lunes, 6 de julio de 2020

A Refutation of the Communist Pontiffs of France and Belgium


Last worker’s Day, among the jointed declarations of MLM Parties and Organizations, there was one signed by the Communist Party of France (MLM) and the Marxist Leninist Maoist Center of Belgium entitled: With the people's war, under the banner of the MLM, before the second general crisis of capitalism! In that statement, which seems more like anathema to communist pontiffs, the comrades expose: "their" Marxism "well understood"; refuting with phrases the "heretics" who in different parts of the world are fighting to lead the forces of the world proletariat to the fulfilment of its historical mission.

The statement of the comrades could be dispatched with any phrase, as some comrades do it, however, it is necessary to take their ideas seriously and refute their mistakes because some are disqualifying phrases without any argument, others only show "their" contradictory and mutilated Marxism, and others coincide with the ideas of mistaken comrades who seek to introduce within the Maoist Leninist Marxists, formulations and dogmas contrary to Marxism.

The comrades begin affirming: "We are entering a new Era..." Do they mean that we are in a different era than that of the World Proletarian Revolution? However, from what they saying below, everything seems to indicate that they are not talking about something different, but that it is a “small” slip, a meaningless phrase that belies those who pose as “infallible” Marxists.

Later arguing why, we are entering a "new Era" they state:

“This general crisis appears with COVID-19, a disease whose virus that produces it is the result of a mutation that comes directly from the contradictions developed by the capitalist mode of production: the contradiction between humans and animals on the one hand, and the contradiction between cities and the countryside on the other”

First, the economic crisis of world capitalism already existed since 2008, even the imperialist agencies already announced the decrease of the world economy and warned of the worsening of the social crisis days before the appearance of the Coronavirus. The Coronavirus pandemic shows an extreme flare-up of it, revealing it in all its magnitude around the world. Second, it is unilateral and inaccurate to refer to a “contradiction between human beings and animals”, when the exact Marxist formulation refers to the contradiction between society and nature, since there are no humans outside of society and nature is not only animals.

Then they sentence in bold:

“We affirm, on this First of May, 2020, that the capitalist mode of production is a complete obstacle to the development of humanity and to the valorization of life itself. All the states that are at the service of the capitalist mode of production must be overthrown, so that humanity can establish socialist, dialectical and non-destructive relations with everything that forms the planetary Biosphere!”

Without going too far into reasoning about what they mean by the “valorization of life itself, it is incorrect the suspicion that the comrades have that there are States that are NOT at the service of the capitalist mode of production is striking. What would those States be? An unfounded "suspicion" when it has already become evident that imperialism has become a world system of exploitation and oppression, subjecting all modes of production and putting all States at its service.

In the words of the Proposal for the Formulation of a General Line for Unity of the International Communist Movement of the UOC (MLM), it is stated:

“Imperialism, as an internationalized mode of production, chained all countries —with their specific modes of production— in a single world economy, where the economy of each country is a link in a single chain, which obeys and serves production, the realization of surplus-value, accumulation and centralization of world capital.”

Consequently, ALL STATES "are at the service of the capitalist mode of production"

Later and also in bold, they give us another papal sentence:

“In imperialist metropolises, where capitalism triumphs 24 hours a day, there must be a spirit of rupture to equalize, an ability to be consistent to the end in the affirmation of communism. We underline the growing weight of subjectivity in the imperialist metropolises and remember that revolutionary consciousness never arises mechanically, but as a fracture with the dominant values”

Proletarian ideology is a break with bourgeois ideology, but it does not emerge from an exclusive struggle in the sphere of ideas. It arises from the contradictions of capitalist society and class struggle but it develops independently of the struggle of the spontaneous movement that has the same base. However, the “fracture with the dominant values” in the social field is only possible through the revolutionary activity of the masses. By merging socialist consciousness with the labour movement. Therefore, according to Engels, proposing a "cultural battle ..." outside the class struggle is pure "ideologism", it is, among other things, a coincidence with the “cultural revolution” advanced by Avakianist revisionism a few years ago, and from which it cannot arise but, as the practice has shown, a sect.

And from that anti-Marxist statement, they conclude the following statement, also highlighted in bold:

“We affirm here that only a correct dialectical materialist understanding of the crisis can lead to a correct political and cultural orientation, not to mention the ideological and scientific dimension”

A sophism that only the enlightened pontiffs understand and not the mortal revolutionary proletarians, for whom it has always been clear that only based on the dialectical materialism of Marxism, that is, on the materialist conception of the world, on the dialectical method and the position of the class of the proletariat, they can derive a correct political orientation for their revolutionary practice.

