From DEM VOLKE DIENEN:

Every year the communists revolutionaries in the whole world celebrate the 19 of June as the day of heroism and the international day of political prisoners. In the 19 of June 1986 the revolutionary political prisoners and prisoners of war rose up in rebellion in the three Lima prisons: Lurigancho, El Frontón and Callao. They gave in an enormous display of revolutionary heroism, where over 250 of them gave their lives to defeat the genocidal plans of the old Peruvian state and its imperialist masters. These comrades, as all the sons and daughters of the people, lives on in the struggle of the international proletariat and the peoples of the world.

The best way to honor these comrades is to continue their struggle, to follow the same path and to learn from their great leader Chairman Gonzalo, today when the communists of the world are intensively struggling to achieve higher levels of unity based on the principles of marxism-leninies-maoism, principally maoism, the struggle against revisionism and to serve the world proletarian revolution, it is of decisive importance to advance boldly and through leaps in the struggle for the reconstitution of the communist parties, in that sense in honor of the fallen heroes and serving their aims, today we publish in Spanish a document from the communist party of Peru titled: DEVELOP THE CONSTRUCTION, PRINCIPALLY OF THE PARTY IN SERVICE OF THE ARMED STRUGGLE which is a declaration from the sixth and seventh plenary sessions of the central committee of the PCP. In English we publish an excerpt from the document and we will publish the full translation as soon as possible. As far as we know, this document was not published before in the Internet and we hope by this publication it will also reach comrades who didn't know it before.

Regarding this we want to note one important point, we have transcribed the documents from ”GUERRA POPULAR EN EL PERU El Pensamiento Gonzalo TOMO II” a recompilation of PCP documents which was published 1993 by a certain BORJA. This figure at some point were linked to the newspaper “el diario” and also published an international edition of this newspaper but he was never a party member and never represented the position of the party. After the publication of the mentioned recompilation, he tried to use it as well as the other works he have done so to attack the position of the party and destroy the work of the party abroad, obviously these intentions failed and he ended up as an open renegade of the people’s war and until this day continues vomiting his reactionary class hatred against Chairman Gonzalo. From such a person not even the slightest degree of “intellectual honesty” can be expected so we warn the reader that the text may include some errors in regard to the original text published by the pcp.

The case of “the great mister Borja” is well known to everyone who is familiar with the history of the Revolutionary internationalist Movement in the 90s and is a good lesson because it shows how individuals with the support of some right opportunist in the leadership of parties momentously can generate confusion and difficulties by applying the revisionist method of “fighting red flags with red flags” and its particularly interesting because it also shows that these particular characters end up forgotten and irrelevant at the garbage heap of history while the communists march forward overcoming every difficulties and raising the red flag to even higher peaks.

We hope today’s publication is a humble recognition of the fallen comrades.
Glory to the fallen heroes! Long live revolution!
¡Gloria à los heróes caídos! ¡Viva la revolución!

The Writers of Dem Volke Dienen

DEVELOP THE CONSTRUCTION, PRINCIPALLY OF THE PARTY IN SERVICE OF THE ARMED STRUGGLE

III. COSTRUCTION AND STRUGGLE I’N THE PARTY. COMBAT REVISIONISM AS THE MAIN DANGER

The development of the party work and the two lines struggle led us, during the last years, to the following conclusion: develop the construction taking the ideological-political construction as the base and develop the organizational construction simultaneously, in the midst of the class struggle of the masses and the two lines struggle, that is of the proletarian line of Mariategui and its development against the right and left opportunism. And more recently, we have advanced in the understanding of the unseparable link between construction and struggle. This process is particularly linked to the struggle against the right and left liquidationism; is struggling against liquidationism that we have understood these important problems.

These experiences the party have lived in these last years are just to those of the international proletariat; thus, in the experience of China take the following certain synthesis into account: “Whether to persist in inner-Party struggle or not is a principled difference between Chairman Mao’s line and the revisionist line in Party building. ”

STAGES AND IMPORTANT STRUGGLES IN THE HISTORY OF THE PARTY

In general lines and from the point of view of the construction of the party in particular, we could divide our history in the following stages: first, of the establishment of the Road of Mariategui and the constitution of the party; second, of the pursuit of the road of Mariategui and the defense of the party; third, of the struggle to retake the road of Mariategui and of the reconstitution of the party. If we want to concrete more, to point out the problems of the construction of the party, the three stages we would specify like this: constitution, defense and reconstitution.

The constitution of the Communist party, in October 1928, the greatest work of Jose Carlos Mariategui was a long and great struggle that concludes more than three decades of combat of the Peruvian proletariat. The constitution implied struggle against anarco-sindicalism and against the machinations of the emerging Apra-ism, and was the triumph of the necessity of the party of the proletariat in our country.

