Dear Comrades,
today we have received a text of the Editorial Staff of
Classposition ["Klassenstandpunkt"] regarding the current
two-line-struggles in the FRG. The article can be found here: http://www.demvolkedienen.org/index.php/en/t-dokumente-en/2312-fighting-fire-with-gasoline-or-how-to-dig-your-own-political-grave
And here:
Proletarians of all countries, unite!
"Fighting fire with gasoline" or how to dig your own political grave
A commentary of Class Position
Introduction
The right liquidators have run from the
two-line-struggle for years. But after the declarationby the comrades
from the Committee Red Flag they had to respond1. They can not run any longer. Their backs are against the wall.
Essentially their text is their
declaration of bankruptcy. They confirm all the Maoist criticisms
against them and are finally forced to expose their web of lies and
stories publicly as a whole, not being able to spread it in one-on-one
conversation and through facebook comments any longer. Now everybody can
see it as the anticommunism on the level of “Animal Farm” it truly is.
They obviously view communists in formation not as the vanguard of the
proletariat they are, rather describing them like vampires, sucking the
life out of young revolutionaries, and like black holes, sucking in and
destroying organizations. Everybody can clearly see that people with
this views are a lot of things – right liquidators, opportunist,
reactionaries, enemies of the proletariat and the Internationalist
Communist Movement and a lot more – but there is one thing they are
clearly not: Communists.
Because of this they again try to run
away from open two-line-struggle. Instead they try to isolate the
leadership from the masses using intrigues. They hope some of their
bourgeois comments about democratic centralism will stick around in the
back of the head of the masses, associating them in daily work, so that
discipline subconsciously is linked with the feeling of being a servant.2
Additionally they try to create conflict in the revolutionary movement
in FRG and in the International Communist Movement. But they fail at
this. Because every idea has a class-character they expose themselves as
ugly German revisionists. They try to impress unknowing readers by
droning on about things they have no clue about. It is impossible to
respond to all of their reactionary and revisionist ideas, while still
systematizing the two-line-struggle, which is why we will focus on nine
aspects of their text, in which they confirm the maoist criticisms
against them, and three principal aspects of their “criticisms”. Not to
convince these people, but to fight this German-national,
right-opportunistic liquidationism.
Opportunism through and through
The right liquidators provide proof of their opportunism right on the first page of their text:
“Also, one thing has to be noted. We
write this as Youth Resistance[“Jugendwiderstand”]. It is a
revolutionary youth organisation – not a communist cadre organisation,
not a party, nor a party construction organization – hence, we are not
bound by any guidelines of these and we also don’t accept the overblown
theater the people from Hamburg play.”
They clarify, as soon as possible, that
they will run away from any form of principle struggle. It is not about
making open two-line-struggle, but about whining, stating non-committals
and claiming absurd things.3
Lenin explains:
“When we speak about fighting
opportunism, we must never forget a characteristic feature of
present-day opportunism in every sphere, namely, its vagueness,
amorphousness, elusiveness. An opportunist, by his very nature, will
always evade taking a clear and decisive stand, he will always seek a
middle course, he will always wriggle like a snake between two mutually
exclusive points of view and try to “agree” with both and reduce his
difference of opinion to petty amendments, doubts and innocent and pious
suggestions, and so on and so forth”4
Regarding their text
In the following we want to talk about
nine aspects of their text, in which they clearly confirm the maoist
criticisms raised against them, especially the ones from the declaration
of the Committee Red Flag.
1) Splitting instead of two-line-struggle
2) No ideological-political justification for splitting
3) Sabotage against Revolutionary
Construction [“Revolutionärer Aufbau”] and others as a means to hinder
the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany
4) Military attack against the international proletariat
5) Snitching and police work
6) Agent provocateur
7) Justification for fleeing from two-line-struggle
8) Lies about the PCP
9) 8th of March and the Afrin demonstration
First. The right
liquidators split without waging two-line-struggle concerning the
ideological and the political line. They did so as a group. They negated
the fundamental principals of how communists behave -
two-line-struggle, democratic centralism and open struggle - and instead
used intrigues.5
Second. The right
liquidators founded a new organization without making any ideological
and political criticism against the organization they split from.6
They also propagated a diffuse party committee, which acted under
changing names, recently as “maoist Communist Party of Germany –
Construction Committee” [“maoistische Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands
– Aufbaukomitee” ].
