Re: FAATZ: Re nature of the PCP

[Chris Faatz <cfaatz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 5 Apr 1996 Rubyg580@xxxxxxx wrote:

> In a message dated 96-04-04 14:09:17 EST, you write:
>
> >My view of the PCP is that it's what has been termed "bureaucratic
> >centralism" that rules. I.e., the Party's highest bodies make the
> >decisions, and the cadre base carries them out. Sure, info flows from the
> >base to the top, but *decision-making* is made without the input of the
> >base. That's not Leninism, imho. If I'm incorrect, I invite your reply.
>
> This definitely sounds like the way RCP functions, but what evidence
> do you have that tells you this is the way PCP functions?

My information flows from sources that A.O., L.Q. and others claim are
not reliable--NACLA, Latin American Bureau, etc. However, as a newcomer
to this list, I wasn't aware of the book by Simon whatshisname. I'm going
to check that out.

I *don't* take the PCP's own info, any more than the RW, as objective
and reliable--until I have grounds to believe that it's so that
definitively derails the info I have from my other sources.

Clearly, that's a point on which we differ. I hope we can do so amiably.
Or, at least so long as I continue my search for information.

> I know
> about RCP because I was there, for quite a few years.  Obviously I
> don't have the same level of experience with PCP, but I can say from
> working with people who follow the line of the PCP, that the difference
> between them and the "comrades" of RCP isthe difference between
> night and day.

We'll see. I don't believe it, at this point. Perhaps the Simon (Strong,
is it?) book will help lead me to believe otherwise.

I'll warn you--I'm picking up the latest issue of "A World to Win" today
as well, even with all the stuff that's been said about the RCP.

Parenthetically, I'm sorry you spent so many years around those folks. I
must say, your bitterness and anger come through quite clearly. Here's
to your continuing on a revolutionary course, having learned some lessons
through your experiences.

>
> Particularly the attitude toward criticism and self-criticism, the attitude
> toward the masses, the attitude toward political discussion and
> debate and the encouragement of contacts between people--in all these
> areas there is a world of difference between what I observed at close
> range and over a number of years in RCP and what I have observed and
> experienced working with, for example, the NEW FLAG.

See, I understand what you're saying, but I have to say that, while I
read New Flag cover to cover with great interest (or did, until Luis
unmasked me as the social imperialist reactionary liberation theologian
that I am), as a *marxist,* I need independent verification. *Everything*
I've read outside of PCP-allied or sponsored publications paints a very
different picture of the organization, its line, and functioning. While,
with Chris B, I support the revolution in Peru and its stand against
imperialism and neo-colonialism, I'm not convinced that the PCP is the
vanguard of the Peruvian revolution. *And I'm not convinced that this
question is being resolved on the ground, either,* in the interests of
the PCP.
>
Cordially,

C2



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---