Re: Correcting error in "Have the 'New Flag'"...

[hariette@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (hariette spierings)]

>What is wrong with a conditional endorsement of RIM as an initial step
>of uniting the loose forces of revolution worldwide? None.

If Co-RIM
>did not meet the Marxist principles established as a Condition by the PCP
>to joining this organization, it is the duty of the supporters of the
>People's War everywhere to demand the PCP Central Committee to take
>corrective action which would involve the folowing two alternatives:

>1) removal of the Avakian clique of its direction and reconstitution
>of RIM with genuine and mass based M-L-M parties,

>2) withdrawal of the PCP from this organization which will mean in practice
>the destruction and collapse of RIM. At the present moment, Co-RIM has
>only a fragile and bureaucratic existance.



I think comrades should take an historical perspective on this issue rather
than getting sidetracked on questions of who is the best anti-Avakian
fighter of the lot.

As early as 1984, the people who today conform Committee Sol Peru in London
expressed the following view in respect to the Revolutionary
Internationalist Movement:

"In the RIM there are many who should be there and still are not, while
there are also some who are there, but if they do not correct themselves, it
would be better if they were not"  (Maoism and the Two Line Struggle Within
the RIM - Committee Sol Peru, London, 12/10/1994).

This view fully corresponds with the two alternatives listed by New Flag as
the task of the present moment.  Also, it represents a way forward from this
particular temporary quagmire for the Maoists of the world, and also for all
the genuine anti-revisionist forces within the International Communist
Movement at the world level.

In 1984, this position of ours was still "a voice in the wilderness" and
other views prevailed within the movement of support for the People's War in
Peru.

However, we were patient then, and did not jump the gun.  We did not set our
noses against the Central Committee of the PCP demanding that our views were
taken on board or else, nor did we make it a condition for uniting in
defence of the Peruvian revolution that everyone should agree with our
analysis of Robert Avakian as a "New Khruschev", nor with our assessment of
the RCP line as regurgitated Zinovievism and crypto-Trotskysm, despite the
fact that all of that was clear to us from the first day we came into
contact with the leadership of RIM in London.

Today this minority view is become the current orthodoxy within the Maoist
Movement.  It took a heinous treason to prove it right on the spot.

If I may say so, comrades should not take an intellectual's view of these
matters.  Intellectuals can indeed see farther on occassions, but they lack
the stamina to struggle patiently for their views to prevail upon the
movement.

What is the use of being 100% right in everything if you would find no
support for your views because these are ahead of the times? Comrade Stalin
said: "The Central Committee does not claim infallibity".  Can we claim it
ourselves just because we may have been right on one particular point among
so many others to be taken into consideration?  No.  It is important to have
a sense of proportion.

Moreover, there is no reason why the first alternative as listed by NF
should be discarded, even today.  More than 98% of the bases of RIM are in
fact oppossed to the Avakian bureacracy.  It may in fact be possible to
combine both alternatives by a process of reconstitution - and even a change
of name of the organisation, once revisionism is overcome, since the RIM
name may appear to many to be already tainted beyond repair.  And what is
applicable to RIM is also applicable to the work of the International
Emergency Committee just as well.

That is in fact the sense of the World Mobilisation Commission being
currently organised by the red fraction at the international level.

The question of the opportunist Peruvian individual and his sidekicks as
mentioned by comrade Rolf Martens, is only a derivative question of the
above with barely local importance in a part of Sweden.

Opportunism will not prevail if we firmly unite the revolutionary forces and
put an end to secundary squabbles that detract from the General Line.
Chairman Mao taught always to apply the "piecemeal solution".  One step at a
time, and we will succeed in removing the colossal mountain of garbage - and
here - in the case of the RIM bureacracy - we are hardly dealing with any
more than a molehill.

The central issue today is to close ranks around the call for the World
Mobilisation Commission, a call that has already been endorsed by El Diario
Internacional, Committee Sol-Peru Belgium, Committee Sol Peru London, MPP
Belgium.

Here in London we have also received endorsements from Peru Support
Committee Rhode Island, Peru Support Committee Detroit, Luis Godenas and
Rolf Martens himself.  More should come in the next few days, I'm sure (if I
have forgotten to list anybody, please send again your mailers of endorsement).

I am also sure that El Diario will soon publish the list of all endorsements
that arrive directly to their offices, and that these will show the great
level of unity of the anti-revisionist camp at the international level.

Long Live the World Mobilisation Commission!
Long Live the Unity of the Marxists-Leninists-Maoists of the world!
Down with imperialism, revisionism and opportunism!

Adolfo Olaechea





     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---