We publish below a series of unofficial translations of articles found on A Nova Democracia here, here, and here in further commemoration of May 17, the anniversary of the initiation of armed struggle in Peru in 1980 (ILA80).
May 17: Thirty years of People’s War in Peru
May 8, 2010
May 17, 1980 – the people’s war led by the PCP — Communist Party of Peru — begins in Peru, labeled by the press monopoly and the reaction as “Sendero Luminoso”11. Today, 30 years later, an intense campaign continues to claim that the people’s war ended in 2000 and that, following the arrest in September 1992 of Dr. Abimael Guzman Reynoso (Chairman Gonzalo) and a large part of his Central Committee, this leadership requested talks with Fujimori for a peace agreement. However, this is only because armed actions, which have never stopped occurring, have once again assumed a large scale. In order to understand this still so hidden process and its real meaning, AND publishes the article by José Antonio Fonseca, from the Center for Studies on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, recently sent to our editorial office.
The People’s War in Peru continues to fight heroically and invincibly
Guerrilla training in the Peruvian highlands
During the 1980 general elections, in the town of Chuschi, in the state of Ayacucho, a column of guerrillas carried out revolutionary agitation and propaganda at a polling station. After denouncing the electoral farce, they burned the ballot boxes and left. This was the Communist Party of Peru’s (PCP) public declaration of war on the Peruvian state, beginning the People’s War, the triggering of a long process that produced great twists and turns in the destiny of the masses of Peru, but also a great encouragement and call to action for communists, revolutionaries and oppressed peoples around the world. Just four years after the defeat of the Great Cultural Revolution and the beginning of capitalist restoration in China, the flames of the People’s War in the Andes shook the imperialist and reactionary forces around the world.
The press monopoly tried to hide the Peruvian revolutionary process, just as it does today with the people’s war in India, always equivocating about the most monstrous war crimes committed by the armed forces of the State. After all, why are there so many books, why have veritable battalions of “Senderologist” experts emerged?2 For the task of misinforming and confusing campaigns of lies? None of this was able to completely hide the most profound revolutionary process in the history of Latin America, much less annihilate it as the entire reaction dreamed of.
Actions speak for themselves
In the second half of 2009, the Peruvian press monopoly reported on at least 58 actions by the People’s Guerrilla Army—EGP, led by the PCP.
In July, the EGP carried out a wide-ranging campaign of armed agitation and propaganda in the departments of Ayacucho and Cusco.
In August, the EGP launched violent attacks against several military bases in the departments of Ayacucho and Junin, executing 11 soldiers. That same month, the EGP placed dozens of red flags with the hammer and sickle along ten kilometers of the Fernando Belaúnde Terry highway, between Santo Domingo de Anda and San Francisco.
In September, in the Santo Domingo de Acobamba district of Junin department, an EGP company ambushed a reactionary army patrol, injuring three soldiers. When the reactionaries sent reinforcements, the guerrillas attacked and shot down an MI-17 helicopter, killing two soldiers and injuring four officers. The EGP fighters seized weapons and a large amount of ammunition.
In October, EGP units attacked a military base in the San Judas mountain range, in the Apurímac and Ene river valley region (VRAE), seized the facilities of a radio station in Huanta (Ayacucho) and broadcast the contents of a PCP bulletin. There were also attacks on military bases in Vizcatán.
In November, EGP fighters in Lima raised red flags with the hammer and sickle. At Cerro Tinkuya in the VRAE, an EGP attack killed one soldier and wounded four sergeants.
In December, actions were held to celebrate the birth anniversary of Mao Zedong in districts of Alto Huallaga and in the town of Huancas, department of Apurímac, with rallies and graffiti.
These actions confirm incontestably that the People’s War continues strong and steady, defeating successive operations of siege and annihilation of the Peruvian State that no longer only have the presence of Israeli specialists and Yankee military advisors, but also contingents of Marines stationed in Ayacucho under the pretext of the fight against drug trafficking.
People’s war and counterrevolution
When the ballot boxes burned in Chuschi, the Peruvian state underestimated the PCP. The pro-Yankee government of Acción Popular went so far as to say that “it would take 60 days for the police forces to liquidate the gang of subversive delinquents.” Two years passed and the government, frightened by the growth of the people’s war, ordered the intervention of the armed forces.
In the mid-1980s, the PCP was active in 22 of the country’s 24 states. By 1985, the EGP had carried out more than 20,000 actions. In 1986, this number had already exceeded 30,000.
On June 18 and 19, 1986, Alan García ordered the bombing by land, sea and air of the political prisons of Lurigancho, Callao and on the island of Frontón, murdering around 300 prisoners of war and members of the Communist Party of Peru. A PCP Resolution proclaims June 19th as the Day of Heroism, recognized by several parties on all continents.
In 1988, armed actions had already surpassed 50,000. In that year, in the midst of the war, the PCP held its 1st Congress, marking a great leap forward, cementing its base of party unity.
At the end of the 1980s, an offensive was launched against the PCP and its support bases, carrying out massacres of peasants in the department of Ayacucho, in the towns of Accomarca, killing 69 peasants, and in Cayara, killing more than 40 peasants. The Peruvian army and the bourgeois press widely publicized these massacres as being “the work of Sendero”. In response to these bloodbaths, the PCP carried out a series of actions to recover areas where the reactionary army had carried out these operations.
In 1990/91, the counter-offensive of the reaction, under more concentrated direction of the Yankees through the US State Department and the CIA, located and arrested Dr. Abimael Guzmán and a large part of the Central Committee of the PCP. Dr. Abimael, presented to the international press in a cage, wearing a prison uniform, with the aim of demoralizing and humiliating him, reacted with a vigorous speech exhorting the communists and the Peruvian people to continue with the people’s war.
He, who has been imprisoned and held incommunicado ever since, was attributed with the authorship of the “Peace Letters” presented by Fujimori from the podium of the UN General Assembly, and of the positions of surrender of the war, for a peace agreement and “national reconciliation”. But the lack of conclusive proof of these facts, as well as the successive refusals of the Peruvian State to present them publicly, only serve to confirm the repeated accusations that it is all nothing more than a plot.
Under the effect of these events, a part of the prisoners of war and the historical leadership of the PCP fell into the enemy’s game, spreading the capitulation. This is evident in the publication of the book “De mão e letra” [Fist and Letter] by the defenders of the peace agreements (the “accordistas”). This book, whose authorship is attributed to Abimael Guzman (without him having admitted this publicly), was organized by one of the leaders of the PCP, openly the accordist Miriam, and is yet another attempt by the accordists to use Chairman Gonzalo and associate him with the Opportunist Right-Wing Line — LOD, of the party.
All this nonsense is an attempt to stop the advance of the people’s war in view of the impossibility of defeating a revolutionary process by conventional means, given its strength and ideological solidity. This has been the counter-insurgency strategy of US imperialism against revolutionary processes led by Maoist parties, taking Nepal as an example, where they achieved great results with the capitulation of the leadership of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) after ten years of people’s war.
Facing a thousand difficulties and persisting in applying its basis of party unity, the PCP recovered from these profound blows. The heroic people’s war never stopped fighting and warding off the plans of siege and annihilation launched by the forces of the counterrevolution.