But not there for the pontifical discourse:

“Anyone who does not use the concepts of the Biosphere, who does not want to understand the dignity of the reality of the animal issue, who has never understood the scope of global warming, who does not use the city/country contradiction in his approach ... cannot understand our times” Poor of us who do not use the concepts of Biosphere (capitalized) and who definitely cannot understand the entelechy of the "dignity of the reality of the animal issue"!

However, such discourse only seeks to obfuscate the proletarian conscience, since for Marxism it is clear from the very beginning that there is a contradiction between society and nature, which has been pushed to the extreme by imperialism, especially in the last 30 years, highlighting it as one of the most important contradictions in today's society, because the subsistence of life itself on the planet is at risk.

A problem recognized by the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) in the Program for the Revolution in Colombia (to save nature from the depredation to which capitalism has subjected it) and in the proposal for the formulation of a General Line for the Unity of the Movement International Communist:

“Imperialist capitalism is a social regime that survives on the depredation of the only two sources of wealth: the labourforce and nature; their life expectancy depends on strangling society and destroying nature. Transforming the relations of men with nature is only possible by transforming the current social relations of exploitation into social relations of collaboration. The aspiration to save nature without touching the power of capital is bourgeois reformism, repudiating natural disaster, but it does not attack its main cause: the capitalist mode of production. Stopping the destruction of nature is part of the proletariat's socialist program because it demands to end to the cause of its destruction: imperialist capitalism”.

But pontificating over the biosphere and other matters of that nature has a purpose: to highlight as a main global contradiction the contradiction between society and nature or, as their Declaration says: "between human beings and animals." It is not possible a ruse of intellectuals, but the own confusion of the companions. Concerning the current world main contradiction, the situation created by the crisis and the pandemic had put completely clear that this is the contradiction between the global proletariat and the global bourgeoisie; the fact that also left bare the error of the comrades who mechanically and dogmatically affirmed that such a contradiction, since the 60s of the last century or since the rise of imperialism, has been the contradiction between the imperialist countries and the countries, peoples and oppressed nations.

With apologies to the reader for the length of the quote, it is good to bring up the words of the Proposal for the Formulation of a General Line for the Unity of the International Communist Movement:

“At present, the main world contradiction pits the global proletariat against the global bourgeoisie, being, finally, the contradiction that best and most concentratedly expresses the fundamental contradiction of the system; the most decisive for being its direct manifestation in the field of class struggle, and as such, the one with the greatest revolutionary influence over the other world contradictions of imperialism, the one that most helps the advance of the revolution and the progress of society, accelerating the transition to socialism.

The world economic crisis that started in 2008 has especially aggravated the world contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, reaffirming its character as the main contradiction in the imperialist world, in extension and depth, where the vast majority of the world population lives subjugated by the chain of salary, he accumulates misery amid the wealth he produces, and supports with his workforce a few monopolistic parasites that privately appropriate world production. Both the bankruptcy of medium and small owners, as well as the ruin and displacement of millions of peasants by capitalism and wars, massively swell the ranks of the proletariat, whose existence is increasingly threatened by unemployment, cuts in benefits, massive dismissals and the reduction of the real salary, unleash their rebellion in massive mobilizations, strikes, general strikes, uprisings, against the crisis, against the "rescue plans", against the world system of wage exploitation, no longer exclusively in oppressed countries but also in the imperialist countries where the workers' movement reawakens, not only of the industrial workers but of all the workers against a system that is not even capable of supporting its wage slaves, strangled by the imperialist parasite that appropriates all the social product.

The extension and depth of the world contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie reveal that capital is a social relationship where - for the first time in the agony of capitalism - the owners of capital and the owners of the job are face to face; fact of utmost importance for the World Proletarian Revolution, but of little interest to many revolutionary communist comrades, tied to the analysis of another previous period, which no longer corresponds to the current world reality and the perspective towards which objective trends of society point. This is a great divergence between the Maoist Leninist Marxists, about what is the main world contradiction at present: between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, or between the oppressed countries and the imperialist countries.

Independently of the wishes and the will, the undervaluation of the world contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is wrong and out of focus position in the political, idealistic in the ideological, and common with the post-MLM revisionism of the PCR, EU whose underestimation of the weight of the proletariat derives from the denial of its leading role in the World Proletarian Revolution.”

