UNITE! Info #3en: 3/3 '94 art. on Mao, RIM, US, PCP
Rolf Martens
[First posted: 01.01.96;
Reposted with line lengths edited: 05.06.98]
Article "WHY DOES THE RIM HELP U.S. IMPERIALISM
ENCIRCLE THE PCP?", originally published by RM in leaflet
INFORMATIONSBLAD No. 24 Eng, 12.8.1994, Part 3/3
(Continued from part 2/3)
*The Revolutionary Line of Mao Zedong and of the Former KPD/ML
(NEUE EINHEIT), and the Phoney"Marxist" Declaration of the RIM*
The RIM Declaration of 1984 contains some vicious open at-
tacks on (at least formerly) well-known correct principles of
Marxism and some flagrant untruths about the then existing si-
tuation in the world and recent history, including omissions of
vital facts. It's difficult to see how these things could have
been the results of even gross ignorance on the part of its
authors.
With particular fury, the Declaration attacks Mao Zedong's
extremely successful foreign policy of a united front against
imperialism in general and against one or two superpowers in
particular. By the 1960s, U.S. imperialism had long been the
main protagonist of reaction. Such imperialist former big powers
as Great Britain, Germany, France and Japan could no longer com-
pete for hegemony. Mao Zedong correctly analysed them as be-
longing to an intermidary zone between the then only hegemonic
power and the socialist countries. In the well-known "A Proposal
Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Move-
ment" of 1963, one of the CPC documents of "the Great Polemics"
unmasking Soviet revisionism, he correctly urged the working-
class in the capitalist countries which U.S. imperialism was
controlling or trying to control to "direct their attacks mainly
against U.S. imperialism but also against their own monopoly ca-
pitalists and other reactionary forces who are betraying the
national interests".
For heaven's sake, no!, the Declaration cries out (p. 23,
English version). We're all for Mao Zedong, of course, but that
was one of his mistakes! Imperialist countries, you see, can
have *no* legitimate "national interests" but *only* imperialist
ones. Mao Zedong's "erroneous" view "seriously affected the de-
velopment of the Marxist-Leninist movement in these countries".
It also "had a long history in the international communist move-
ment", and it definitely "should be broken with" (p. 23). You
must never advocate such united fronts against one or two super-
powers!
Mao Zedong's view did have a long history in the communist
movement. As all who have had to use Marxism to fight back
against the attacks by phoney"Marxist" helpers of imperialism
and social-imperialism on this point know, it was precisely the
correct view of Lenin, too. His "The Discussion on Self-Determi-
nation Summed Up", for instance (in Collected Works, Vol. 22),
written in 1916 in the middle of the then raging imperialist
war, was aimed precisely at refuting the view of some Dutch and
Polish socialists that there could be "no" *national* wars, at
least not in Europe, in the imperialist period and that it was
"impermissible" ever to support the national independence of an
imperialist country. He wrote, i.a.:
"If Belgium, let us say, is annexed by Germany in 1917, and
in 1918 revolts to secure her liberation, the Polish comrades
will be against her revolt on the grounds that the Belgian bour-
geoisie possess 'the right to oppress foreign peoples'! - There
is nothing Marxist or even revolutionary in this argument. If we
do not want to betray socialism we *must* support *every* revolt
against our chief enemy, the bourgeoisie of the big states, pro-
vided it is not the revolt of a reactionary class."
Was this unknown to the RIM Declaration's authors? If you
read some of the many articles and books by the chairman of and
one other "theoretician" (RW/OR) of the RCP, USA, comrades Bob
Avakian and Raymond Lotta, you can see that they at least are
very well read in the works of Marx and Lenin. Did they have a
hand in, in 1984? This is unknown but does seem likely. Anyway,
calling that Declaration "Marxist-Leninist" is a lie.
China's successful foreign policy under the leadership of
Mao Zedong, which helped the proletariat in the world and the
oppressed peoples and nations enormously and which gave China
itself an international prestige which was never greater than in
1976, was one of the important achievements of the Chinese revo-
lution in general and of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolu-
tion, 1966-1976, in particular, which made the leadership remain
in the hands of the revolutionary proletariat.
The last five years even have seen an enormous "posthumous
victory", so to speak, of that foreign policy. By 1974, the si-
tuation in the world described above had developed further so
that, against a rising tide of national liberation struggles in
or by countries of the third world, of revolutionary struggles
by the masses in many other countries as well and even some
struggles by capitalist/imperialist countries to shake off fo-
reign domination, the entire imperialist system was being upheld
mainly by two superpowers, which also were contending with each
other for hegemony, Soviet social-imperialism and U.S. imperia-
lism.
Mao Zedong in that year presented his famous and correct
analysis of the countries' in the world being divided into three
groups, three worlds, neither then nor later forgetting the
class struggle continuing also within the different countries,
never ceasing to advocate revolutionary war as the way for the
proletariat to seize power. And he was at that time already ad-
vocating the forging of a broad international united front
against the two superpowers, in particular against social-impe-
rialism, and later sought to include not only small and medium-
sized imperialist countries, those of the second world, but even
certain forces of U.S. imperialism into a united front against
Soviet social-imperialism as the then most dangerous source of
war, which had put its economy on a military footing and above
all was threatening an aggression against Western Europe.
The danger of a war in Europe being started by social-impe-
rialism was a very serious threat in the mid-'70:s. Mao Zedong's
China and, in Europe itself, above all the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT),
whose genuinely proletarian revolutionary character enabled it
to see the facts, persistently warned about it, while almost the
entire bourgeoisie pretended there was "detente". When the Rus-
sian new tsarists could not realize their hegemonic plans, their
entire empire got into increasing difficulties and by 1989 star-
ted to crack. The masses oppressed by it revolted.
The recent partial downfall of that pillar of reaction, So-
viet social-imperialism and social-fascism, on the whole greatly
has improved the world situation. This upheaval also has caused
further economic misery but it will in the long run be very be-
neficial for the peoples of the world. Bourgeois leaders as one
man are calling it "a defeat of communism". That's a good one.
Most of those people licked social-imperialism's boots while Mao
Zedong and his adherents told all how similar it was to Hitler
fascism.
*"Never Unite the Many to Defeat the Few!"*
*"Superpower Lackeys Are the Real Revolutionaries!"*
Even more loudly than at Mao Zedong's correct analysis of
the world situation in the '60:s, the RIM Declaration howls at
his correct analysis of the situation in the '70:s and at the
immensely important foreign policy decisions which followed from
it, which were intensely disliked by that group within U.S. im-
perialism which had connived at the social-imperialists' aggres-
sive plans because they suited its own counterrevolutionary
aims.
These decisions weren't Mao Zedongs's at all, you see! It
was "the revisionists" in China who then "to a large degree"
"controlled" its diplomacy! (p. 25) (Precisely when in fact
Chairman Mao was receiving more foreign heads of state than
ever, precisely when more people than ever listened to his
words.) And to advocate unity of the third world was "all
wrong"! To portray countries of the second world as intermidate
forces was even - "counterrevolutionary"! "The Marxist-Lenin-
ists" (who? - perhaps the above-mentioned "uncle" comrades Ava-
kian and Lotta, who both had published books with such attempts)
have "correctly refuted" the "revisionist slander" that "the
'Three Worlds Theory' was put forward by" Mao Zedong! (p. 25)
It was indeed a "nasty" theory to the superpowers and their hel-
pers.
Here again, one basic principle of this Declaration stands
out: By no means should there be a united front against those
reactionary forces in the world which at the time are the most
dangerous! This "principle" is being upheld by today's "RIM-
lers", too.
The Declaration does contain many phrases which may look
very revolutionary. It even repeats some important truths, in-
cluding *some* of those extremely important principles concer-
ning inner-party struggle which were stressed by the Documents
of the 10th Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), in
1973. However, it never refers directly to those Documents,
which, like practically all the other very important CPC docu-
ments of the 1966-76 period, the RIM always has been discoura-
ging people from studying in the original. And, significantly,
it leaves one thing out which, i.a., precisely hits at the RIM's
line:
"It is imperative to note that one tendency covers another.
The opposition to Chen Tu-Hsiu's Right opportunism which advo-
cated 'all alliance, no struggle' covered Wang Ming's 'Left' op-
portunism which advocated 'all struggle, no alliance'. The rec-
tification of Wang Ming's 'Left' deviation covered Wang Ming's
Right deviation. The struggle against Liu Shao-chi's revisionism
covered Lin Piao's revisionism." (CPC's 10th Congress, Zhou En-
lai's report, Peking Review 35-36/1973, p. 21)
This element, one tendency covering another, also was pre-
sent in the struggle within the CPC at that time and played a
significant role in the later overthrow of socialism in China,
in 1976-78. Here, too, the RIM Declaration grossly falsifies the
demonstrable facts of what happened, this time in order to jus-
tify the admiration which the RIM has always tried making people
feel for its quite particular "heroes", the phoney"leftist", in
reality ultra-rightist, group of persons who had degenerated in-
to becoming, i.a., superpower lackeys, known as the "Gang of
Four".
The "gang" was named so by Mao Zedong, who in 1974 repeated-
ly urged them to stop functioning as a such. Their leader, Jiang
Qing, in 1972 already, through a series of secret unauthorized
interviews with historian Roxane Witke, had started seeking U.S.
support for herself as "Dowager Empress" after Mao Zedong's
death. Even better suited their line social-imperialism. The
CPC's CC's two decisions, proposed by Mao Zedong, on 7.4.1976 to
dismiss the publicly criticized openly-rightist Deng Xiaoping
and to appoint Hua Guofeng First Vice-Chairman also hit the
"gang", whose member Zhang Chunqiao had "outranked" Hua Guofeng
but was "bypassed" as less to be trusted.
Mao Zedong at CPC meetings towards the end of his life re-
peatedly sharply criticized not only Deng Xiaoping and his
"right deviationist wind to reverse correct verdicts" of 1975-76
but also Jiang Qing's phoney"left" reactionary line, explicitly
warning against her "wild ambitions" of "becoming CPC chairman"
and even saying: "After I die, she will make trouble".
This the Gang of Four did. Less than a month after Mao Ze-
dong's death (9.9.1976) they attempted a coup to seize power.
*How Was Socialism Overthrown in China, How Did the Marxist-
Leninists Analyse This and What Has Been the RIM's Fairy Tale
About It?*
The phoney"left" gang was dealt a decisive blow and its coup
attempt foiled when all its four members were arrested on 6.10.
1976 by the forces of Hua Guofeng, who publicly promised to con-
tinue Mao Zedong's line completely and thus also continue the
criticism against the "traditional"-rightist Deng Xiaoping.
This blow against the long-hated Gang of Four, therefore,
received massive and enthusiastic support from the Chinese
people and also from genuinely Marxist-Leninist forces abroad.
But the RIM, e.g. in its Declaration (pp. 25-27), portrays
this blow as "the counterrevolutionary coup d'état in China".
This "theory" is not only obviously very strange, it also defies
the facts. How could suddenly, in revolutionary China, a coup
d'état have succeeded without at least great turmoil; why
wasn't there mass resistance against the action hitting Mao Ze-
dong's "closest comrades in arms"(!), as the Declaration calls
the gang? What really is inferred here, together with the un-
truth that China's diplomacy "to a large degree" was controlled
by revisionists, is: The great beacon of the early '70:s, China,
was "half revisionist". It's pure fantasy, aimed at promoting
"Gang-of-Four-ism" today.
What actually took place was that Deng Xiaoping's right-de-
viationist group utilized the damage caused and threatened by
the phoney"left" clique and the intense hatred it caused, to
further their own purposes step by step, secretly being joined
by Hua Guofeng's group, who as early as in November, 1976, star-
ted breaking their promise wholly to uphold Mao Zedong's line.
One revolutionary party in the world - as far as I know -
analysed this correctly: the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) in Germany.
Comrade Gonzalo's PCP (faction), for instance, never did show
an understanding of it. It never distanced itself from the Gang
of Four and, even before its "RIM days", held some correspon-
dingly phoney"left" views on international issues.
Such a stand, as taken by an isolated revolutionary party in
a comparatively backward country like Peru, may well be judged
to be an honest and relatively harmless mistake.
It takes on a different character when propagandized inter-
nationally and systematically since 1984 by an entity such as
the RIM. This all comrades inside or outside the RIM must see.
*The RIM's Utter Silence on a Historic Reverse by the
Bourgeoisie, Led by U.S. Imperialism, and What This
Reverse Must Mean*
During the decade before the RIM Declaration was written, a
series of mutually interconnected issues had risen to great im-
portance, at least in Europe: The extremely reactionary anti-
growth, anti-nuclear-energy, anti-science, anti-technology and
anti-industry campaigns instigated by the most right-wing bour-
geoisie, including the revisionists, in general and by U.S. im-
perialism in particular. And it was the preceding phoney"Marx-
ists" who had provided and misled those groups of ignorant
people who supported these assaults on vital interests of the
masses, mainly under the upside-down pretext of "environmental
protection".
These attacks, which continue today, with ever more bour-
geois forces behind them, stem from the bourgeoisie's fear that
the technological and industrial development might make condi-
tions ripe for a revolutionary workers' movement which would en-
danger their entire rule in the world. Marx even noted the be-
ginnings of this fear some 140 years ago, pointing out: "Steam,
electricity and spinning machine were revolutionaries of a much
more dangerous character than even the citizens Barbès, Raspail
and Blanqui." (Speech in London, 14.4.1856)
Today the bourgeoisie on certain vital points already com-
pletely have reversed their earlier striving for more and more
industry, better and better technology. In most so-called "ad-
vanced" countries, they are retreating from nuclear energy, in
part even from the use of oil; they are advancing backwards into
the coal age, even into the windmill age, are systematically
creating mass unemployment and tearing down earlier welfare sys-
tems.
Clearly, all this calls for radical counterattack by the
Marxist-Leninists. Such has been delivered by one, only one,
party, the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), which thereby also, when it was
still revolutionary, gruesomely further unmasked the earlier
phoney"Marxists". And what do the RIM and its Declaration say on
this enormous subject? Not one word. Again, the RIM's standpoint
greatly pleases, above all, U.S. imperialism, which is enginee-
ring anti-nuclear-energy campaigns and other foul things in the
world and greatly fears those counterattacks against them which
only our ideology, actual Marxism, makes possible.
In order also to reverse the reversal, the proletariat must
strike down the bourgeoisie's rule in the world completely, and
the genuine Marxist-Leninists must begin do do some uniting.
NOTES:
1. On the author:
Since decades back, there is no Marxist-Leninist party in Swe-
den. In pamphlets, leaflets etc published since 1974 I've been
advocating the creation of one. I've studied CPC writings since
1973 and was even more influenced by representatives of the
KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) who because of persecution in Berlin(West)
and West Germany at the time were in exile in Malmoe 1972-76.
That party's line proved very effective in practice here. I con-
tinued close cooperation with that party until April, 1990, when
I criticized it as now bourgeois. See my article (in German):
"EINE KRITIK der buergerlichen Politik der KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT),
oder wie sie nunmehr heisst, und ihres Vorsitzenden Klaus Sen-
der, 1989 / Mitte 1990", August-September, 1990. Since 1990,
some mutual exchange of publications has continued.
2. On the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT):
Address: Verlag NEUE EINHEIT, Koernebachstrasse 50, 44143 Dort-
mund, Germany, or: Postfach 309, 10973 Berlin, Germany; tel:
+49 - 231 - 83 89 32; +49 - 30 - 693 74 70. Chairman: Klaus Sen-
der. Among its earlier publications are some extremely important
articles, urgently recommended for study. Mostly available only
in German. Statement, Oct '78, and article on international si-
tuation, '73, available in English from me. An important series
of publications by Klaus Sender ('86 etc) point out some serious
errors by Lenin, i.a. on pan-slavism.
3. On other addresses:
Magazine A World to Win, Information Bureau of the RIM, IEC have
BCM World to Win, BCM RIM and BCM IEC respectively, all:
27 Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3XX, U.K. Weekly RCP paper
Revolutionary Worker / Obrero Revolucionario: RCP Publications,
Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL60654, USA
Voie Prolétarienne (monthly: Partisan, magazines: Cahiers):
BP No. 95, 93803 Epinay/Seine cedex, France
UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / !UNIOS! /
FOERENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
Advocates the political line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong. Each
item # will be posted in one or more language(s). Leaflets in
the INFORMATIONSBLAD series published by me, mainly in Swedish,
since 1975 are available on request.
Befuerwortet die politische Linie von Marx, Lenin und Mao Ze-
dong. Jedes Nummer # wird in einer oder mehreren Sprache(n) ge-
sandt werden. Flugblaetter der Reihe INFORMATIONSBLAD, von mir
hauptsaechlich in Schwedisch seit 1975 veroeffentlicht, sind auf
Anfrage erhaltlich.
Avocate de la ligne politique de Marx, Le'nine et Mao Zedong.
Chaque nume'ro # sera envoye' en une ou plusieurs langue(s).
Volantes de la se'rie INFORMATIONSBLAD, publie'e par moi,
principalement en sue'dois, depuis 1975, sont accessibles sur
demande.
Partidaria de la li'nea poli'tica de Marx, Lenin y Mao Zedong.
Cado nu'mero # sera enviado en una o varias lengua(s).
Se pueden conseguir a la demanda volantes de la serie
INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicada por me principalmente en
sueco desde 1975.
Foerespraakar Marx', Lenins och Mao Zedongs politiska linje.
Varje nummer # kommer att saendas på ett eller flera spraak.
Flygblad i serien INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicerad av mig
huvudsakligen paa svenska sedan 1975, kan faas paa begaeran.
Postal address:
Rolf Martens
Nobelvaegen 38
S - 214 33 Malmoe
SWEDEN
Tel: +46 - 40 - 124832