These people expect this organization to
be recognized as self-reliant without any ideological political
struggle. In this text they expect the organization they deserted from
without giving a single criticism, to provide a criticism to be able to
develop a relationship.7
Those who split, are the ones who have to
formulate a criticism, not the other way around. They have to prove
that they allegedly represent the reddest line, which has to be
followed. They have to prove that their actions are justified. In their
text they prove that they haven’t done this.
Third. In their text the
right liquidators confirm, that they actively tried to sabotage the
development of the Revolutionary Construction and others, as a means to
undermine the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of
Germany.8
Instead of encouraging open two-line-struggle in the Revolutionary
Construction, they tried to split using intrigues. Their failed
fractionism lead to a “Youth Resistance base-unit”, which was so
isolated, that “they had to flee and the work collapsed”.
Fourth. The right
liquidators admit to physically attacking and threatening our comrades
and trying to prohibit the sale of the mass-newspaperRed Post [“Rote
Post”].9
They admit to having lead a military attack against the international
proletariat, even if in their gang-mentality it was “only a slap”. An
action, during which one contingent, under one leadership, with one
shared objective, sends out a detachment of people to attack two
targets, meaning hitting and threatening them with stabbing, after which
they retreat collectively and in an organized manner is clearly a
military action. Anybody who denies this has a militaristic
understanding, in whichsomething only counts as military if tanks and
rifles are involved. The comrades they attacked are the comrades, who
have done the work to support the people’s war in India for years and
who participated in the nationwide day of action in solidarity with the
People’s War in India in Berlin. An attack against these comrades is
also an attack against the Indian comrades. The right liquidators even
show in their own photograph, that the comrades they attacked were
carrying the banner for the 200thanniversary of the birth of Karl Marx, a
banner that was carried by revolutionaries all around the world that
day. An attack against these comrades is an attack against the struggle
for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany for one, but it
is also an attack against anybody who carries that banner, against
anyone who supports this grand international campaign, against this
campaign, that unites the most advanced forces in the International
Communist Movement and thus furthers the struggles of the international
proletariat. The right liquidators prove they aim to sabotage this
campaign, but they won’t succeed in this. This aim and this attack is a
crime against the international proletariat.
Fifth. The right
liquidators claim, that the Maoists in the FRG are snitching. Every
single picture and video that was published was uploaded to their
facebook page or website by themselves beforehand. Them talking about
“personality-profiles” just proves how on point the criticism is and how
they recognize themselves in it. The right liquidators were exposed,
but they were exposed in front of the revolutionaries in the FRG and in
the world, not in front of the cops. That is not snitching.
It is snitching however, to claim, that
different organizations and groups are one, which is what the right
liquidators are doing in their text. They claim that the website
DemVolkeDienen.org is the news-platform of SoL [“Socialist left” /
“Sozialistische Linke”]. They explain which organization allegedly
became which and founded which.10
They say Committee Red Flag, SoL, Internationalist Collective Berlin
[“Internationalistisches Kollektiv Berlin”], Red Women Committee Berlin
[Rotes Frauenkomitee Berlin], Red Women Committee Hamburg [Rotes
Frauenkomitee Hamburg], Struggle together [“Zusammen Kämpfen”], Red Ruhr
Crew [“Rote Ruhr Crew”], Revolutionary Construction, the satire page
“Some of my best friends are Antideutsche” [“Einige meiner besten
Freundinnen sind Antideutsche”], Kang-Tscheng-Productions and othersare
all parts of one organization. They claim that SoL is a memberof
theLeague against imperialist Aggression [“Bündnis gegen
imperialistische Aggression”], a league, that has never publicly
disclosed their member organizations. Only Antideutsche have attacked
the league this way so far. This is police work. The right liquidators
are trying to provide a ground for a trial based on circumstantial
evidence, which would enable the reaction to ban multiple organizations
at once on the basis of paragraph 129a [building/supporting a domestic
terrorist organization]. The right liquidators are preparing an attack
against the whole revolutionary movement in the FRG.
Sixth. They are acting
as agent provocateur. With their provocations in Hamburg they were
trying to provoke a fistfight in front of undercover cops and cameras,
to provide the reactionaries with an excuse to take action against the
communists in formation.11
But the communists in formation didn’t fall for it, they led
two-line-struggle and sold newspapers to the masses, including some of
the masses of the right liquidators. With their fantasies and
provocations about the activities during G20 and the 1st of May they aim
to do the same. They talk about maoists, who shouted “Youth Resistance,
we know that already - Allahu Akbar instead of revolution”, even though
they know that these were people from from the alliance, who at that
point couldn’t be considered maoist at all. They try to provoke
statements about who did what and self incrimination.