The anathema of the communist pontiffs of France and Belgium indicates that exits two tendencies within the Maoist Leninist Marxists have led the movement to ruin, and qualify without further arguments: the first, of wanting to “make Gonzalo a classic from Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in an abstract-formal approach (...) a stereotypical style led to this tendency to deny the Covid-19 crisis, to see it as a kind of bourgeois conspiracy to mask the crisis and strengthen political and police control"; the second, in the case of the Maoist Communist Party of Italy, of having "a syndicalist-populist approach" which they miss talking about "the people's war" when before "it seemed to him simply anarchism" the armed struggle being waged there, and the case of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada, "openly assumes that the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is an entirely secondary event, much less important, for example than the Chinese revolution that culminated in 1949." A trend "that is part of a union-populist approach, without any depth, without any breadth."

Immediately, the comrades were condemned as heretics! And not because there are not some deviations or misconceptions in the condemned comrades, but the comrades in their pontifical style, simply take out a phrase to utter their condemnation, thereby only showing their ideological poverty.

Then they pass another sentence, also highlighted in bold:

“We affirm that there are three lines in the movements that claim to be Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. There is the opportunist line of the left, which proposes a turnkey ideology in which Gonzalo would be the universal key to do what we want as we want, which is leftism. There is a right-wing opportunist who wants to unite all Maoists regardless of ideological content. Finally, there is the correct line that makes the teachings of Gonzalo and the Communist Party of Peru the correct interpretation of Maoism and advocates the formation of guiding thoughts to go to the people's war”.

To begin with, the communist pontiffs show here their lack of dialectics and their mechanistic Marxism, since the two-line struggle is inherent in our movement; that means, the tendencies and nuances do not exist outside of Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, but rather they fight within the International Communist Movement itself.

Indeed, there is a "leftist" line based on the belief that "the teachings of Gonzalo and the Communist Party of Peru" are the "correct interpretation of Maoism and advocates the formation of guiding thoughts to go to the people's war", in whose bosom there are also nuances; one of whom is represented by the communist pontiffs who signed the declaration, another is represented by the comrades of Brazil and Germany, and other comrades are halfway there; they all have in common to claim the correct interpreters of the teachings of Gonzalo Thought and the PCP. This needs to be specified to differentiate comrades and comrades from those who also in the name of "the teachings of Gonzalo Thought and the Communist Party of Peru" supported the "letters of peace" and championed the Right Opportunity Line - LOD, which also has followers among some organizations that also call themselves Maoist Leninist Marxists, as is the case of the “Maoist Communist Party of Colombia, but who are people who are no longer part of our movement, precisely because they abandoned the ideological basis of Marxism.

There is also a correct line that during all these years has fought both against right opportunism and against "leftist" deviations; it is a line that has not sought to become a “red fraction” because it accepts the fight of lines as something necessary and beneficial for the development of our movement; and various parties and organizations at different times have played a prominent role, as is the case with the comrades of the Communist Party of Maoist India, and others modestly as in the case of the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) of Colombia against the act of betrayal in Nepal and to Prachandist and Avakianist revisionism. As is only natural, within this line there are also nuances.

Finally, in the middle of these two lines, there are comrades halfway, but in general, our movement has managed the fight against the main danger, right opportunism or revisionism and conciliatory centrism, reaching to differentiate the field over the years from the Maoist Leninist Marxists of all kinds of opportunists.

Recognizing this situation is part of the application of dialectical materialism to the analysis of the phenomenon, where the depreciation made by the communist pontiffs of France and Belgium have no place because they start from subjectivism. On the contrary, Marxism Leninism Maoism allows us to understand that the existence of diverse tendencies and nuances within our movement, do not obey the bad assimilation of the "teachings of Gonzalo Thought and the Communist Party of Peru", but to the changes in the objective situation, the evolution of imperialism in recent decades and the sharpening of its contradictions, disagreements in evaluating the experience of our movement and understanding the deeper causes of defeat in China. Issues on which it is necessary to promote the study, research and the fight of opinions that the MRI never addressed, and a large part of the MLM Parties and organizations have avoided, problems that are decisive in advancing the unity of the communists towards a new regrouping.

In this regard, the silence of the parties and organizations face of the Proposal for the Formulation of a General Line for the Unity of the International Communist Movement, presented by the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) in 2016, shows not only the contempt for solving the fundamental problems of the World Proletarian Revolution but also the dogmatic and sectarian attitude, in addition to confusion and nationalism. There has not been a solid argument against what was raised there, except for some critical ideas from the comrades of "Reconstitution of Communism" in Spain, which in addition to not being correct, have not deserved an answer because the comrades do not share the basis of unity from the Maoist Marxist Leninists; they, like Avakian, and as the Progressive Labor Party (PLP) already did, believe that "new communism" must be "done", "re-founded" or "rebuilt".

