Otto's War Room (毛派): Another look at Protracted Peoples’ War and related issues- the United Front

By SJ Otto

As an editor of a Maoist web site, I have to take positions on a variety of issues. I have already discussed some aspects of People’s Protracted War (PPW).

I don’t have a firm position on that because I basically agree with PPW, however, I can’t see how we can implement that today in the US.

So that brings us to some other issues. One that I feel is important is the idea of a United Front. I have read a few Maoist tracks on the idea of a United Front. They vary quite a bit.[1] There are some Maoists that oppose such a front and instead call for a struggle against “revisionism.” For some of these factions fighting revisionist communist parties is as important as fighting the Bourgeois. For me this has been a serious problem. I can agree, to a point, opposing revisionism. But to what point do we keep this fight going.

The anti-revisionist policy his been a major part of the Communist Party of Peru (PCP, once known as Shining Path). This group took the anti-revisionist policy very seriously and went as far as to militarily attack various communist and socialist parties in that country.

That is one place where I strongly disagree with some Maoists and many Gonzaloistas. Many don’t want any kind of United Front. Or if they do, they have distanced themselves from any real United Front.

But in my opinion we need a United Front. I don’t believe it is possible for a Maoist group on its own to form a successful revolutionary movement here in the US. I believe such a movement is essential.

As I have told many of my friends and comrades who are not Maoists, such a world outlook (and it is a world outlook) is a chosen philosophy. Not everyone can be a Maoist. It is a chosen calling. It is the kind of calling where those who understand the belief and also the nuts and bolts of such a movement, know what needs to be done for a revolution.

It is preferable if a Maoist movement can be in the leadership of a United Front. But event that is not absolutely required. Having Maoists in leadership positions is the best possible situation. But it is just as important that Maoist (who have that understanding) be in important positions of leadership.

A good example of the difference between Maoists who favor a united front and those who do not was presented by Kenny Lake, of Kites Journal, in the article: “On Infantile Internet Disorders and Real Questions of Revolutionary Strategy: A Response to the “Debate” over the Universality of Protracted People’s War:

“The United Front…of Leftists, or of Popular Classes under the Leadership of the Proletariat?

One final controversy needs to be addressed before moving this discussion of the experience of the people’s war in Peru to a conclusion: Sendero’s application of the united front under the leadership of the proletariat. Andy Belisario’s article criticizes Sendero for not applying the united front, implying they had a sectarian approach to other political forces. Online, the newer generation of self-proclaimed “Maoists” in the US have bickered over a supposed difference among them between those with an allegiance to the Communist Pary of the Philippines’ approach to the united front versus those upholding Sendero’s lack of one. The online debate from the US seems to be lacking any solid experience or conception of what applying the united front strategy actually looks like, but Belisario’s criticisms raise real questions about what the united front is to communists and what Sendero’s practice was.

As Mao conceived it, the united front is an alliance of classes in the revolutionary process led by the proletariat and its vanguard. It’s a recognition that intermediate classes, such as myriad strata of petty-bourgeoisie and, in 1930s China, the peasantry and even the national bourgeoisie, could potentially be won to supporting (or in the case of the poor peasantry, being the main force in) communist revolution, even while the proletariat must play the leading role. The united front takes different shape in different social formations; in the US, for example, the solid core of the broader united front is the alliance between the multinational proletariat and the liberation struggles of the various oppressed nationalities and nations. But the key thing—and I think Belisario would agree with me here—is that it is an alliance of classes, not a question of “uniting the Left.” The former takes a broad view of society as a whole, while the latter gets stuck in narrow conceptions and small thinking on who can and will be part of the revolution and obsesses over ideological debates within small, stale circles.”

This article contrasts the difference between the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the Peruvian PCP. The big difference, as he points out, is that the Philippines group worked with a United Front and the Peruvian communists avoided that all together. It is no coincidence that the CPP is still in operation, along with its military wing, the New People’s Army. The PCP still exists, but militarily it is only a shadow of its former self. Politically there are so called Gonzaloistas and they are devout followers of Chairman Gonzalo, (also known as President Gonzalo). I admire these people and respect their beliefs. But I disagree with some of their Ideas. I recently wrote an article: Another look at Protracted Peoples’ War- what are the possibilities—part 1. I like some of their ideas and they developed a very real revolutionary rebellion in Peru. But I think we Maoists need a United Front.

In this case I agree with the Ideas put forth by Jose Maria Sison.

This is the second part of a series I’m writing on PPW and related issues. This issue is important. I realize there are many political parties and political positions put forward by many leftists and most of them have differing positions on the idea of a united front. Some are non-Marxist such as different as the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Politically DSA is directly in contradiction with Maoist and other Marxists organizations. And yet there have been many Marxists who have either joined DSA or work with them to some extent.[2] That collaboration is tactical. There are plenty of Maoists who have condemned working with DSA. They have their reasons. But I really believe in trying to create as wide a united front as possible. Whether it is solely with other Marxists or whether some non-Marxists, such as DSA join, we need to create a united front and it needs to include as many left leaning persons and groups as possible.

Some Marxist groups, such as Trotskyists, are very hard to work with.[3] They are much harder to work with than DSA. They tend to attack any group that is even mildly pro-Stalinist. While some Maoists are critical of Joseph Stalin, almost all of them realize that Mao was a student of Stalin in his early years. Mao had a good relationship with Stalin and turned on the Soviet Union after Stalin’s death. The Trotskyists view Stalin as a major enemy and label him everything from anti-communist to anti-worker, even going as far as to accuse him of being a fascist. Stalin has been dead since the 1950s, however, to this day the Trotskyist factions have been antagonistic to any Stalinist or Maoist group. That doesn’t make it impossible to work with them; however such cooperation has been very difficult in the past. The simple fact is we have to be as accommodating as possible, but not to the point of allowing any faction to push us into positions that are antagonistic to our policies. Some groups we can work with, others we can’t.

It is my firm belief that a united front is necessary for any left movement or revolution to take place in the US. It seems unlikely to me that a Maoist group, in this country, will ever have the numbers to pull off a revolution on our own.

Pix by Song of the United Front.

[1] For one example see Georgi Dimitrov, “Unity of the Working Class against Fascism.”

[2] There is an outright faction of Marxists in DSA. See DSA Communist Caucus: Our Statement.
and For other Marxist issues related to DSA, see Joseph Schwartz and Jason Schulman, Toward Freedom: Democratic Socialist Theory and Practice and José G. Pérez , Are DSA’s Factions Missing the Point? A Response to Philly Socialists/Marxist Center.

[3] See J. Moufawad-Paul, Maoism or Trotskyism?