How to understand the Peruvian Revolution and the people’s war
José Antonio Fonseca
Center for Studies on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Brazil
The crucial problems and main challenges for the international communist movement today lie around the correct evaluation and assessment of the People’s War in Peru, particularly with regard to the understanding and application of Maoism, taking it from its center, the problem of power, power for the proletariat in different types of revolution, through an armed force led by the communist party. Power conquered and defended with People’s War.
Therefore, we will focus on this crucial question for the development or otherwise of any revolutionary process in the world, the problem of the ideology that guides it, exposing, albeit synthetically, the meaning and importance of Gonzalo Thought as a beacon and guide of the people’s war and its role in understanding Maoism in Peru and throughout the world.
Reconstitution and People’s War
For 30 years, the Peruvian people, led by the Communist Party of Peru, have faced extremely harsh repression, including genocide, prison massacres, psychological warfare and distortion of the objectives and nature of the war led by the PCP. In these years, the main milestone of the counter-revolution was the arrest of a large part of the central committee of the PCP and its leader, Chairman Gonzalo, in 1992. Under his leadership, the party was reconstituted guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the general political line of the New Democratic Revolution was outlined, and the people’s war was initiated and developed until it reached strategic equilibrium in 1991.3
With the severe blow suffered in 1992, the people’s war suffered a setback, with the fall of entire party committees, a decline in actions in the capital and in the countryside under successive campaigns of destruction by the reactionary armed forces with all the power in their hands. The areas and bases of support for the revolution were drastically reduced. But in the midst of the most ferocious offensive of the counterrevolution, under the psychological warfare campaigns of a true “capitulation operation”, the party has been rebuilding itself, always keeping the war as the center of its activity under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism Gonzalo thought.
The importance of Chairman Gonzalo to the Peruvian revolution had been demonstrated even before the war and became evident with it. For this reason, since his arrest, he has been the focus of controversy in Peru and internationally regarding his role in the People’s War and the current attempts to dismantle it.
At the center of this controversy are the well-known “Peace Letters”, proposing an agreement with the old Peruvian State to put an end to the People’s War. Chairman Gonzalo, for his part, is completely isolated and at the mercy of all kinds of trickery set up by the intelligence services (Peru’s National Intelligence Service and the US CIA), with the exception of his famous “speech from the cage”.4 Fifteen days after his imprisonment, he was never able to speak publicly, not even to any minimally trustworthy organization.
The reconstitution of the PCP
Abimael Guzmán Reynoso joined the party in the late 1950s and in the early 1960s he began the development of the Red Fraction in the Ayacucho Regional Committee, decisively applying Lenin’s definition of a fraction: a group of men united by a community of ideas, with the fundamental objective of influencing the Party to apply its principles in the purest possible form.
In these years, Chairman Mao Zedong, leader of the Chinese Revolution, also led a determined struggle against contemporary revisionism (mainly from the leadership of the CPSU after Stalin’s death), known as the “Great Polemic” within the International Communist Movement.
This is how in Peru Chairman Gonzalo and the Peruvian revolutionaries set themselves the imperative task of resuming the party’s course and converting it into a true communist party, raising the banner of its reconstitution.
The center of the struggle was the resumption of the character and program adopted by the Party at its foundation—a historic achievement of the working class and the Peruvian people—returning to center the mass work among peasants, construction workers, intellectuals and the poor masses of the neighborhoods and slums, with the 1st Regional Convention of Peasants of Ayacucho in 1969 being of great significance, where the agrarian program was established.
In this process of ideological struggle, the PCP will be one of the few cases in Latin America in which it was possible to expel the revisionist minority from its ranks.
The process of reconstitution within the PCP was consolidated ideologically, politically and organically, emerging stronger after each line struggle that resulted in a new unity on new bases. This process lasted for almost seventeen years, culminating in late 1979 and early 1980.
In the ideological field, the struggle of lines promoted by the Red Fraction against opportunism developed on the basis of the defense of the ideology of the proletariat, which until 1966 was condensed into Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, deepening in 1979 with the slogan “Unfurl, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought” until, in 1981, with the beginning of the people’s war, it proposed to march “Towards Maoism!” In 1982 the PCP began to defend Maoism as an integral and superior part of the development of the ideology of the international proletariat.
New impetus for the ICM
In the 1980s, the revisionist parties justified their right-wing opportunist line of eternal “accumulation of forces” by arguing that there were no objective conditions for making a revolution due to the absence of a “world strategic rearguard” represented by the socialist bloc. Contradicting this argument with facts, the Peruvian communists began the People’s War with the people in 1980.
In those days, some communist parties that had adopted Mao Zedong’s thought fought to develop the revolutionary armed struggle as a people’s war, such as the Communist Party of the Philippines, the Communist Party of Turkey (ML) and various fractions derived from the Communist Party of India (ML) after the defeat of the Naxalbari Uprising. However, with the forcefulness and vigorous unfurling of Maoism for the People’s War in Peru, the PCP became the most important driving force and regrouper of the international communist movement. Through the intervention of the PCP, the initiative of communist parties that defined themselves by Mao Zedong’s thought to create the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) (1984) took a new leap forward due to its definition of unfurling, defending and applying Maoism.
As the RIM itself would record in 1993 with the declaration Long Live Maoism, the Peruvian experience, in its struggle to develop the People’s War, was one of the most important facts for understanding the depth of Maoism, even for those parties whose people’s war was already underway.
People’s war and the “bend in the road”
According to PCP documents, the People’s War in Peru lasted eleven years on the strategic defensive (from 1980 to 1991), when in 1991 it entered the stage of strategic equilibrium. During this period, the PCP was building a new policy, a new economy and a new culture in more than half of Peruvian territory through the construction of the State of New Democracy, supported by popular committees in the support bases.
This tremendous coup led the ruling classes and imperialism to adopt an openly fascist regime, through Fujimori, who was elected with a furious anti-neoliberal rhetoric, but who after one year in government promoted a “self-coup”. This episode marked a new phase in the revolution and the war, beginning one of the bloodiest escalations of repression and war crimes against the masses and the leadership of the PCP, with new massacres of political prisoners and prisoners of war.
With the arrest of most of the Central Committee and Chairman Gonzalo during this period, what he himself would call a “bend in the road” appeared. This was the famous speech in the cage on September 24, 1992, in which Chairman Gonzalo exhorted the revolutionaries to persist in the People’s War, insisting that the revolution was a historical necessity, that it was the duty of the communists to overcome the “bend in the road” by continuing the People’s War.
The international significance
A correct assessment of these 30 years must still be the object of the international communist movement, as it can only be done from a clear class position, that is, starting from the ideology of the proletariat in its highest stage of development, Maoism; understanding its trajectory as a unity from the bases that allowed the emergence and thunderous development of the people’s war until reaching strategic equilibrium and the entire struggle to ward off the offensive of the counterrevolution through the continuation of the people’s war.
Drawing a parallel between the Peruvian process and the Nepalese one in terms of their outcomes, it is necessary to highlight some similarities and differences.