Seventh. The right
liquidators try to justify their avoidance of two-line-struggle, by
claiming that they demanded two-line-struggle, which was denied. How is
it not two-line-struggle to discuss at events, or to write texts with
criticisms? What was their reaction to this? Running away, trying to
prohibit and to ignore it.12
We want to emphasize, it’s still a fight, even if only one of the
participants is a willing fighter, while the other one just takes it and
tries to flee.
Eighth. Their claim
about the practice in the Communist Party of Peru,that the “photos of
the children of the militants should be burned”, shows how they have no
clue about the Party and are spreading lies.13 Such a decisionwas never takenby the Communist Party of Peru.
Ninth. Regarding the 8th
of March we were told that two masses who sympathize with the right
liquidators and live in Hamburg attended the demonstration of the
comrades from Hamburg, where they wanted to carry their eclectic hammer
and sickle flag. After being asked if they are maoist one of them
responded that one is not a maoist, just because of carrying that flag.
They were informed, that the revisionist flag wasn’t welcome in the
demonstration and were offered a maoist hammer and sickle flag, which
they gladly carried through out the entire demonstration.
Regarding the Afrin demonstration, we are
unaware what incident the right liquidators are talking about. We were
told, that a female and a male comrade, so two comrades, sold newspapers
there and meet the aforementioned masses of the right liquidators.
Neither our comrades from ATIK, in whose block the incident supposedly
took place and who are quick to react in such situations have spoken to
us regarding this, nor can we explain where the ten additional
“activist”, who supposedly threatened the two masses may have appeared
from. This story is as believable as “polish assault” on the German
Reich – and serves the same purpose14.
The only explanation we are able to come
up with is, that the comrades were near these two people when other
attendees of the demonstration expressed their hatred for the right
liquidators. It is certain, that no organized Maoists have been involved
in this incident.
Regarding the ideological-political criticism
1. Opposition against the Party
The Communist Party is the vanguard of
the proletariat. It is composed of the best children of the class. Its
members promise to break with their old lives, to dedicate their life to
the revolution and to accept death, if the necessities of the
revolution demand it. Its members are taught through two-line-struggle.
They are taught through the struggle between the red proletarian line
and the black bourgeois line, in which the red proletarian line proves
itself through criticism and selfcriticism and through forging of
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the universal contributions of chairman
Gonzalo as a science. Its members submit their Individual under
thought-through, collective discipline. They submit to democratic
centralism, so that not individualism, but the ideology of the
proletariat is the line.
This is progressive, meaning in the eyes
of the right liquidators it’s “crazy”. It’s not liberal, meaning they
consider it “authoritarian”.
They say maoist are tyrants, freaks and
nerds. From the view of the petite-bourgeois and the lumpen proletariat
democratic centralism may appear to be tyranny against the lumpen-like
bourgeois individualism. If the reactionary follow- don’t-lead
understanding of the massline is what one is aiming for, communists in
formation may appear to be “weird Freaks”. If one denies the science of
Marxism, communists in formation may appear to be “Nerds”. If one is
opposed to the party, any development towards it may appear to be
“elitist”.
The right liquidators try to turn the masses against the reconstitution of the Party.15
They don’t understand the massline, which when applied means to
systematize the ideas of the most advanced parts of the masses and to
propagate this systematization back to the masses, while the right
liquidators apply a follow-don’t-lead-policy. This is not the massline
of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the masses they reach this way are not
the most advanced parts. This follow-don’t-lead-policy doesn’t lead to
the vanguard, but to the coolest group of macho-men. This is clearly
expressed in their claims about “the supposed reactionary character of
hooliganism” and in their stance towards “Allahu Akbar”-paroles on their
1st of May demonstration. If these paroles were shouted after their
mobilization followed a clear line and included correct analysisof
Yankee imperialism and the mass murder in Palestine the situation would
be different and their claim about it “happening under the leadership of
proletarian revolutionaries” would actually be correct. But considering
their actual paroles (that means the condensed expression of their
politics) were “Fuck the USA” and “Fuck Israel” no-one should be
surprised they mobilizedpeople who consider “Allahu Akbar” to be the
correct political line, instead of the most advanced parts of the
masses. This has nothing to do with the ideology of the proletariat.
Their talk about “the Sect from Hamburg” also is an expression of their
opposition against the Party. The ones who want to overcome the
fractuation of the left and constitute the Party are often called
“sects”. Red Guards Austin in the USA are also currently attacked using
this claim16.