But instead of making some serious reference to serious arguments, instead of making the effort to understand the dialectical materialism of the unity of the communists, the communist pontiffs only manage to complain and incidentally attack us with a gratuitous insult:

“It is a great pity that Prachanda's international refutation did not extend politically to the point of becoming an international unit. It is necessary to underline here the damaging role of the UOC (MLM) of Colombia, which yesterday denounced the Maoist Communist Party of Italy as centrist and finally became one of its vassals”

"There's none so deaf as those who will not hear and none so blind as those who will not see", says popular wisdom and the communist pontiffs locked in their schismatic reverie, are not able to warn that there was indeed a BIG BREAK and that the struggle of the communists (in which they also participated) prevented Prachanda's revisionist platform and especially Avakian's from imposing itself in the MCI.

The lack of dialectic of the comrades prevents them from noticing that several comrades, who initially adopted centrist positions of conciliation with Prachandism, definitively broke with it and some even bravely and publicly admitted their mistakes, as is the case of the Galician comrades. UOC (MLM) has not changed its firm ideological and correct political positions, but the wrong comrades who have rectified which is a source of joy for the Maoist Leninist Marxists of all countries, this bothers to the communist pontiffs because they do not see beyond their noses.

For those who are not scared by the insulting words, as well as for comrades who are not familiar with the events of recent years, it is necessary to do a bit of history, for which we apologize in advance regarding the length of the quotes.

On February 17, 2007, the companions of France, who now pontificate wrote in “On the subject of Nepalese revisionism and the international communist movement”

“What happened next was of greater importance. There have been, since June 2006, documents from the Communist Party of India (Maoist), which criticized the prospect of "peace accords" in Nepal. There were also, from the second half of 2006, the numerous pronouncements of the Communist Workers' Union (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) of Colombia.

The UOC (MLM) of Colombia had the just initiative to seek to precisely identify Nepalese revisionism and rightly calls for Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communists to unite under a real red flag.

Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communists must support this initiative.

Likewise, it is clear that within this process, the Communist Party of India (Maoist) has a great role to play, as much as the Communist Party of Peru, since the fact that the Nepalese revisionism began to expose itself when attacked the people's war in Peru.

As the UOC (MLM) did in its call to the proletariat of all countries and the Marxist Leninist Maoists, we have to lay the foundations for a new definition, to guide the international communist movement, within the grandiose perspective of the world revolution.”

On August 31st, 2016, the call was published in Workers' Revolution: Let's unite and draw a clear line of demarcation between Marxism and revisionism!” which had been sent by the UOC Executive Committee (MLM) in April 2013 to the following parties and organizations:

To the signatories to the Joint Declaration of December 26th, 2011 THE INTERNATIONAL UNIT OF COMMUNISTS DEMANDS THE DEFEAT OF REVISIONISM AND CENTRISM!

Arabia – Maoistes Arab, Argentina – PCP Maoísta, Bangladesh – Party Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Estado Español – Colectivo Odio de Clase, PC MLM de Francia, Partido Comunista del Ecuador Sol Rojo, Perú – Base Mantaro Rojo, Panamá – PC (ML) Panamá, Colombia – UOC MLM

To the signatories of the Joint Declaration of December 26th, 2012 THE INTERNATIONAL UNITY OF COMMUNISTS DEMANDS THE DEFEAT OF AVAKIANIST REVISIONISM, CENTRISM AND ALL FORMS OF REVISIONISM!

Afghanistan - MLM Workers Organization (PM), Arabia - Maoistes Arab, Bangladesh - Party Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Belgique - Center MLM, Ecuador - Communist Party of Ecuador - Red Sun, Spanish State - Hatred of Class, Spanish State - PERUCRPM and Reconstruction Group, Spanish State - Red Flag Communist Organization, Panama - PC (ML) Panama, Peru - Mantaro Rojo Base Committee, Colombia - UOC MLM

To other Marxist Leninist Maoist parties and organizations:

Afghanistan - Communist Maoist Party of Afghanistan, Germany - New Peru, Brazil - Revolutionary Front, Colombia - Maoist Organization of Colombia, Ecuador - Reconstruction PC of Ecuador MLM, Spanish State - Great March towards Communism, Spanish State - Proletarian Revolution, State Spanish - UCCP, India - Free speech, Mexico - Lijuc Gran Marcha, Communist Party of Turkey / Marxist-Leninist (TKP / ML) And also, he was personally sent to some Comrades from various countries.