In both cases, a right-wing opportunist line emerged as a result of a new situation: in the case of the PCP, the arrest of the majority of its central committee, when part of this leadership argued that the world revolution had entered a general ebb and that there was no proletarian leadership to continue the war. In the case of Nepal, the leadership of the PCN(M) began to defend the existence of an international and regional correlation of forces unfavorable to the triumph of the revolution. The similarity is that in both processes a right-wing opportunist line proposed negotiations to end the people’s war. The difference is that in the case of Nepal, the main leadership of the party heads the LOD [Right Opportunist Line], while in Peru it was never proven that Chairman Gonzalo was part of it, in addition to the LOD being instrumentalized by the enemy’s intelligence services and headed by the majority of the imprisoned leadership. Another important difference that may reveal the character and essence of each one’s ideological-political line is the fact that in Peru the People’s War continued to combat and defeat the right-wing opportunist line and the reaction, while in Nepal the capitulation of the leadership stalled the revolution and no divergent force has managed, at least up until now, to resume the people’s war.
What did the thirty years of People’s War in Peru and Gonzalo Thought give to the international revolutionary process? The main thing about Gonzalo Thought is the understanding of Maoism as the development of Marxism-Leninism and its elevation to a new, third and higher stage. It reveals and proves the universality of Maoism and applies it to the specificity of Peru, as a guiding thought of the Peruvian Revolution and which at a certain point became Gonzalo Thought.
Let us remember that it was through the defense and the entire work of systematizing Lenin’s work carried out by Comrade Stalin that Leninism was synthesized and established as the second stage of Marxism. No new stage of Marxism was produced on demand, but rather through knowledge of the truth, in the concreteness of the class struggle and the revolutionary process of each country and of the world proletarian revolution as a whole. In other words, that the universal can only exist through the particular which, in turn, as a result of its application, produces new universal truths. This is part of the Marxist theory of knowledge according to which without synthesis there is no leap, no leap in quality is possible.
Every revolutionary process contributes to and enriches Marxism, but a qualitative leap depends on the moment in which the class struggle develops and the complexity of the problems that arise, as well as on the depth of the determined revolutionary process and the solidity of the vanguard that leads it. And this is true when it occurs, as a unit, in its three constituent parts. This is not only the case of Leninism and Maoism, but the very emergence of Marxism occurred from the three currents of thought that humanity had most developed, namely: English political economy, French socialist thought and German classical philosophy, and at the same time in the struggle against them. As a science, Marxism needs to develop in order to respond to the concrete problems of social reality.
It is necessary to say, even in passing, that this is different from what the chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party of the United States, Bob Avakian, claims, speaking of the need for a “new synthesis” as a condition for “fostering a new wave of world proletarian revolution”, or from what Prachanda, of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), proposes with his “21st century socialism”. In fact, such propositions incubate the defense of an overcoming of Maoism.
It was up to the PCP, led by Chairman Gonzalo, to gather from Chairman Mao’s vast work the systematization and synthesis into its three constituent parts, Maoism, as a new, third and superior stage of Marxism. Since the 9th Congress of the CCP [Communist Party of China] (1969) and in the 1970s, many spoke of Maoism and its status as the third stage of Marxism, but it was only with Gonzalo Thought and the Peruvian Revolution that a complete synthesis of Maoism was achieved. All previous processes (even those that claimed to be “Maoist”) only managed to partially recognize the significance of Chairman Mao’s great work, failing to understand it as an integral and harmonious set of ideas, its universal character, and generally recognizing it as applicable only to the dominated countries.
Therefore, this is the question at the heart of the controversy of the international communist movement: to fully understand and accept Maoism as the new, third and superior stage of Marxism, from which the fight against all types of revisionism and opportunism and its validity and necessity to guide the second great wave of the world proletarian revolution today are inseparable.
It was up to Chairman Gonzalo to resolve the need to creatively apply Maoism to the Peruvian reality. First as a guiding thought and then ratified at the First Congress held after 8 years of People’s War, as Gonzalo Thought, which is the main aspect of the ideology that supports the general political line of the Peruvian revolution, systematizing it in its center: the military line as a prolonged people’s war applied to the reality of Peru. In this way, he synthesized the contributions of the Chinese Revolution and Chairman Mao, including elements that are dispersed in his theoretical work, and developed fundamental concepts such as the concentric construction of the three instruments of the revolution — communist party, revolutionary people’s army and the revolutionary united front, in which the party stands out as the main and central part of this construction; the need for a militarized party and the leadership as the centralization of revolutionary leadership. He emphasizes and develops the issue of two-line struggle and the need for its correct management as a driving force for the forging of an authentic communist party. By developing the conceptual framework of bureaucratic capitalism, it touches on the cornerstone of the revolution in colonial/semi-colonial countries, the correct class analysis of these societies, from which the general political line, strategy and tactics, as well as the methods and forms of struggle for the development and triumph of the revolution from new democracy uninterrupted to socialism, arise.
Taking the approach of major historical periods from the great leaders of the international proletariat, particularly Lenin and Mao, who summarize them as restoration and counter-restoration, he develops an extraordinary approach to the process of the world proletarian revolution, characterizing it in three major stages: strategic defense, strategic equilibrium and strategic offensive. According to him, the world proletarian revolution began with the publication of the Communist Party Manifesto (1848), passed through the Paris Commune (1871), triumphed with the Russian Revolution (1917), developed, under the leadership of the Communist International, the stage of strategic defense until the Second World War, reaching the stage of equilibrium between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, between socialism and imperialism, with the triumph of the great Chinese Revolution. With the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China (1966), strategic equilibrium was developed, providing answers to major pending questions for Marxism and pointing to brilliant perspectives for the revolution. Even with its defeat in 1976, ending its first great wave, this occurred with the world proletarian revolution reaching and bequeathing to revolutionaries a very high level.
With the Nicaraguan Revolution and especially the Peruvian Revolution, a second great wave of the world proletarian revolution began, opening the era of the strategic offensive. To promote and sustain it, Gonzalo Thought points to the task of forming and/or reconstituting militarized communist parties.
On the 30th anniversary of the beginning of the People’s War in Peru, we highlight the need for all revolutionaries and communists in the world to study and deepen the struggle around its meaning and outcome, starting from its center, Maoism, and from its understanding, which is given to us by Gonzalo Thought.
The theoretical and practical work of the Leader of the World Proletarian Revolution
AND Editorial Team, September 30 2021
The titanic work of Abimael Guzmán, Chairman Gonzalo, is based on a vast, rigorous and solid philosophical, ideological and political foundation, amply proven by the transformative action in the class struggle that he personally led and that continues against the wind and tide of the counterrevolutionary offensive, despite the vicissitudes and setbacks along the way. A proletarian intellectual, philosopher, party man, outstanding communist leader and great political and military strategist, with a lively and profound knowledge of the history of Humanity, especially of bourgeois society in the stage of imperialism and of contemporary Peruvian society–in which he lived–Chairman Gonzalo is a great follower of Marx, Lenin and Chairman Mao Zedong, the greatest Marxist-Leninist-Maoist of our time.