The right liquidators value the emotion,
experience and spontaneous consciousness of parts of the working-class
over teaching the comrades Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the practice of the
international proletariat and the worlds peoples synthesized into
theory. That is subjectivism and the same argument as usedby
post-structuralist enemies of the proletariat. It means they think some
chauvinist dudeshanging around in Neukölln know better than Marx, Lenin
and chairman Mao.
They oppose the construction of the party
from top to bottom. They oppose centralism for the independent
kingdoms. They agreed with organizational principalson a platonic level,
but don’t act according to them.
This is why the maoist in the FRG call them right liquidators.
2. German nationalism
They don’t want Germany to die.17
They don't want to criticize the ocean of black-red-yellow flags during
the public viewing during football world-cups, which means they don't
want to criticize the identification with German imperialism. Based on
their wrong understanding of the German nation, they claim such a
criticism would be against the masses and the people.18
This means they negate the massline and two-line-struggle and
capitulate to the imperialist chauvinism of the German nation. They
equate the German people with German imperialism. This is the bourgeois
understanding of what the people are.
The territory of the German nation is
soaked in the blood of massacred Slavics. It has an economy based on the
blood and sweat of the peoples of Europe and the oppressed nations all
around the world. Its language and culture are an expression of its
national characteristics, which are based on imperialist chauvinism,
Prussian servant-mentality and officialdom, not on worker- and
soldier-associations. This nation is not represented by Thälmann, but
rather by Noske.
This acceptance of the standpoint of the
German nation also expresses itself in their views on proletarian
internationalism. They are shocked to hear, that the maoist do all of
their work in service of the proletarian world-revolution. They are
upset that the plan for the actions during the G20-summit included
sending a message of international solidarity and supporting the
oppressed people’s morale in their fights.
This is why the maoist in the FRG call them German-nationalist, imperialist chauvinists.
3. Gonzalo-thought or Gonzaloism.
Even a puddle of vomit has a certain
structure to it. We have tried to summarize the views of the right
liquidators regarding Gonzalo-thought and its application as structured
as possible:
1.They claim, Gonzalo-thought is only the guiding thought in the revolution in Peru and is therefore not applicable in Germany19
2. They say, Gonzalo-thought has provided some universally applicable contributions to the ideology of the proletariat.20 This is contradictory to the first point.
3. They claim, wanting to apply Gonzalo-thought in Germany means to negate the concept of a guiding thought.21
4. They note, that the Class Position
explains the necessity of a guiding thought in the revolution in the
FRG. Apparently this sadly didn’t prompt them to overthink their third
point.22
5. They claim the applicability in the
FRG necessitates a new stage of Marxism, meaning they don’t understand
the dialectic between universal applicability and a new stage.23
6. They claim Gonzalo-thought solves no new problems and open questions in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.24
We’d like to remind them of the militarization of the party and the
concentric structure of the three instruments they even acknowledge
themselves.25
7. They claim Maoism to be the last stage of Marxism.26 They deny the dialectic of practice ad theory.
8. They claim talking about
Gonzalo-thought and applying it, as that is what the comrades of the
Committee Red Flag are doing, is secret Gonzaloism. They say this
negates Maoism and Gonzalo-thought and its universally applicable
elements.27 This means they are trying to negate Gonzalo-thought using Gonzalo-thought, which is about as eclectic as one can get.
As the right liquidators’ text only serves to spread confusion on this question, here for once with all clarity:
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism develops based on
revolutionary practice. Based on the practice theory is developed,
which is used as the basis of new practice once more. Some of the theory
is disproven, some of it is confirmed and developed. Marx, Lenin and
chairman Mao developed the ideology of the proletariat in all its three
aspects, philosophy, political economy and scientific socialism and with
this raised it to a new stage. Today the ideology of the proletariat is
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and Gonzalo-thought. This means on a global
scale it’s Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism. Gonzalo-thought
principally is the guiding thought of the revolution in Peru, but it
also has some universally applicable aspects, as Chairman Gonzalo also
made contributions to the ideology of the proletariat, that not only
need to be applied in Peru but everywhere. In the left of the
Internationalist Communist Movement it’s being currently discussed
whether these contributions should be called Gonzalo-thought. Of course
the right liquidators know nothing of this as they are neither a part of
the left of the Internationalist Communist Movement nor of the
Internationalist Communist Movement at all. Claiming this ideology won’t
develop further based on class-struggle until communism is metaphysical
and negates the dialectic of theory and practice.