As seen among the signatories of those correct statements, there are the now Communist pontiffs and among the serious arguments that were expressed there and that the comrades now ignore them were the following:

*“The Joint Declarations of December 26, 2011, and 2012, and the pronouncements of various parties against pseudo-MLM revisionism, already contain and express a common basis of unity in the principles, which enables the Maoist Leninist Marxists to unite to draw a clear line of demarcation between Marxism and the main revisionist danger.

The Communist Workers' Union (MLM) considers that the Maoist Leninist Marxists today have "a general identity with a base of unity characterized by recognizing the historical merits of the MRI and accepting its defeat at the hands of revisionism; for the commitment to fight for the unity of the Maoist Leninist Marxists in the MCI on condition of a deep demarcation with revisionism and conciliatory centrism; for the defense of the fundamental principles of Marxism Leninism Maoism on the class struggle, the State, the revolution, the historical role of the masses, the path of revolutionary violence of the armed masses to overthrow the old State, the historical need for the Dictatorship of the Proletariat including semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries in the form of the New Democracy State, the need to continue the revolution under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, imperialism as the last highest stage of capitalism and the prelude to socialism, the expiration of the democratic revolution bourgeois old type, the validity of the World Proletarian Revolution and the leading role of the proletariat in it, the necessity of the Party as a political detachment and superior form of organization of the proletariat, the inevitability of crises in capitalism, the danger of war world, the revolutionary role of wars and crises as it happens with the present”*.

He added about the correct method to fight for unity:

“Consolidate the general base of the unity of the Maoist Leninist Marxists treating their differences (including differences of principle) consciously practising the method of Unity - Struggle - UNITY, as contradictions within the people. Without this method and without the common thread of a General Line to discuss and take a position on essential questions, the fight over everything and against everyone will cease to be a fight for the unity of the Communists, and will end up undermining the task of defeating and isolate the main revisionist danger.”

And it ended:

“In charge of the international unity of the communists, the commitment and fundamental struggle of the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) is for the New International.

In this perspective, in these years the UOC (MLM) has proposed to contribute to the theoretical defeat of pseudo-MLM revisionism and to contribute to the elaboration of a proposal for a General Line for the unity of the International Communist Movement.”

As can be seen, consequent with its words, its line, and its plan, the UOC (MLM) submitted that proposal to the Marxist Leninist Maoist movement for discussion in 2016.

And as the facts demonstrate, the Joint International Declarations of recent years signed by the UOC (MLM) are correct and make no concessions to revisionism, centrism, or "leftism". The world has changed for the good of the revolutionary Marxist line and this has been of great importance for the advance of the revolution, but the communist pontiffs cannot notice it.

The commitment of the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) with the International Communist Movement and with the World Proletarian Revolution, have their orientation that corresponds to the understanding of the development of contradictions and only have to do with the struggle between right and wrong within our movement. Hence the insult that the UOC (MLM) became a vassal of the PCmI is an offence that only denotes the visceral hatred of the communist pontiffs for the comrades in Italy and the great bourgeois European disdain for a small organization in a small country, which according to the "wisdom" of those pontiffs is "semi-feudal and semi-colonial".

In this same anti-Marxist tone of the "know-it-all", the spiel against the Communist Workers Union (MLM) continues:

“It must be seen that the failure of the UOC (MLM) is all the more damaging since this organization had the qualities of its defects. He did not understand the notion of semi-feudalism, semi-colonialism and mistakenly considered his country, Colombia, as capitalist. However, this reflected a very fine observation of the development of agro-industrial (bureaucratic) capitalism in his own country. The UOC (MLM) should have played a major role ideologically in the current crisis, due to the nature of the crisis. But since he has been arrogant with the subject of animals and climate change, he has not adequately grasped the city/country contradiction, he has failed to make a qualitative leap that would have been of great value”

A statement contrary to his sentence of lines below where they stand out with the usual bold:

“The basic problem of each country is the question of assimilating the principles of dialectical materialism and the concrete study of reality from a revolutionary subjectivity that recognizes the dignity of the real”

Precisely, the scientific rigour of the Communist Workers' Union (MLM) led him to conclude, after the examination of Colombian society that this was a capitalist and semi-colonial country. In other words, to recognize the real capitalism that developed in an oppressed country, renouncing empty doctrinal formulations that seek to frame reality to empty formulas. That is the dialectical materialist method that allowed him, from the class position of the proletariat, to conclude that the claim to make a New Democracy Revolution in this country is an illusory reactionary petty-bourgeois aspiration. This is the depth of the revolutionary conclusions of daring to recognize the dignity of the real.