After twelve years of unstoppable growth of the People’s War–which began on May 17, 1980–under his masterful leadership, recognized Leadership of the Communist Party of Peru (PCP) and the Peruvian Revolution, Chairman Gonzalo was captured by the reaction along with the majority of the Central Committee (CC) of the party and sentenced to life imprisonment by exceptional courts and “faceless” judges. He fought and resisted unwaveringly and heroically from the first day of 29 years of total isolation, in solitary confinement many meters below the ground, against all sorts of mistreatment and torture, machinations, lies and the most terrible trials, remaining intact in his communist conviction. Twelve days after his capture, when the reactionaries tried to humiliate him by presenting him to the national and foreign press inside a cage, he gave a forceful speech addressed to the PCP, the fighters of the People’s Army, the Peruvian people, the international proletariat and the International Communist Movement (ICM) that resonated and continues to resonate as a resplendent and victorious beacon of resistance and combat against imperialism and all world reaction. Chairman Gonzalo transformed the solitary confinement cell at the Callao Naval Base (Navy base in Lima) into the highest Luminous Combat Trench until his last breath with the vile assassination on the morning of September 11th. Chairman Gonzalo defeated all reaction, the old Peruvian genocidal State and its successive governments in power, imperialism and the revisionist and capitulationist Right Opportunist Line (LOD), in their failed attempts to crush the People’s War, which continues invincible fighting against wind and tide, bequeathing to the international proletariat and the oppressed peoples of the world imperishable contributions of universal validity that enrich the treasury of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
When still relatively young, Chairman Gonzalo developed two theses at the academy, involving rigorous theoretical work, demonstrating a profound mastery of Kant’s work and his theory of space; and also a vast study of the State, retracing its entire development up until the emergence of the bourgeois-democratic State.
But it was far from the university that the greatest man of our time brought to Humanity the theoretical arsenal for the transformation of objective reality and for bringing the entire world into luminous Communism: he did so in the intense practice of 17 years, in which he created and led the Red Fraction that reconstituted the PCP, and in the 12 years, leading the great People’s War, until his capture by the reaction, on September 12, 1992; as well as in the 29 years of total solitary isolation of unbreakable resistance.
Defined Maoism
Chairman Gonzalo’s most important contribution was to define Maoism as the third, new and superior stage of development of Marxism, a contribution of universal validity. Until then, in the ICM, Chairman Mao’s contributions to Marxism-Leninism were vaguely understood and lacked a synthesis that, in the words of Abimael Guzmán himself, could only be achieved in the midst of the People’s War as a creative application of the universal truths of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, especially Maoism, to the concrete reality of Peru, integrating them into the practice of the revolution in that country, launching the Campaign for Maoism, about which he stated: “The struggle for Maoism will be long.”
This is how Chairman Gonzalo’s definition and synthesis is stated in the document On Marxism-Leninism-Maoism: “What is the fundamental of Maoism? The fundamental of Maoism is Power. Power for the proletariat, Power for the dictatorship of the proletariat, Power based on an armed force led by the Communist Party. More explicitly: 1) Power under the leadership of the proletariat, in the democratic revolution; 2) Power for the dictatorship of the proletariat, in the socialist and cultural revolutions; 3) Power based on an armed force led by the Communist Party, conquered and defended through people’s war. And what is Maoism? Maoism is the elevation of Marxism-Leninism to a third, new and higher stage in the struggle for the proletarian leadership of the democratic revolution, the development of the construction of socialism and the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, as a proletarian cultural revolution; when imperialism deepens its decomposition and revolution became the main trend of history, amidst the most complex and great wars seen to date and the relentless struggle against contemporary revisionism.”
It is also a leap in the understanding of the ideology of the international proletariat, whose apparent expression is the replacement of the use of the term “Mao Zedong Thought” by “Maoism”. Far from being pure semantics or “symmetry,” as false Maoists claim, “the ‘ism’ has a clear meaning; ‘thought’ is nothing more than a set of ideas, nothing more, while ‘ism’ is a doctrine that fully interprets all matter in its various ways of expressing itself, which are the three already mentioned: nature, society, knowledge. What is the difference between Mao Zedong Thought and Maoism? If they uphold or defend the same truths, why fight over this terminology? It is not a simple matter of terminology; what is at stake is whether it has universal validity or not, and if it is an ‘ism,’ then it has it; and if it is not an ‘ism,’ then it does not. That is the problem, so it is not a matter of terminology, is it? Because if things are identical, then why don’t we say ‘the international ideology of the proletariat: Marxist thought-Lenin thought-Mao Zedong Thought’, why don’t we say it that way if it is identical? It would be logical. So why use Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought? If it is the same, let us use Marx Thought-Lenin Thought-Mao Zedong Thought. Would that be correct? It would be profoundly absurd, it would be denying its universal character. What is the intention? To deny the universality of Chairman Mao Zedong’s development, that’s what.” (presentation and oral defense at a session of the First Congress of the PCP, 1988, of the document On Marxism-Leninism-Maoism).
Thus, Chairman Gonzalo establishes that the soul of Maoism is the people’s war, which is inseparable from the former, and therefore of universal validity, as being a mass war under the leadership of the Communist Party to conquer and defend the New Power, that is, in his own words: People’s War until Communism!
“‘Military theory of the international proletariat.’ Of course, this is clear, and it is even recognized by reactionary strategists; they say: it is with Mao that the communists arrive–they do not say international proletariat–the communists arrive at a complete military theory. Lenin did not arrive at this; Comrade Stalin has very important contributions on the problem of war that we cannot ignore, but he does not arrive at a complete military theory. How can the military theory of the proletariat be concretized in two words? I believe that is how it is. People’s war is the terminology used by Marx and Engels, yes, they used it; Lenin insisted more on the problems of the masses, obviously it is part of the people’s war, but it is Chairman Mao who developed the [military] theory of the proletariat. Every class in history generates its own way of waging war; the bourgeoisie generated it and without generating it it could not triumph; Napoleon, in this regard, did a lot. People’s war, the theory of the proletariat, military, implies universal validity; this is the point under discussion. People’s war is universal and it must be understood well, because what does it mean? It applies in every circumstance in which the proletariat leads, taking into account the character of the revolution: whether it is democratic, socialist or cultural revolution, it applies; and taking into account the specific conditions of each country.”
Bureaucratic Capitalism
Chairman Gonzalo, taking up what was developed by the great Lenin, Stalin and Chairman Mao, on the development of capitalism in countries dominated by imperialism where pre-capitalist feudal and semi-feudal bases remain, bequeathed to the international proletariat the key concept of bureaucratic capitalism and semi-feudality.
This is what Chairman Gonzalo states: “Bureaucratic capitalism is the capitalism that imperialism promotes in a backward country; the type of capitalism, the special form of capitalism, that an imperialist country imposes on a backward country, whether semi-feudal or semi-colonial. Let us analyze this historical process. The bourgeoisie that are developing in Latin America are becoming increasingly linked to the dominant country, in such a way that these weak bourgeoisie, instead of developing independently, as the European ones did, and in the service of national interests, are developing as subjugated, dependent bourgeoisie, surrendered body and soul to the imperialist powers (England or the United States, USA) as they grow until they become powerful and developed intermediate bourgeoisie, as the history of this century shows. Bureaucratic capitalism develops three lines in its process: a latifundist line in the countryside, a bureaucratic line in industry and a third, also bureaucratic, in the ideological. Without claiming that these are the only lines, we must not assume that these are the only ones. It introduces the latifundist line into the countryside through expropriatory agrarian laws that do not aim to destroy the feudal landowning class and its property, but rather to progressively evolve it through the purchase and payment of land by the peasants. The bureaucratic line in industry aims to control and centralize industrial production, commerce, etc., placing them increasingly in monopolistic hands in order to facilitate a faster and more systematic accumulation of capital, to the detriment of the working class and other workers, naturally, and to the benefit of the largest monopolies and imperialism as a consequence; in this process the squeeze to which the workers are subjected is of great importance. As can be seen in the industrial law, the bureaucratic line in ideology consists of the process of molding the entire people, through massive means of dissemination, especially in political conception and ideas, particularly those that serve bureaucratic capitalism; the general law of education is the concentrated expression of this line, and one of the constants of this line is its anti-communism, its anti-Marxism, open or covert.”