This ideology needs to be applied to the
concrete circumstances and be developed into a guiding thought. Talking
about “-thought” in no way negates the concept of a guiding thought.
Consider the struggle for the
reconstitution of the Communist Party of Peru lead by Chairman Gonzalo
and the Red Faction as an example. The Communist Party of Peru declared
following as their Party Unity Basis during their sixth conference in
1969; “Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought, the thoughts of Mariategui
and general political line”. In May of 1977 they declared: “handling
the line in international class-struggle demands three things. Firstly
to define Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought and to apply it with
determination; secondly, the reuptake of the line of Mariategui about
international politics and its development; thirdly, the summary of the
experience of the party regarding this problem and especially the
struggles about this question.” We emphasize its development. While the
CPP at this point talked about Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought,
this development later became the guiding thought of the party, then it
developed into the guiding thought of Chairman Gonzalo, then
Gonzalo-thought. The formulations guiding thought and Mao Tse
Tung-thought were used at the same time.
The central committee of the CPP
determined that chairman Gonzalo made contributions to the development
of Marxism, but is not a forth sword himself, during a meeting in August
of 1993(“SESION DE TRABAJO, COMITE CENTRAL, PARTIDO COMUNISTA DEL
PERU“). This means there is no such things as Gonzaloism, but chairman
Gonzalo made contributions towards a fourth stage of Marxism. As far as
we know the aforementioned document is not available on the internet,
but it was an important part of the two-line-struggle in the
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement in the mid 1990’s.
Another point showing the rottenness of
this people, is that they attempt, with the same tricks as Avakian and
those converging with him, to portray “Great Leadership” as something
extremely strange and mystical. The German translation of “Führerschaft”
is the exact translation of the Spanish Word “jefatura”. The translated
document that is quoted by them very much clarifies the question of
Great Leadership28. Still they insist on the term jefatura29.
It is the same Trick everyone in the International Communist Movement
knows from the Avakianists, precisely to run away from the struggle on
the basis of principles and to suggest the Communist Party of Peru would
be “dogmatic” and “quasi-religious”. This the exact core of the
defamation campaign against the Communist Party of Peru (and more
importantly, a significant part of the counter-revolutionary warfare).
The right liquidators just spread
confusion, instead of making clear and concise criticisms, learning
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and facing the two-line-struggle in the
Internationalist Communist Movement.
They don’t care about the ideology of the
proletariat. They have no redder line than the communists in formation
in the FRG. Where is their criticism of our line-documents like “The aim
of German imperialism to develop into a superpower”, “People’s War –
The solepath to Liberation” or “One class, one ideology, one party, one
revolution”? Where is their position about the People’s-War-document
(they even talk about in their text, criticizing one point, without
taking a stance about it as a whole) or the document about the position
of the anti-imperialists to the PKK written by Alexandra Becker, which
was, among others, also published at DemVolkeDienen.org and which has
been widely discussed in the revolutionary movement in the FRG?
This is why the Maoist in the FRG call them right opportunists.
Conclusion
In their helpless attempts to deal with
the two-line-struggle they can not flee from anymore, the gang of right
liquidators, with their backs to the wall, confirms all maoist
criticisms that have been formulated towards them, especially those
conclusions drawn in the statement of the Committee Red Flag. They are
right liquidators. Because everything they do is against the
Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany. They are a
German-nationalist pile of trash. Because they use the bourgeois
understanding “people” and conciliate with imperialist chauvinism. They
are right opportunists. Because they can not combat the ideology of the
proletariat. So they have act as they would represent it.
Editorial Staff of Class Position
23nd of May, 2018
1Translators
note: At the time of this translation, there has not yet been a
translation published by the right liquidators themselves. Hence, all
quotes from their text have been translated by us to best of our
knowledge.
2“They
treat their activist like servants They raise themselves up to be
authorities and demand Jefatura for their person, without having done
anything to earn it.“
3It’s made even clearer in this quote:
“Mistakes due to lack of attention are possible and we reserve the right to later additions and statements, especially in ideological question.”
“Mistakes due to lack of attention are possible and we reserve the right to later additions and statements, especially in ideological question.”
4Lenin, “One Step forwards, two steps back”
5They confirm this in their text:
“We will talk about the political-ideological contradictions more thoroughly later on”,
“We will talk about additional ideological problems and contradictions and their expression in the practice, how SoL handled the criticism, the exact process of quitting and the mistakes made during it another time.”,
“Anyhow the comrades from Berlin (local leaders, activists, masses)-and with this the majority of people organized with SoL in the FRG- left the organization one after another in mid-January of 2015.”