Concerning the development of capitalism in oppressed countries, it is necessary to quote, once again apologizing to the reader, what was said in the Proposal for the Formulation of a General Line for the Unity of the International Communist Movement:

“To condition, the revolution of the proletariat in the oppressed countries to an alleged capitalist development similar to that of the imperialist countries is to revive the rotten revisionist theory of the "productive forces", opposed to the proletarian revolution burying a dying system. It ignores that oppressed countries, even those with elemental conditions of industrial development, have been incorporated into an internationalized mode of production and that imperialism has become a world system of financial enslavement.

In the oppressed country, capitalism is a mode of production that interweaves, influences, undermines and tends to dominate the surviving precapitalist modes of production, all integrated into the country's social-economic formation, united to the world economy by the internationalization of capital.

The capitalism of an oppressed country is an aspect of the world mode of production, an aspect of imperialist capitalism, therefore, subjected to its inevitable economic crises and bearer of the fundamental peculiarity of modern capitalism "the domination of the monopoly associations of the big businessmen" It is component and dependent of a dying world system of oppression and exploitation. It is monopoly capitalism closely linked to world financial capital, only marked by the deep marks of the shackles of semi-colonial dependence, imperialist parasitism, and its tendencies: both to stagnation, to violently and artificially contain technical progress, the pace of growth of certain branches of production, including the entire economy of the oppressed country; as to accelerate their development - the most general tendency under imperialism - by accentuating the decomposition of the peasantry, sweeping away vestiges of precapitalist modes of production, or assimilating them, and even in some cases reinforcing them, but always subjecting them to the needs of world production, of the realization of surplus-value, the accumulation and global centralization of capital.

Denying the existence of the capitalist mode of production in oppressed countries, claiming to be "strange capitalism", "not national but artificially introduced by imperialism", "no producer of capital goods", "no articulated national market", "no classic ”… means moving away from Marxism along the path of the already defeated 19th-century Russian populist petty-bourgeois theories, unable to objectively study the laws of operation and development of the oppressed country's social-economic regime, to which the capitalist mode of production is not exported, but capital, which acts and influences its germs and capitalist development originated in the economic process of the ancient feudal society. The considered "defects" of capitalism in oppressed countries are the characteristics of semi-colonial dependency and its role in the world economy; they do not suppress the essential characteristics of all capitalism: production of merchandise under a regime where accumulated capital buys and exploits wage labour of free workers.

The rise of capitalism in the bowels of the old feudal society of oppressed countries is an economic law recognized by Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. The capitalist predominance in the social-economic formation of some oppressed countries was admitted by some Leninist Marxists in the 60s of the last century and timidly by the Maoist Leninist Marxists of the 80s. The complete dominance of the capitalist mode of production over the other modes of production in the social-economic formation of oppressed countries, becoming the determinant of the capitalist character of their society, it is a real phenomenon of the last and current period in the dying phase of capitalism, accelerated and highlighted by the economic crisis of world capitalism unleashed in the dawn of the new century. Even so, except in exceptional cases, this undeniable trend is still ignored by the revolutionary communists and reason for fierce struggle among their ranks.

It is not only a problem with the scientific method of investigation for the strict knowledge of reality, seeking the truth in the facts; It is above all a fight against theories that are foreign to Marxism, which has influenced the ranks of Marxists since the 60s of the last century, passing directly from the social democratic economic literature to being erected as a "Marxist guide" to know the reality of the economic social formation of the oppressed countries.

Foreign theories to Marxist political economy, which serve the reactionary conjugation between the material — economic — interest of the small owner and the opportunistic political commitment auxiliary to imperialism on its deathbed. They are the theories of the fear of recognizing the sign of modern times in the proletarian revolution and the proletariat the gravedigger of imperialism. They are the theories of the petty-bourgeois propensity to “look back,” denying not only the existence of capitalism in oppressed countries but also capitalism's historical victory over feudalism, on which the world's maximum program of proletariat proclaimed in the Communist Party Manifesto.

Longing for the return or the existence of an “independent and monopoly national capitalism” under imperialism is an absurd contrast to the reality of the integration into the world economy of all the old isolated national economies, and contrary to recognizing in imperialism the superior and last phase of capitalism, after which only the socialism of the World Proletarian Revolution follows.