Exploring this in more depth, with a strong emphasis on the struggle between the two factions of the big bourgeoisie–the comprador and the bureaucratic–he states: “Well, bureaucratic capitalism is a question that is not understood. Chairman Mao in Coalition Government, as published, tells us that in China there is a bureaucratic capital of big bankers, big merchants, big landowners, which oppresses workers, peasants, petty bourgeoisie and restricts the national bourgeoisie; very important is the definition that says: restricts the national bourgeoisie, as he puts it. It is a monopoly capital, a big capital concentrated in the form of a monopoly; what does this have to do with? With its relationship with imperialism, obviously. Chairman [Mao], in volume IV, page 170 and the following, where the thesis of “bureaucratic capital” is found, there he tells us that in 20 years—he is talking about 1947—this bureaucratic monopoly capital linked up with the State and thus became a bureaucratic monopoly state capital. Watch carefully! Extremely important! 47 minus 20, [equals] 27; what happened in 27? Chiang Kai-shek’s coup, or not? So he told us, so he told us in Coalition Government, therefore, for Chairman [Mao] there was a bureaucratic capital that developed in China and that in the twenty years, from 1927 to 1947, was linked to the State and generated, added to it the being of the State, is that clear? That is what Chairman [Mao] said. And he said to those who exploit and again he lists the four classes with the difference as to which is restricted to the national bourgeoisie, he reiterates again, very interesting! In Coalition Government he did not say state and it is in volume III, as comrades well know; in IV, in 1947, he said state and said ‘in 20 years’, therefore, it is a process of development of bureaucratic capitalism and that is what is not understood. In volume IV, in addition to the ‘Unpublished Writings’, Chairman [Mao] already speaks of bureaucratic capitalism, he already proposes it: bureaucratic capitalism. Furthermore, in the IV volume itself, in On the People’s Democratic Dictatorship, which is the New Democracy, as he himself explains, because it is the final part, Chairman [Mao] speaks of the bureaucratic class, pay attention! Very important. What is the Chairman saying there? That this fusion of non-state monopoly capitalism with the state capitalism has already occurred and that the latter—the state capitalism—will be the predominant capital, the lever of the reactionary economy; that is why at one point he speaks to us of the comprador bourgeoisie and why in China at one point he specifies that there is a comprador bourgeoisie and a bureaucratic bourgeoisie and that Chairman [Mao] later redefines it as bureaucratic, do you understand? It is a process.”
The Militarized Party and Concentric Construction of the Three Fundamental Instruments of the Revolution
It was Chairman Mao who defined that in order to make a revolution, a Communist Party, a new type of army and a united front of revolutionary classes were necessary. These were what he called the “Three Magic Wands”, in which the Revolutionary United Front is to encircle the enemy and support the armed struggle, the army is to carry out the armed struggle and the Communist Party is the heroic fighters who wield these other two wands. Chairman Gonzalo, in turn, established that the construction of these three instruments should be done concentrically.
Regarding the Party, Chairman Gonzalo states that it is necessary for it to be, in addition to being a party of cadres and with a mass character, a militarized party. “The militarization of the Communist Parties is a political guideline that has strategic content, since it is ‘the set of transformations, changes and readjustments that are necessary to direct the people’s war as the main form of struggle that generates the new State’, therefore the militarization of the Communist Parties is key to the democratic, socialist and cultural revolution”.
This “set of transformations, changes and readjustments” concerns both the external relationship between the Party and the other two instruments, as well as the internal relationship within the Party itself. Externally, it is the construction of the Party around the rifle, that is, within the revolutionary Army from its embryonic stage, and its leaders, cadres and militants being simultaneously commanders and fighters of this Army. From this derives the series of modifications that the Party must adopt as a set of procedures, methods and forms of a revolutionary Army, of a new type, applying democratic centralism, mainly centralism, and differentiating itself from the Army by the fact that it is a chain of information and knowledge, which manages the Mass Line and, therefore, demands collective leadership and collective synthesis to encompass the whole of objective reality, presupposing freedom and discipline; the confrontation of ideas—in meetings—achieved through the method of the Two-Line Struggle as a method of distinguishing what is right from what is wrong; combined with the personal obligation to follow what is defined by the majority, by the higher committee or by the Party leader; the Party that must be inspired by the discipline of modern armies so as not to hinder the functioning of the Army, since it operates from within it. This implies objectivity in the relationship between the militant and the Party, in which, inspired by Lenin, the Maoist militant must be “a soldier in an Army in the field who cannot be absent without the authorization of command”.
“At the First National Conference in November 1979, Chairman Gonzalo put forward the thesis that the Communist Party of Peru needed to be militarized; then, in the early months of 1980, when the Party was preparing to launch a people’s war, he proposed developing the militarization of the Party through actions, based on the great Lenin who said that we should reduce non-military work and focus on military work, that peacetime was coming to an end and wartime was coming, and that all troops should be militarized. Thus, taking the Party as the axis of everything, he built the Army around it and, with these instruments, with the masses in a people’s war, built the new State around both. That the militarization of the Party can only be carried out through concrete actions of the class struggle, concrete actions of a military nature, does not mean that we should exclusively carry out military actions of various types (guerrilla action, sabotage, selective annihilation, propaganda and armed agitation), but that we should mainly carry out these forms of struggle, in order to encourage and develop the class struggle by indoctrinating it with facts, in this type of actions as the main forms of struggle of the people’s war. The militarization of the Party has its antecedents in Lenin and Chairman Mao, but it is a new problem developed by Chairman Gonzalo taking into account the new circumstances of the class struggle and it is clear that new problems will arise that will be resolved through experience. This will necessarily imply a process of struggle between the old and the new so that it can develop further, since war is the highest form of resolving contradictions, it strengthens men’s abilities to find solutions. It is the militarization of the Party that has allowed us to initiate and develop the people’s war; and we consider that this experience has universal validity, which is why it is a demand and necessity that the Communist Parties of the world militarize themselves.”
Consequently, the revolutionary army, in the words of Chairman Gonzalo, “is of a new type, that is, an army for the fulfillment of the political tasks that the Party establishes in the interests of the proletariat and the people; a character that is embodied in three tasks: to fight, to produce so as not to be a parasitic burden, and to mobilize the masses. It is an army that is based on political construction based on the ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism (today), and the General Political Line as a military force that the Party establishes.” He continues: “It is an army based on men and not on weapons; an army that emerged from the masses and is always linked to them, to those who serve them wholeheartedly, allowing it to move within them like a fish in water. Without a people’s army, the people will have nothing, Chairman Mao said at the same time that he taught us the need for the Party to have absolute leadership over the Army and established his great principle: The Party commands the gun and we will never allow the opposite. In addition to clearly establishing the principles and norms for building a new type of army, the same Chairman called to ward off the use of the army for capitalist restoration by usurping leadership through a counterrevolutionary coup and, developing Lenin’s thesis on the people’s militia, he took the general arming of the people further than anyone else, opening a breach and pointing the way to the armed sea of the masses that will lead us to the definitive emancipation of the people and the proletariat.” Thus Chairman Gonzalo formulated the construction and development of a new type of army based on three forces: a main force, a local force and a base force. The base force is the militarized working masses as a reserve and organized militias, but not as a permanent force. In this, the thesis of a sea of armed masses is advanced to ensure that the People’s Army remains faithful to the revolution and to ward off the danger of its being usurped by a leadership that has betrayed the revolution, as happened in the revisionist coup in the Soviet Union (USSR) and the People’s Republic of China.
