For years I have admired Joma
Sison[1] as
a writer and a theoretician. But I have some disagreements with his views on
Chairman Gonzalo
and his followers. For example
He said:
"Of course, militarization of
the party is the anti-MLM line of the Gonzaloites who worship Gonzalo, make him
the definer of Mao's theory and practice in China and who ignore how he
actually made his own ten-year long people's war ultimately decline with his
flip flop from "Left' opportunism to Right opportunism in his own
country."
In my opinion that comment seems to be a simplification of a
rather serious problem the Communist Party of Peru (PCP) experienced. When Gonazlo
was captured, he and some members who of the PCP, who are in prison, have
pushed for an end to the people’s war. Gonzalo has publicly backed the idea
that it would be better to become a legal party and continue political work rather
than carry on the people’s war.
The reaction of the government to that effort has been to
completely oppose it. The government
has taken a hard line approach to the PCP as well as any organization
connected to them or sympathetic to them.
The left faction of the PCP has condemned any effort to end
the war as well as condemning those who try to organize any legal political
party. They have condemned MOVADEF, which
is an effort to create a legal party that tries to support PCP prisoners. The
left, which is often represented by the Peru
People’s Movement, has refused to believe that Gonzalo has actually
capitulated. The say that since they can’t really meet and talk with Gonzalo
they have no idea what he really wants.
In my view this is more than simply “a flip flop.”
One thing I oppose is factional fighting as we have in Peru
Since the MOVADEF has been attacked and condemned by the
Peruvian government, I have a hard time believing they are traitors to Maoism,
as many of their left-wing critics have said.
Another comment Sison makes:
“Ard Kinera and his kind in Tjen
Foldet are mere charlatans and fake Maoists. They have been blabbering about
protracted people's war for more than 20 years.”
Is this kind of attack really helpful to us? Ard Kinera said
in his article:
“Sisons sinister attack
on the strategy of People’s War
The founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines
I really don’t find these kinds of attacks helpful. It’s
obvious there is disagreement here. But do we need words like “sinister” or
“fake Maoists?” Is it not possible to simply have discussion and disagreement
without resorting to name calling?
It is obvious that the PCP suffered a severe set back after
Gonzalo’s capture. Sison accuses him of making lots of mistakes before he was
captured. According to him the PCP was in trouble way before his capture. But
how can he really know that. I see no reason to believe the people’s war was in
danger before Gonzalo’s capture. It is obvious he made mistakes. But his
political ideas live on and even though some of his supporters are “dogmatic” I
have not had problems with them yet. As long as I can get along with the
supporters of Chairman Gonzalo I will continue to do so.
The bottom line is that those of us on the Marxist left need
to make an honest effort to get along. That may be real hard in the case of
Trotskyists and those who call themselves Marxist and yet they condemn many of
the leaders and theoreticians we look up to. Still we need to make an honest
effort for a united front when we can. Not forming a united front was a mistake
in Peru
Pix from ABS-CBN
No comments:
Post a Comment