To deny capitalist development in oppressed countries, under the pretext of its dependent, unequal, unbalanced, and unclassified character is to ignore the nature of imperialism and the essence of its semi-colonial domination: real economic and political dependency, at the exclusive service of increasing accumulation and world imperialist centralization of capital, and against the masses and the progress of society in oppressed countries, whose disjointed and unbalanced development is an articulated pinion in the great chain of the world economy, imperialist world production and world market.

Limiting the development of capitalism to the peasant revolutionary path - of the bourgeois revolution - ignoring the slow, painful reactionary landowning path for the peasantry, but the most common under imperialism, is to "forget" the ABC of Marxism on the agrarian question, "forgetfulness" that leads to the awarding of a fantastic "evolution of feudalism or semi-feudalism", both the unbalanced decomposition of the peasantry in the oppressed countries —almost always accelerated by blood and fire—, as well as the unbalanced concentration of the population and misery in the great cities, ignoring in the great division between the city and the countryside a necessary condition for the development of the capitalist mode of production, a great inequality typical of capitalism that only socialism can create the conditions to eliminate it.

Furthermore, there is no arrogance when considering the problem of the contradiction between society and nature (not "with the issue of animals and climate change") in its proper dimension, as expressed by the Program for the Revolution in Colombia and the Proposal for the Formulation of the One Line for the Unity of the International Communist Movementalready mentioned above; on the contrary, the UOC (MLM) starts from the humble recognition already expressed by Federico Engels in The part played by labour in the transition from Ape to Man:

“And in fact with every day that passes we are learning to understand its laws more correctly and getting to know the more immediate and also the more remote consequences of our interference in the usual course of nature. Especially since the mighty advances made in the natural sciences in the present century, we are in a better and better position to know and, hence, to control even the more remote natural consequences of at least our most ordinary productive activities. But the more this happens, the more will men not only once more feel but also know their oneness with nature, and the more impossible will become the senseless, unnatural idea of an antagonism between mind and matter, man and nature, soul and body which arose in Europe after the decline of classical antiquity and which obtained its most elaborate expression in Christianity.

(…)

However, to carry out this control requires more than just knowledge. A revolution is needed that completely transforms the mode of production that exists until today and, with it, the current social order.”

Later, and regarding the recognition of the dignity of the real, the comrades continue in the declaration and with the same already familiar bold:

“This constitutes the basis for the generation of guiding thought that guides communist commitment in class struggles that, by definition, have a national framework”

Precisely, a dialectical anti-Marxist and anti-materialist theory fought by Marxism from its founders to the present day. A theory that corresponds to the old bourgeois ideas about the "supreme saviours" and the superstitious faith in the "geniuses" who "illuminate" the struggle of the masses with their "thoughts", "ways" and "new syntheses"

That is the "Maoist" version of the cult of personality, which was directly criticized by the Masters of the world proletariat: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, who clearly expressed their rejection of everything that contributed to the superstitious prostration before any authority.

This is clearly expressed in the Proposal for the Formulation of a General Line for the Unity of the International Communist Movement:

“Committees and not individuals direct the Party at all levels. Without leaders, the proletarian revolution cannot triumph, but they are historical products that materialize the application of Marxism Leninism Maoism to the study of reality and the transformation of the world, into a program, a tactic and an organization, and not as ideas from heaven to the brilliant heads of almighty bosses”

The Maoist Marxist Leninist theory of chiefs is opposed to the cult of personality of the so-called "guiding thoughts", "ways" and "synthesis" coined in the MRI; this anti-Marxist conception of the bosses, in the MRI's own experience, was found to lead to revisionism, the disaster of the communist organization and the defeat, resignation or surrender of the revolution. From these anti-Marxist theories derives the peregrine prediction that the Party of the proletariat will not be able to build itself, it will not be able to successfully lead the revolution in a country, if it does not have a brilliant leader who gives national form and content to Marxism Leninism Maoism.

Opportunists have always been the defenders and promoters of the cult of personality: Liu Shao-chi and Lin Piao, in socialist China; Arce Borja, in the Communist Party of Peru; Avakian, in the PCR, EU and the MRI. In the name of fighting the cult of Stalin's personality, the revisionists who slavishly promoted that cult during his life ended the achievements of socialist construction in Russia; in the name of Mao Tse-tung thought, the new bourgeoisie usurped power in China.