Guiding Thought and Leadership
Starting from Lenin, who teaches us that in universal history the oppressed masses, in the struggle against their oppressors, have always elected their Leaders to lead them, and regarding the relationship between leaders, party, classes and masses, he states that a leadership cannot be improvised, Chairman Gonzalo summarized the experience of the World Proletarian Revolution, identifying that every revolution generates a group of leaders and among these a Leadership, a recognized Leader who stands out from the others and who comes to represent the movement after proving himself to be the most capable and the most firm in leading the Party and the Revolution, fusing revolutionary theory with revolutionary practice in a given country—shaping the guiding thought of this Party and this revolution, the basis on which its prestige and recognition are sustained.
“Any revolution that we see shows that it takes decades to forge a number of leaders. However, the main thing is that a Leader is created, a single head that stands out clearly, far above the others, and this is what we have to understand, and it is not by anyone’s will, it is the very reality of the revolution, of the class and of the party, which demand and promote this conformation. This is how it always happens, there is nothing strange about it, but it is a necessity; Engels already insisted on this and told us that even a literary movement has a head that represents it.”
The importance of the communist leadership, which represents the movement because it is supported by the guiding thought—that is, it drives and develops it and is subject to it—has precedents in all movements of humanity, especially in the great historical events of the class struggle in general. It is the point of identification of the masses with the ideology and the entire struggle.
Stages of the World Revolution
Chairman Gonzalo, based on Chairman Mao’s analyses of major periods and epochs of universal history in general and the history of the class struggle in particular, more specifically that of capitalist society, and, like him, his masterful handling of contradiction, defined that the World Proletarian Revolution has, just like the people’s war, three major moments, three major strategic stages of development: first, strategic defensive; second, strategic balance; and, third, strategic offensive.
“Chairman Gonzalo tells us that in the process of the world revolution of sweeping imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth there are three moments: 1st Strategic defensive; 2nd Strategic balance; and 3rd Strategic offensive of the world revolution. This is done by applying the law of contradiction to the revolution, since contradiction rules everything and every contradiction has two aspects in conflict, in this case revolution and counterrevolution. The strategic defensive of the world revolution opposed to the offensive of the counterrevolution began in 1871 with the Paris Commune and ended in the Second World War; the strategic balance was established around the triumph of the Chinese Revolution, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and the development of the powerful national liberation movement; later the revolution entered the strategic offensive, this moment can be located around the [years] of the 1980s, when we see signs such as the Iran-Iraq war, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, the beginning of the People’s War in Peru, a period inscribed in the “next 50 to 100 years”; from then on the development of the contradiction between capitalism and socialism, the solution of which will lead us to communism. We conceive of a long and not a short process, with the conviction that entering communism will involve a series of twists and turns and setbacks that will necessarily occur. Furthermore, it is not strange that we apply the three moments to the world revolution, since Chairman Mao applied them to the process of protracted people’s war. And as communists we must look not only to the moment, but to the long years to come.”
Conclusion
Through the Peruvian Revolution, which was bolstered by the great People’s War, under the leadership of the PCP and the leadership of Chairman Gonzalo, the largest armed revolutionary mass movement of the proletariat in the history of the Americas, the fruit of the creative application of the universal truths of the scientific ideology of the international proletariat to the concrete reality of Peru, the integration of these truths with the practice of the revolution in Peru, a process that led to Chairman Gonzalo’s definition of Maoism as the third, new and superior stage of development of Marxism and Gonzalo Thought, which were sanctioned by the historic and grand First Congress of the PCP, the Marxist Congress, the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Congress of Gonzalo Thought, as Chairman Gonzalo himself defined it, “a congress born of two fathers, the PCP and the People’s War”, of eight years of invincible People’s War.
Thus, Chairman Gonzalo and his Gonzalo thought, as the basis and guide of the Peruvian Revolution, provide contributions of universal validity to the ideology of the international proletariat and to the World Proletarian Revolution, the main one being the definition of Maoism. Chairman Gonzalo’s contributions of universal validity are part of this third, new and superior stage, Maoism and at the same time its development.
Long live the 36th anniversary of our victorious and invincible People’s War! (Conclusion)
June 2 2016
Military activity carried out by revolutionary prisoners in prisons, which were converted into Luminous Combat Trenches
In this edition, we conclude the publication begun in AND No. 171, of the Declaration of the Peru People’s Movement (Reorganization Committee) of May 17, 2016, on the occasion of the 36th anniversary of the People’s War in Peru. Taken from the page vnd-peru.blogspot.com.br.
Chairman Gonzalo, in a masterful summary, told us that all this phenomenon inevitably leads to the people’s war, which is its response. The PCP conceives the world people’s war as the great process of the oppressed nations, of the oppressed peoples led by Communist Parties that, through waves and various wars, or in circumscribed areas, regions and even worldwide, will come to consolidate into a world people’s war as a response to the imperialist counterrevolutionary war. The PCP does not understand the world people’s war as a war waged in unison, everywhere. It would be good, but that is not the reality and it will come to that in the future (Lenin: Immense Iron Legions of the Proletariat).
With the world people’s war, we would begin all construction and development, according to the level of society, throughout the world, so that, after a long journey, which will be hard and not at all easy, we will enter communism, which will also require another revolution. What will this revolution be like? We will leave that to future generations, as we do not have a crystal ball. But we all join it (communism) or no one joins.
The Party calls on us not to set our sights on the imperialist world war, whether it will occur or not; war is inevitable and will occur when conditions are right. We do not consider that the problem of revolution comes from the war of the reactionaries. Revolution comes from the people’s war.
Our problem is the people’s war, specifically, it is to prepare ourselves for it, to convert these aggressions into people’s war or to prepare ourselves, even without imperialist war, without direct aggressions from imperialism, to raise the people’s war and dare to fight, which is the case of Peru during these thirty-six years.
Understand that the main contradiction, as stated by the Party, is the main one historically, until imperialism and reaction are swept from the face of the Earth, because we are the vast majority. If the oppressed nations break imperialist rule, they will be contributing to the crushing of imperialist power itself in its metropolis.
Depending on the circumstances that arise in continents or countries, socialist revolutions will occur. Our criterion is not that only after the revolutions of the oppressed nations will there be socialist revolutions.
Those who focus on imperialism, focus on the enemy, and do not focus on the power of the people, of the masses, are incapable of understanding that three worlds are emerging, although they know very well that it was Chairman Mao who supported this thesis. The main trend is revolution, historically and politically.
