly
with that focus, they try to isolate and discredit.

In this sense, in their attempt and effect of weakening and causing 
confusion among supporters of the Peruvian revolution worldwide, 
they play the same role as the senderologists: "friendly" senderologists, 
instead of the openly reactionary kind we're familiar with like Simon 
Strong, Robin Kirk, the Renique Brothers, etc.

It's very clear from your post that you unite with this focus; it's 
good that you at least were able to clarify that.

>Maybe I'll start with the first issue that came out after we met
>the New Flag, that's the `July/Aug.95 edition.

[actually, that was the one we got WHEN we met them last 
August, remember?]
But, of course, why don't you skip the two intervening issues, 
which have the articles, "With Friends Like These, Who Needs 
Enemies" Parts 1and 2.  Then you won't have to explain how 
those articles are "pro-avakian" or "pro-peace talks".  You 
obviously didn't think they were when you eagerly handed out 
the flyer with exerpts from "With Friends Like these Who Needs 
Enemies, Part 2" last fall.

In fact, in Vol 1 #3, there is not only an article addressing the RCP 
directly, but Part 2 &3 of the article by the Atelier d'Etudes Franco-
Peruviennes exposing the line of the capitulators.  Also the article 
"On 'National Identity' & Resistance of Andean Communities" from
ElDiario Lima, and a companion article that criticizes RCP by name 
for de-emphasizing the class character of the struggle in Peru.  

Then there's the "Women in Struggle" article that discusses 
Proletarian Feminism, (also from El Diario Lima) and the next one 
"Marxism and the Emancipation of Women" that criticizes the RCP 
line on women (though it doesn't mention them by name) There's 
also an article signed by MPP, August 1994 titled "The Voice of the 
People: Victory to the Revolution not Peace Accords".But it doesn't 
mention RCP, so I guess that's not good enough for you either.

> Hmmm...dang!  [talking about v.2#2]
>Can't find a single word against the  RCP or Avakian written by
>NF.  There is an article on page 18 entitled:  Last Hope of Opportunism
>Swept Away: RIM's Call For The Defense Of Our Red Flag Waving In Peru 
>Reinforces Our Struggle."

A paragraph in that article quotes the PCP document of January 
1995, "The Political Situation: Prepare the Strategic Offensive": 
"We must continue to struggle against the revisionist and 
capitulationist ROL [Right Opportunist Line].  If we don't fight 
it, we cannot build organizations superior to the enemy and we 
cannot seize power throughout the country.  _The_main_thing_is_
to_reaffirm_ourselves_on_the_Bases_of_Party_Unity_and_in_
building_the_seizure_of_power_which_demands_crushing_the_
revisionist_and_capitulationist_ROL_.  To sweep it away, purge 
the Party so that it will be strengthened, and it will be more like 
the fortress that it is, like a fine sword of the purest steel that 
President Gonzalo has forged."

You note that they (the PCP) do not say "we must base ourselves 
on opposition to Avakian and Co-RIM, and whatever we do, we must 
always and everywhere denounce those traitors!" The PCP calls for 
the crushing of the LINE that leads to capitulation.  Clearly, the RCP 
and CoRIM are not doing that; they instead are covering up that line.  
But neither is Arce nor Oleachea doing that.  Their whole focus is on 
denouncing, not just CoRIM, but the very forces who ARE trying to 
grapple with exposing that capitulationist LINE; on denouncing those 
who are trying to actually promote an understanding of the CONTENT 
of Gonzalo Thought, not just claim to be "defending" it.

There is clearly more to be done to fully carry out this instruction 
of the PCP, to crush the line of the capitulators. Unfortunately, some 
who could be focusing their efforts on doing that are instead puffing 
themselves up as being more red than the PCP, and more capable 
of winning the People's War from outside of Peru by "unmasking" 
every "phony supporter" they can invent, acting as if the "greatest 
danger to the revolution" is not only not imperialism but the "line 
within the party" like the RCP says, but rather is the alleged "pro-
Avakian line" of those who REFUSE to hold themselves above the 
PCP in their atitude toward the RIM. And this "geatest danger" to 
the People's War is not only outside the Party, but outside of PERU!

There were many who used to say that the US was forced to pull 
out of Vietnam because of the anti-war movement in the US.  This 
is similar to the WMC line that the decisive thing is "purifying" the 
overseas support movement for the Peruvian revolution.  In fact, this 
is dead wrong!

The US was defeated by the VIETNAMESE people, on the battlefield.  
The anti-war movement in the US and elsewhere aided that process, 
but without the military victories of the Vietnamese people, those 
movements would not have attained the level they did in terms of 
struggle in the imperialist countries.  And those movements alone 
could NEVER have led to the defeat of the US in Vietnam.  This is 
critical to understand.  

The actions of the Peruvian people on the battlefield is what's primary.  
THAT'S what the support movement has to concentrate on popularizing 
and promoting: The actions of the Peruvian people as the vanguard 
troops of the world revolution today, and the idelolgy they follow, 
MLM, GT, as the guiding theory of that vanguard role.  Our role as 
supporters can only be secondary to that of the masses of people 
in Peru.

To act, like the WMC does, that the role of the support movement 
is primary, and the struggle in Peru depends on purging the "impure" 
supporters from the support movement -- that is, at bottom, an idealist 
and ultimately reactionary position.  Bob Avakian cannot make or 
break the Peruvian revolution, neither can the WMC.  Our role as 
communists in other countries is to bring the lessons of the Peruvian 
revolution to bear on making revolution where we find ourselves.

You need to put more attention to studying and applying in practice
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and studying Gonzalo Thought for the 
lessons it holds that are applicable in general, and less attention to 
figuring out all the ways you can get back at RCP for treating you like 
shit.
 
Gina/Detroit
(The lead balloon, Minnie Mouse, milkmaid, Jesuit, whatever!)
P.S.Your post was good, but in fact it did not answer my challenge 
to dissect an article paragraph by paragraph.


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