Since the constitution or founding of the party we can highlight five important struggles:

1. against the abandonment of the road of Mariategui and the left liquidationism of Ravinez and co.;
2. against capitulationism and right liquidationism of Terreros – Portocarrero and Acosta – Del Prado – Barrio, under the influence of browderism;
3. against the revisionism of Del Prado and co. under the command of the contemporary revisionism of Khrushchev – Brezhnev;
4. For the construction of the three instruments of the revolution and against the rightism disguised as “left” and,
5. against both the right and “left” liquidationism.

These are important struggles in the almost fifty years of history of the party, we must pay great attention to it in order to draw experiences and lessons from it which serves to the development of the construction which we are engaged. The study and investigation of the history of the party, although have advanced, should be reinforced, it is vital to understand the two lines struggle, the process of construction of the three instruments in the country and to adhere more to the line of Mariategui and its development.

RECONSTITUTION AND STRUGGLE

The process of reconstitution of the party is a consequence of retaking the road of Mariategui; it was initiated in the beginning of the decade of the 1960s and although raises over the class struggle of our motherland, especially of the proletariat and the peasantry, is intimately linked in its development to marxism-leninism-Mao Tsetung thought. During more than 15 years the reconstitution has passed by the following moments: of its determination, which is established in the VI Conference with the establishment of the Party Unity Base (marxism-leninism-Mao Tsetung thought, Mariategui thought and general political line) and the decision on the necessity of the reconstitution of the party, in 1969; of its application, which key is the III plenum that sanctioned the basis of the reconstitution in the ideological-political, the organizational and in the mass work, in 1973; of its impulse, which develops since 1975. thus, the reconstitution of the party entered in the actuality in the moment of its culmination which should be concluded in the V Congress. The task today is, then, culminate the reconstitution.

The reconstitution has allowed to understand with more clarity and certainty the inseparable relation between the construction of the party and general political line; that the construction of the party serves the general political line which core is to follow the path of encircle the city from the countryside, this is the stage of the democratic revolution which we find ourselves, and to move away from the political line undermines the construction and leads to negate the character of the party and its role as the organized vanguard of the proletariat making it impossible to struggle for power, central problem of the revolution. All that is proven by our own party history.

The development of the reconstitution had been done, as it must be, in struggle against opposed lines; against revisionism, rightism disguised as “left” and liquidationism; the struggle against right and left liquidationism while waged in parallel to the application of the reconstitution was successfully completed when it was decided to “liquidate liquidationism to advance and develop two lines struggle against revisionism as the main danger” and while concreting the political line for its immediate application in the guideline of “Reconstitute the party from the countryside and put the peasant work as the base to follow the path of encircling the city from the countryside.”

COMBAT REVISIONISM AS THE MAIN DANGER

the development of the two lines struggle in the party in the present puts forward to combat revisionism as the main danger; the summary of the waged struggles in the last years and the problems we face today demands us to combat revisionism having the following points in mind:

1. opposition to marxism-leninism-Mao Tsetung thought and the thought of Mariategui. Negation of the development of the line of Mariategui.
2. opposition to the path of encircle the city from the countryside. Hopes in the reactionary state and in the regime and questioning of directing the work to serve the struggle for power.
3. opposition to reconstitute the party from the countryside and to build it in struggle against revisionism as the main danger. Questioning the path of building the party in a backward country as ours.
4. separate the ideological-political construction from the organizational and pretend to develop the construction outside the framework of the class struggle and of the two lines struggle.
5. unilateral application of the open and secret work which negates its interrelation. Questioning of the party system, structure an work.
6. negation of the role of the leadership and the great leaders and opposition to proletarian discipline.
7. negate to the peasantry its condition of main force and be against putting the peasant work as the base of the whole construction.
8. questioning the effective leadership of the proletariat in the revolution while following the criteria of considering it as the main force.
9. negate the necessity of “to go down lower and deeper, to the real masses” in order to educate them for revolution and that the split with revisionism is unavoidable and indispensable. Negate to develop the struggle for demands in service of the struggle for power.
10. accept the worker-peasant alliance as the base of the united front in theory but questioning in praxis and negate the necessity of building the united front from the countryside.
11. negation of the People’s War. Opposition to principles and military line of Chairman Mao Tsetung and raising insurrectionist and urban guerrilla criteria. Negation of the universal law of the revolutionary violence.
12. questioning of the necessity of combating revisionism as the main danger. Negation of proletarian internationalism, particularly as a defense of marxism-leninism-Mao Tsetung thought and obligation of combating revisionism. Conciliation with revisionism.
13. exaltation of revolutionarism and preaching of “unitarianism” without demarcation.
14. opposition to the “philosophy of struggle”. Liberalism, conciliationism and groupism. “Dirty struggle”.
15. questioning the view of proletariat to substitute it for the bourgeois view.

The struggle against revisionism as the main danger that is currently being developed is of a great importance and in perspective, and its generalization and differentiation which considers all the fronts of our activity and the diversity of concrete situations, as how to conduct it correctly and with firmness and sagacity is a decisive question for the development of the construction.

To be continued->