The Party condemns Deng Xiaoping’s revisionist theory of the three worlds, which focuses on inter-imperialist contradictions in order to follow one of the superpowers or imperialist powers. Deng relied on the help of Yankee imperialism in its contradiction with the social-imperialist USSR to carry out the restoration.
Today, in the situation in the Middle East and Ukraine, some are leaning on the US imperialists and others on the Russian imperialists, others are calling for the support of the German imperialists to fight against the fascist Erdogan, etc. Others are seeking support from the imperialists to fight the Islamic State. The trap of the revisionists and opportunists is to confuse.
In the struggle for power, what is the main thing? The revolutionary struggle or the counterrevolutionary struggle for political power? Which of the two changes and transforms things? The revolution, obviously, is that of the proletariat, and this tendency is developing more and more. We must crush these confusions and positions by unfurling, defending and applying the people’s war to make the revolution. Revolution is the main tendency in the world today.
Today, it is much more obvious that imperialism is violence and reaction in every way; it is a paper tiger. Imperialism is in its collapse, but it will not disappear on its own. We have to sweep it away with the world revolution, which will encompass a much longer period, which corresponds to the third stage of the world revolution. That is, the stage of its strategic offensive. We entered this stage around the 1980s, with the beginning of the people’s war in Peru, as defined by Chairman Gonzalo in the document of the First Congress of the PCP: International Line.
Therefore, we need Maoism to be increasingly embodied by the peoples of the world in order to create Communist Parties of the new type, to initiate and develop the people’s war in each country, on the march towards the world people’s war. This is the task that has been delayed, as we have not fulfilled it and due to the lack of a clear position on the part of those in this region, we see other forces prevailing in the Middle East at the head of the armed struggle against imperialist aggression, which, however, have an ideology that is retrograde and dangerous for the revolution (that is, they have a dual nature).
Imperialist aggression and war, the immense imperialist genocide and plunder against the peoples of the oppressed nations, as we are seeing, encourage revolution. Therefore, the class character of the liberation wars, of all armed struggles of the peoples, regardless of who the forces temporarily leading them may be. That is why it is essential to develop the people’s war to show the way and serve the development of the communist movement in these countries, hence the need to further enhance the campaigns of international support for the people’s wars in Peru, India, etc., to create international public opinion in favor of the people’s war.
Let us celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution!
Celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. The Party has established and is our guide in this celebration: it began in May 1966 and it is necessary to study it as the greatest political process of humanity, not only because of its immense mass dimensions, but because of the political level it has reached and because it expresses the highest development of the World Proletarian Revolution, it is the greatest struggle led by the Communist Party of China and Chairman Mao Zedong himself; the decisive struggle for the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, one of the great milestones on the path of the proletariat’s struggle for power; an epic that has resolved the then pending problem of the continuation of the revolution and posed the essential task of changing its soul, the problem of ideology, making us see that it is not simple, but complex and arduous. Its immense lessons are incalculable, but we must always remember that with the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, Marxism-Leninism became Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, in short, Maoism; and this is obviously of immeasurable transcendence for the world proletarian revolution, the Peruvian revolution and the people’s war. For all these reasons, we celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution!
The boycott develops the people’s tendency against elections and serves the People’s War and the Reorganization of the Party
On April 10th, general elections were held to replace the authorities of the old landowning-bureaucratic state, to decide which members of the oppressor class would represent and crush the oppressed in Parliament and, most importantly, who would preside over the government for this purpose. These elections were organized to elect a president, vice-presidents and deputies. But only the deputies were able to fulfill their purpose. The entire electoral process has been developed amidst the most scandalous fraud and reactionary manipulation, and despite all the reaction, it has not managed to end the electoral dispute by failing to resolve the central problem of the presidential election.
As a result of these, two candidates who obtained the two largest numbers of valid votes were defined in a “second round”, that is, Keiko Fujimori (39%) for the Fuerza Popular party (FP) party and Pablo Kusinski (21%) for the Peruanos por el Kambio [trans. A misspelling of cambio, “change”](PK). Both highlighting the caudillista character of their groups, they identify themselves with the abbreviation of the names of their candidates: with the F for Fujimori and the PK for Pablo Kusinski. Thus demonstrating how this so-called democracy does not have truly constituted parties. These, like most candidates, have similar programs, that is, that of the comprador fraction of the big bourgeoisie. That’s why even the commentators themselves say that there is only a difference in style between them; the representation of the other faction, the bureaucratic one, by the Broad Front, was left out of the race.
Now, as expected, they are heading to the second election on June 5th. How will they develop until the reaction resolves its central problem of the presidential election? As the Party has already warned us, drawing on the law of previous processes and as has been happening, that is, amidst struggles and collusion within the reaction, as always, on the fringes of the people, to garner support for one candidate or another; once again, the major voters, institutions and enormous interests, with the direct participation of the US imperialist superpower and other powers, will choose who can best defend their interests. This is a period that deserves attention in order to understand the true reality and essence of the so-called “democratic elections.”
The situation that presented itself to the reactionaries throughout this process was the grave danger that absenteeism and blank and invalid votes would increase, further demonstrating the discredit of the elections and the people’s discontent with the old State and further delegitimizing its change of authorities. That is why, in these elections, we have a violation of its own “constitution” and electoral laws and widespread fraud. Now the risk for the second round is much greater and, to this end, as in the first round, only much more so, they shamelessly agitate the “danger of Fujimorism”, even more shamelessly now that it has an absolute majority in Parliament with 73 deputies out of 120.
Even more so if this parliamentary majority was elected with less than 20% of the valid votes and much less of the total votes cast, without counting those who did not vote and those who were not registered. This is also predicted by the reaction that this will be the case, in order to have, from the point of view of “representation”, a weak Parliament. Even more so because more than 80% of the parliamentarians from all benches do not belong to the parties for which they were elected, but to regional movements and chiefs of various types.
That being the case, therefore, what we are dealing with is legitimizing the new government that will have to govern with this majority Fujimorist Parliament, whether Keiko or Kusinski is President.
From what has been appearing and statements for and “against” one or the other candidate, what prompts the reaction is to have a President sufficiently “legitimized” by the largest number of votes to, in addition to the three tasks that are a necessity for imperialism and reaction, also resolve the problem definitively by raising the report and recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (CVeR). In other words, to definitively enshrine impunity for the genocides committed before and during the Fujimori regime, the “puppet stuck in the bayonets of the genocidal Armed Forces”. Genocidal Armed Forces that, under the direct direction of Yankee imperialism through the CIA, began to direct the counterrevolutionary war as a “low-intensity war”.
This means that they need to finalize the issue of the CVeR report and proposals and the verdicts and convictions of Fujimori and some of the members of his government and the FF.AA [armed forces of the Peruvian old state] for some of the crimes committed, with the execution of the sentences under conditions that are yet another exaggerated reward for their crimes and an insult to even the most distant sense of bourgeois justice, while they wait for the political measure that will allow them to leave through the front door.
