Re: Louis Godena actually said something

[hariette@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (hariette spierings)]

>It seems to me that support for the Peoples War in Peru could be
>widened even further if people did not have to support some of the
>slogans Adolpho lists. Somehow, I cannot see a rank and file member
>of my union understanding why he or she has to support the slogan
>"Long Live Chairman Gonzalo, etc." before that person can support the
>People's War in Peru. For that matter, I don't understand either.
>Shouldn't the strategy be to "unite all who can be united" instead of
>restricting the support to the few who can uphold all those slogans?
>
>Comradely,
>Robert Perrone


Robert, to support a revolution, means to support its leadership.  This
debate went on too during the Vietnam War when the social-democrats and the
phonie lefts would only "support the people of Vietnam", "support the
children" etc., while the revolutionary camp upheld support for the NLF and
chanted "Ho-Ho-Chi Ming, Victory to the NLF" in the streets of the US and
every county in the world!.  Of course the union rank and file will not, as
they did not initially support even the revolution itself. It is up to the
leaders to educate them, and how are you going to form a proper advanced
detachment if that detachment is only united around gaseous good wishes such
as "victory to the workers and peasants of Peru"?.  You underestimate the
acumen of the working class.  The working class - the real rank and filer -
is never afraid of recognising leadership or even inclined to belittle its
importance.  It is only workerists in the mould of malecki, posing as the
"consciousness of the working class" who entertain such fantasies. If you
want proof, look at the British miners and their iron allegiance to
Scargill's leadership (inept as it was in the end) during the strike and how
did they support him in every possible way.  To say that the workers are
against leadership, is to show little understanding of the working class.

Moreover, that is what leadership is all about, and that is what the
Peruvian revolution can serve for, to promote a legitimate and principled
class consciouss leadership among the ordinary working class folk, by
bringing to the consciousness of the masses the unbreakable link between a
revolution, its protagonists and the ideas and leadership which have
emebarked in the road to victory those workers and peasants with which any
proletarian would feel a "natural" class solidarity.

Only in this way can you offer the proletariat of the advanced countries the
contribution to the common cause of the class at the international level
which is embodied in the revolution in Peru.  All other avenues, lead to a
"humanitarian campaign" of condescending saviours.

However, such a policy would not in any way result in limiting the scope of
the movement.  On the contrary, once the advanced elements begin to move in
an organised fashion, it is certain that the general masses will follow and
that even those opportunist elements "oppossed to leadership" will trail
behind trying to derail the movement, but at the same time helping to
engross it, as indeed it happened during the Vietnam War.

One must distinguish in a movement those who lead and those who trail behind
to validate their "credentials" as the "people's friends". We must first
build-up OUR front as a revolutionary front and set it in motion.  Later,
the front can widen into day to day actions and understandings with the
"trailers", but only on condition that this understandings and actions
actually serve to promote the interests of the revolutionary class against
those of their class enemy.

Fundamental for a Front FOR the Revolution is to uphold revolutionary
leadership!

Adolfo Olaechea



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---