The current fight against pseudomaoist revisionism has forced this discussion about the glorification of the bosses again. The comrades of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) put it this way:

The ‘fight against dogmatism’ has become a buzz phrase among many Maoist revolutionaries. They talk about rejecting the "outdated" principles of Lenin and Mao and developing MLM to the "new conditions" that have supposedly emerged in the world of the 21st century. Some of them describe their effort as 'enriching and developing' MLM as a new path or thought, although this is initially described as something confined to the revolution in the country in question, which at no time assumes an inexorable universal 'character' or of universal 'significance'. And in this exercise individual leaders are glorified and even deified to the point that they appear infallible. Such glorification does not help in the collective functioning of the party and party committees as a whole, since that line is never questioned, as long as it comes from the infallible individual leader. In such situation it is extremely difficult on the part of the CC [Central Committee], not to mention the cadres, to fight a serious deviation in the ideological-political line, or in the basic strategy and tactics even when it is clear that they are against the interests of the revolution. The ‘cult of the individual’ promoted in the name of the way and of thought provides a degree of immunity to deviation from the line if it emanates from that individual leader” (Open letter to the Communist Party of Nepal Unified (Maoist) from the Communist Party of India (Maoist), Central Committee - July 20, 2009)

And to finish this refutation of the communist pontiffs of France and Belgium, it is necessary to make at least an allusion to another phrase characteristic of "leftism" within the Maoist Leninist Marxists, and also highlighted in bold in the Declaration of the Comrades: PEOPLE'S WAR UNTIL COMMUNISM!:

An affirmation of those who claim to defend the historical importance of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, which developed, not through the People's War but through the revolutionary mobilization of the masses in the massive criticism of the followers of the capitalist path and whose purpose was to banish them from all leadership positions, both in the State and in the Party.

People's War to Communism is an empty and false "leftist" phrase. Because it is not part of the teachings of the historical experience of the construction of socialism, the first stage of communism, and because it does not correspond to the development of the class struggle in the march towards communism.

In socialism, as a stage of transition to communism, where there are still classes and class struggles, where still, according to Mao, it is not known who will win, there is a need for organized violence, for the State that is no longer properly a State, according to Lenin in the State and the Revolution:

“There is still necessary (…) a special apparatus, a special machine for suppression, the “state”, is still necessary, but this is now a transitional state. It is no longer a state in the proper sense of the word; for the suppression of the minority of exploiters by the majority of the wage slaves of yesterday is comparatively so easy, simple and natural a task that it will entail far less bloodshed than the suppression of the risings of slaves, serfs or wage¬labourers, and it will cost mankind far less. And it is compatible with the extension of democracy to such an overwhelming majority of the population that the need for a special machine of suppression will begin to disappear. Naturally, the exploiters are unable to suppress the people without a highly complex machine for performing this task, but the people can suppress the exploiters even with a very simple “machine”, almost without a “machine”, without a special apparatus, by the simple organization of the armed people (such as the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, we would remark, running ahead).”

Lenin's words in his Salute to the Hungarian workers on May 27, 1919, are forceful:

“But the essence of proletarian dictatorship is not in force alone, or even mainly in force. Its chief feature is the organization and discipline of the advanced contingent of the working people, of their vanguard; of their sole leader, the proletariat...”

The State of Dictatorship of the Proletariat, about which the "leftists" refer very little is no longer properly a State, insofar as the functions of the government increasingly become matters of the administration of social things ( planning and control), perfectly achievable by the masses and officials without any privilege, eligible and removable at any time; and where the central pillar of the state machine, the professional army needed by the parasitic classes to crush the vast majority, is made unnecessary by replacing it with the people in arms; consequently, war becomes a thing of the past, except to face foreign aggression or carry out international war.

Concerning the new type of state, the "forgetfulness" of the teachings of the Paris Commune by the communists is where the main error and the deepest cause of the defeat of the proletariat in Russia and China, especially, keep on maintaining a special army separated from the masses, which in China was not touched by the Cultural Revolution, becoming an instrument in the hands of the new bourgeoisie to crush the people and allow them to restore capitalism.

But going back to the phrase of the "people's war until communism", it is clear that to the extent that the proletariat triumphs in more and more countries that the socialist camp is expanded and that all countries are dragged into the revolution, the people's war will also be extinguished, along with the State; to the point that when the last bastion of the reaction falls, almost the next day, the rifles may be melted to be used to satisfy the needs of society. A rifle will no longer be needed to make any lazy man work or to change an inept official.

Therefore, one of the first institutions that are extinguished in the transition from socialism to communism, are armies and their reason for being, wars, caused by private property and the exploitation of some men by others.

In summary, Communist pontiffs should be more concerned with examining their anti-Marxist dogmas before condemning "heretics."

Communist Workers Union (MLM)

June 2020