Now, through Keiko, the results of the truth commission are being recognized, that is, that some people committed excesses to clean up the dust and chaff of the old genocidal Peruvian state, its so-called three branches of government, its other institutions at all levels, and especially its armed forces and police. They must try to clean up their genocidal democracy, that is, the governments that preceded the “self-coup,” such as the genocidal Belaunde and Alan Garcia, and the governments that followed. Their “human rights” experts say that if it were not this way, then the Peruvian state would have no legitimacy or continuity, because there would be a “black hole” in its history. That is why the genocidal Belaunde and Garcia were “excused,” because, according to them (CVeR), they were legitimate governments. They will tell the people that the people elected them and that they cannot have so much time for a person who the people recognize as having done so much good, despite his mistakes, and they will say the same about others. Fujimori, as the patriarch of Fujimorism, from his own fortress (“prison”), participated in all the agreements and disagreements of his parliamentarians during Humala’s government. And Montesinos is well protected at the Callao Naval Base from where he has nightly outings (according to Toledo).
So there are still disagreements on how to implement it, because it is clear that all genocidal perpetrators cannot be favored at once as a general measure, like an amnesty, but that the focus must be on the most visible, promising to the Armed Forces. which will soon be the others, in a staggered and gradual manner. Let’s not forget that there are some rats from Miriam’s LOD [Right Opportunist Line] (now as their own organization, the PCPMOVADEF) who have been serving their sentences for some time, but if they have preferred to leave them in prison, isn’t this an attempt to shamelessly fulfill a more general measure in favor of the genocidals? It may be like this, or in another way they will try to cover up appearances, but in any case, that’s what they are doing. Keiko herself said that she will talk to the “repentant terrorists”, those from the “sendero verde”, they must be those from Movadef. And this is a crucial problem for the reaction, because the people’s war continues and it will be increasingly driven as the general reorganization of the PCP advances, as has been seen in the successful boycott that the PCP is implementing.
Therefore, all the reactionaries and revisionists trailing behind them will seek to increase participation, both with K [Keiko Fujimori] and against K, with marches and everything in defense of memory, etc., in order to have a new government legitimized in the amphoras. K did not obtain more than 20% of the electoral standard, not counting those not registered. And Kusinski obtained less than 10%, and thus his parliament was elected with less than 20% of the valid votes and close to 10% of those cast.
Furthermore, where do the parliamentarians from the various benches come from? More than 20% of them are invited and come from regional parties or organizations or local forces, that is, various types of gangs linked to large mining companies or to the mafias set up by these companies to channel and exploit informal miners, large landowners, and this thick corporatist network of “social programs”, not to mention CONFIEP [National Confederation of Private Business Institutions]. One issue that should not be overlooked is the links between both candidates and drug trafficking, through prominent members of their circle.
Lately he has come out strongly against the general secretary of the FP, Keiko Fujimori. This would lead to a repeat of the situation that occurred with former president Samper in Colombia, who thus signed the Yankee-Colombian “agreement” of the “Plan Colombia” without question.
The PCP, since last year and this year, before and even on the day of the first round, on April 10, while developing the pending task of its reorganization, has been increasing the actions of the people’s war in quality and quantity, marching towards the struggle of the masses to lead them and take a new great leap in the incorporation of the masses into the people’s war. It has carried out forceful armed actions both in the countryside and in the city. The EPL [People’s Liberation Army] called on the people and the masses, mobilizing them against the arrival of Yankee troops on September 1; in the countryside, a forceful ambush on the Main Regional Committee and armed incursions in Huancavelica and Huancayo; in the Metropolitan Committee in the Eastern Zone, on September 8, they struck with flags, paintings, pamphlets and “zozobras”, while they were preparing for the infamous World Summit of the IMF and World Bank, which, in the middle of its meeting in the first days of October, the EPL displayed courage and agitation and armed propaganda in the Northern Zone and Western Zone in Callao, etc. In the days leading up to April 10, they attacked with flags, paintings, pamphlets and “zozobras”, with actions in the countryside and city and forceful ambushes in the Main Regional Committee. The boycott develops the people’s tendency against the elections and serves the people’s war and the general reorganization of the party, as we can see, it is laying solid foundations for its successful development and culmination. The militarized party that is the axis and center of the concentric construction of the three instruments of the revolution.
Long live Chairman Gonzalo, Great Leadership of the Party and the Revolution!
Unfurl, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism Gonzalo Thought, especially Gonzalo Thought!
Long live the Communist Party of Peru!
Under the guidance of the Congress, General Reorganization of the Party amidst the People’s War!
Long live the 36th Anniversary of the People’s War in Peru!
Long live the People’s Liberation Army, Gonzalo’s unbeatable legions!
Long live Maoism!
Down with revisionism!
We salute from here the future birth of the People’s Republic of Peru!
Honor and glory to the heroic Peruvian people!
Peru People’s Movement (Reorganization Committee)
May 2016
- Sendero Luminoso – This name was given to the PCP and the Popular Guerrilla Army it leads by the reactionary press, as well as by the “authorities” of the Peruvian State and was taken from a slogan that the Maoists proclaimed in the preparatory phase of the people’s war: “Por el sendero luminosa de Mariátegui!”, alluding to resuming the contributions that the great Peruvian Marxist-Leninist revolutionary José Carlos Mariátegui had made to the Peruvian revolution. ↩︎
- Senderólogos – A pack of pseudo-intellectuals, pseudo-writers, “analysts” and “researchers” from Peru and abroad who call themselves “experts in anthropology, sociology and violence”. These people, through all the media, using distorted arguments fabricated by the reactionaries, try to defame the People’s War in Peru, thus serving the objectives of imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism, with articles, books and police reports.
These senderólogos have been working as advisors to the CIA and the armed forces in counterinsurgency psychological warfare since the beginning of the People’s War, and most of them came from the ranks of Izquierda Unida: a front of political parties and organizations that claim to be left-wing, including a collection of revisionist “communist” parties and NGOs. Many of them have become members of governments in Peru.
The truth is that the “Shining Path” only exists in the rotten minds of these false mercenary “experts”, such as:
Raúl González author of: “Ayacucho: on the paths of the Sendero”, “Alto Huallaga and the Shining Path”, and a dozen other titles;
Carlos Tapia author of: “The military and the Shining Path. Two strategies and one end”, among others;
Gustavo Gorriti author of: “The Shining Path: A History of the Millennial War in Peru”, etc.;
Fernando Rospigliosi author of: “The Shining Path in Peru: Return to the Past”, among others;
Alberto Bolívar Ocampo author of: “Insurgency and counterinsurgency in Peru, 1980-1990″… ↩︎ - Strategic Balance – Concept of People’s War that consists of the second strategic stage of the same, that of the revolution, led by the communist party and its guerrilla army, which has already accumulated forces to such an extent that it configures a new situation in the correlation of forces between revolution and counterrevolution and between the two opposing hills. The other two stages are respectively: the first of the Strategic Defensive and the third and last of the Strategic Offensive. ↩︎
- Speech from the cage – Speech made by Chairman Gonzalo when he was introduced to the national and international press on September 24, 1992, in a police courtyard, in a large cage and dressed in a striped uniform, in an attempt by Fujimori and Montezinos to humiliate and ridicule him. The forceful speech given by a proud and combative Chairman Gonzalo in front of a real pack of thieves defeated the attempts of the reaction and echoed around the world in a call for the continuation of the war. ↩︎
The Worker is an entirely volunteer-run revolutionary newspaper free from and radically antagonistic to corporate influence. We rely on the support of our readers to sustain our editorial line in service of the working class and the reconstitution of its party, the Communist Party. Make a one-time or recurring donation to our newspaper today:
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly
