UNITE! Info #106en: 1/7 More rattler "NE" writhings
Rolf Martens
[Posted: 30.07.99]
Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmärkning:
On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! /
¡UNIOS! / FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der
letzten Seite / Verrez information à la dernière page / Ver
información en la última página / Se information på sista sidan.
INTRO NOTE:
Desperately trying to wriggle away from its total exposure, the
phony"Marxist" swindler "Group Neue Einheit" in Germany in its
latest posting attempts to turn some parts of the history of
what one might call "the international Marxist-Leninist move-
ment" upside-down completely, in order to now accuse me(!) of
those very dastardly crimes which it is precisely that group
that has committed, over a number of years, and precisely I who
have combated, likewise during many years.
Earlier and thorough exposures of the total treason of that
rattlesnake "group" and of its predecessor, the once actually
revolutionary and in fact very advanced party the KPD/ML(NEUE
EINHEIT), from the mid/late 1980s on, I've made via the Net with
above all two postings, Infos #50en and #49de, both sent on
22.08.1997.
I've recently exposed (again) and proved with documents some
of its crimes, in Infos #104en (14.07) and #105en (26.07).
"Who is Rolf Martens", the "Group Neue Einheit" now asks. I'm
an adherent and an advocate, since 1974 and via the Internet
since late 1995, of the political and ideological line of Marx,
Lenin and Mao Zedong. For some details of my political back-
ground I can refer in particular to Info #72en/se: 'RM leaflets
"IFBL" 1975 - ' (2 parts), of 12.07.1998.
In the below, in order to refute the silly lies in the "Group
Neue Einheit's" latest posting and expose that group even fur-
ther, I shall first go into some parts of relatively recent
history, in a chapter taking up parts 1-2/7:
"SOME HISTORY CONCERNING THE M-L MOVEMENT SINCE 1976/78".
After that, I shall reproduce that wriggle posting, inserting
some (sometimes, for clarity, rather long) comments on the
main and very revealing lies in it, in parts 3-7/7 under:
"RATTLER WRITHINGS AND SOME STRAIGHT FACTS".
Last in this posting I'm bringing as an Appendix a list of:
PUBLICATIONS BY THE EARLIER, GENUINELY MARXIST,
KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) REPRODUCED VIA THE NET IN
GERMAN OR IN ENGLISH (SWEDISH) TRANSLATION BY ME.
End of Intro Note
SOME HISTORY CONCERNING THE M-L MOVEMENT SINCE 1976/78
1. BRIEFLY ON ONE IMPORTANT STRUGGLE ALWAYS
EXISTING IN THE TIME SINCE THEN
What has been a main feature of the history, since the overthrow
of socialism in China, of what you might call "the international
Marxist-Leninist movement", or perhaps more suitably, "the ef-
forts at re-assembling actually Marxist-Leninist forces interna-
tionally"?
Summing it up very briefly, you can say that a dominant feature
in it has been the struggle, on the part of such forces which
have really strived to uphold the correct line of Marx, Lenin
and Mao Zedong - really strived to represent the common inte-
rests of the overwhelming majority of people in the world - to
unite and to move forward, in sharp confrontation with those ex-
tremely massive attempts at precisely preventing this and at
leading the international movement astray which have been en-
gaged in by, above all, the CIA of the US imperialists.
"Marxists versus the CIA", you could say, has been the "main
event", during that time, fought out over a period of many
years.
(In earlier times, Soviet social-imperialism played an impor-
tant role too, in the attempts at subverting the international
revolutionary movement and leading it on to a completely re-
actionary track. But during the last two decades or so, that
role more and more got to be only a quite secondary one.)
2. WHO HAS BEEN, AND IS TODAY, IN WHOSE CORNER
REGARDING THE CIA-CONCOCTED "RIM"?
The main and quite important instrument of the CIA in these in-
ternational subversion strivings during many years has been the
so-called "RIM" ("Revolutionary Internationalist Movement").
I've written much on this in earlier Infos.
This phony "preparatory International" was created in 1984,
based on a reactionary document of that year called the "RIM De-
claration" and later translated into more than 20 languages.
What has been the role of the "Group Neue Einheit", and that of
the once really revolutionary and very advanced party from which
it emerged, the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT), in relation to the "RIM"?
They during more than a decade flagrantly *covered up* this im-
portant trap for the leftists in many countries, saying not one
word against (or even about) it in public.
I've written about this too, in many earlier Infos. And those
people eventually even admitted it themselves, saying in their
"Internet Statement No. 2/1998" that they got to see the "RIM
Declaration" as early as in late 1984, at once saw that it was
*unacceptable*, and then - "filed it away".
(As I've noted in Info #105en, they never breathed a word about
the existence of the "RIM" to me either, who co-operated closely
with them until April 1990 but only got to know about the "RIM"
in 1992/93.)
If any among the many crimes of that party's/"group's" may be
called its biggest, then it's this, I judge: Its long-time
covering-up of the "RIM". From 1984/85 on, it has been *in ca-
hoots with* the CIA on this.
That crime has been all the more flagrant, indubitable and vile,
because of the appearance, from 1 May 1987 on at least, precise-
ly e.g. in Berlin, where that formerly revolutionary party once
had originated and still had an important centre, of a certain
nasty reactionary mob of people generally referred to as "die
RIMler" in German ("the RIMlers", I've earlier called them in
English), since they precisely were "RIM" adherents. They called
themselves "Maoists" but over the years got to be more and more
infamous for their unprovoked beating up of others who likewise
identified themselves as leftists.
About all this, the later "Group Neue Einheit" people kept mum
too. They're direct accomplices also to these assaults in the
streets of Berlin, for instance. Locally (too), they formed an
alliance and a division of labour with the "RIMlers" for the
prevention of all genuine Marxism, the one "working" with words,
the other with sticks.
Only as late as on 01.05.1998 (in an "Extrablatt No. 34" then),
that is, some 11 years after the first appearance in Berlin of
the "RIMlers", did the "group" attack their organization pub-
licly - a hypocrisy likewise clearly engaged in (not least)
because of my Internet exposure since 1996 of its earlier total
silence on and actual alliance with that other group.
Among "RIM" adherents in Germany and in other European coun-
tries, it must be noted also, there probably have been, and
still today are, some people too who really want proletarian re-
volution and who were, or even still are, decieved by the "RIM".
The actual Marxists of course should strive to enlighten those
people and, if possible, unite with them. Precisely *against*
this the "Group Neue Einheit's" actions have been directed too.
I on my part, after having learned about the "RIM" in 1992 and
read its "Declaration" in February 1993, at once started warning
people here in Sweden about its character as a reactionary trap,
and on 12.08.1994 published an 8-page leaflet in English which
I disseminated internationally as far as was possible then: 'IN-
FORMATIONSBLAD No. 24 Eng: Why Does the RIM Help U.S. Imperia-
lism Encircle the PCP?'. I later, when I got Net access, posted
the same article as 'UNITE! Info #3en', on 01.01.1996.
This article, already in itself, meant the more or less complete
exposure of the "RIM" as a manipulation and a trap on the part
of reaction in the world. A number of Infos of mine further ex-
posing the "RIM" followed, including many which refuted the
"RIM's" lying on quite a number of issues, by their information
on what was actually Mao Zedong's line and on the history con-
cerning the reactionary "4-gang" in China, for instance.
These publications of mine (as far as I know) were the first,
and during a long time only, exposure of the so-called "RIM",
as such, in the world. I think I can say today, without exagge-
rating, that they gave considerable support to the genuinely re-
volutionary forces in many countries and dealt the CIA at least
something of a blow.
Even somewhat before my exposure of the "RIM", as an entity that
was reactionary from beginning to end, its *leaders*, the "Co-
RIM", had come under attack and exposure by others, namely, for
their stabbing in the back, since late 1993, of the people's war
led by the PCP in Peru. (On the PCP, more below.) But this ex-
posure by those other people never was extended to the "RIM"
itself, which it was the really important thing to do.
Finally, after I had been telling people the facts about the
"RIM" during several years already, the "Group Neue Einheit"
broke its earlier total silence on it and now felt compelled to
shamefacedly mumble, in an Internet posting on 05.08.1997 - en-
titled, typically enough, "NEUE EINHEIT: Rolf Martens' latest
slanders" - that which those people had said back in 1984/85
too, but *only* in private, namely, that the 1984 "RIM Declara-
tion" was "unacceptable". As noted above, they later also con-
fessed to their long-time cover-up of it with the more detailed
"Internet Statement No. 2/1998". At the same time, they attacked
me, the one who did expose the "RIM" to begin with, with new ri-
diculous lies.
So, concerning the subversion by the CIA, including not least
the "RIM", who has been, and is today, in whose "ring corner"?
Clearly, this particular part of the history places the "Group
Neue Einheit" squarely (despite its enforced hypocrisy from
August 1997 on) into the corner of the CIA. And I have been, and
am, in the corner of the Marxists on this.
In its latest statement, the "group" above all tries to turn
these clear facts upside-down.
3. WHO HAS BEEN IN WHOSE CORNER REGARDING INFORMATION,
IN LATER YEARS AND VIA THE NET, ON THE REACTIONARY
4-GANG IN CHINA AND ITS ROLE IN THE OVERTHROW OF
SOCIALISM IN THAT COUNTRY IN 1976/78?
One particularly important falsification concerning recent his-
tory, and one which stands in close connection with propaganda
for a certain really ultra-reactionary phony"left" political
current on the international level, has been the one engaged
in, by a number of different forces, concerning the mid-1970s
"4-gang" in China. In this have participated the so-called
"RCP"-USA (above all), the later "leading party" within the
"RIM", even since back in 1978, the "RIM" itself since 1984
and later many other swindlers too including the so-called
"MIM" ("Maoist Internationalist Movement").
These forces all have tried to make people believe that this
reactionary group, sharply combated by Mao Zedong and named
precisely by him the "Gang of Four" - were "the real revolu-
tionaries" in China after Mao Zedong's death (on 09.09.1976).
On the facts concerning this, and on the role of the 4-gang in
the overthrow in China, I wrote in my abovementioned 8-page
leaflet in English 'INFORMATIONSBLAD No. 24 Eng: Why Does the
RIM Help U.S. Imperialism Encircle the PCP?' of 12.08.1994,
later posted on the Net as 'UNITE! Info #3en' on 01.01.1996:
'*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 ar-
rested on 6.10.1976 by the forces of Hua Guofeng, who
publicly promised to continue Mao Zedong's line com-
pletely and thus also continue the criticism against
the "traditional"-rightist Deng Xiaoping.
This blow against the long-hated Gang of Four, there-
fore, 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), por-
trays 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 Zedong's
"closest comrades in arms"(!), as the Declaration calls
the gang? What really is inferred here, together with
the untruth 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" to-
day.
What actually took place was that Deng Xiaoping's
right-deviationist 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, started 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 distan-
ced itself from the Gang of Four and, even before its
"RIM days", held some correspondingly phoney"left" views
on international issues.'
Later, I devoted two really long Infos, the 12-part #22en of
03.11.1996 and the likewise 12-part #45en of 26.07.1997, to the
correcting of history concerning the 4-gang and the entire over-
throw of socialism in China, bringing a large number of docu-
ments to prove the facts.
Some vitally important articles on this, from 1976, 1977, 1978
and 1979, by the then still revolutionary KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT),
I posted on the Net too, in English translation by me, in Infos
#1en, #12en and #40en. I've complemented this with an analysis,
based on these articles, by myself regarding a certain important
mass protest in China against the 4-gang in April 1976, "Remem-
ber Tiananmen '89 and '76", of 04.06.1996 - reposted on each
4 June since 1997 as Info #36en.
In addition to this, I in Infos #11en, #13en, #16en, #18en,
#26en, #44en and #69en have brought important documents from
the Communist Party of China as led by Mao Zedong, showing what
*was* the line of that then genuinely revolutionary party.
[Continued in part 2/7]