The statements about “political-ideological contradictions” and “ideological problems” never happened.
“We will talk about the political-ideological contradictions more thoroughly later on”,
“We will talk about additional ideological problems and contradictions and their expression in the practice, how SoL handled the criticism, the exact process of quitting and the mistakes made during it another time.”,
“Anyhow the comrades from Berlin (local leaders, activists, masses)-and with this the majority of people organized with SoL in the FRG- left the organization one after another in mid-January of 2015.”
The statements about “political-ideological contradictions” and “ideological problems” never happened.
6“The
“splitting of the maoist movement” in Germany – which is how the
followers of the sect from Hamburg call the quitting of the majority of
SoL and the founding of Youth Resistance – was not the result of intense
intern two-line-struggles [...]”
“This is why Youth Resistance was founded as an anti-imperialist and revolutionary youth-organization under proletarian leadership in February of 2015, after a short phase of general plan-development by the most advanced comrades.”
“This is why Youth Resistance was founded as an anti-imperialist and revolutionary youth-organization under proletarian leadership in February of 2015, after a short phase of general plan-development by the most advanced comrades.”
7“[...]in
which we asked themto send us the countless criticism, which they
shared around at every opportunity, as a whole so that we may take a
stance about it.“
8“Some
comrades in Bremen left the Revolutionary Construction and founded a
base-unit of Youth Resistance [...].”, “There was massive sabotage
against the base-unit of Youth Resistance Bremen, so that the comrades
had to flee from the city from people angered by personal disputes
(Revolutionary Construction encoured this anger) – who SoL would call
lumpen for sure – and the local work collapsed.”
9“[…]
is about ONE (1!) Slap one of their comrades received from one of our
comrades on the 1st of May.”, “We went up to them and told them […] to
stop selling their their lying newspaper in our parts of town,”
10“In
Berlin the first mass organization “Red Youth Berlin” was founded,
which later brought forth the so called mass organisms, called
“Internationalist Workers Committee Berlin” and “Red Women Committee
Berlin”.
11“Said
and done. We were in Hamburg with our comrades the day after the
publishing of this dirty text. And you saw us. For hours.”
12“Completely
out of place they tried to rally against us at our events we held with
international guests, to the discontent of everybody present. They
admitted to having shown up to “cause trouble” - which is why we
prohibited them from attending our events in a letter.”
13“[...]like
the demand, activist should burn child photograps, because the Peruvian
communists had to do this too (it should be noted in a different
situation and time) [..]”
14Translators note: To start World War 2, the German Fascists made up a fake story about Poland attacking Germany first.
15“The
sect from Hamburg is a collection of bourgeois subjects, who have an
elitist practice, that is isolated from the masses, as a starting point,
from which they develop an illegalist line, that is opposed to the
masses. Additionally they claim to be able to develop Maoism into
“Gonzaloism”, a diversion from Marxism, based on misuse of Peruvian
experience, that is an attack on Maoism.”
16Medium.com/@BlackRedGuard, “Why do People Continue to Take the US Red Guards Seriously? Do you even Know Who these People Are?”
17“[...]who’d
rather know them to be with the “Germany-has-to-die-maoists” from the
nearby B5-cellar, rather than the
“Long-live-Thälmann-long-live-council-germany” from Berlin”
18“With
them, they not only share the “Germany has to die!” yelling, but also
the stance about the German people, who both of them view as an obstacle
for the proletarian revolution. Both of them drone on about “Prussian
servant-mentality”, “imperialist chauvinism during the public viewing
[of the football world cup]” and “reactionary Arabs” in Neukölln, “who’d
rather yell “Allahu Akbar” instead of “revolution”.”
19“Why
would it be possible to apply the guiding thought of the Peruvian
revolution in Germany, if the guiding thought is the creating
application to the concrete national circumstances?”
20“We
don’t want to be misunderstood, we do think, that the Peruvian
experience brought forth many important universal contributions to the
ideology of the proletariat, like the theory of the militarized party
and its concentric structure, the furthered analysis of bureaucratic
capitalism and the development of the proletarian military-theory,
people’s war and its application.”
21“The
claim to be able to apply Gonzalo-thought in Germany negates the
concept of an own guiding thought and is unscientific and nearly
religious.”
22“In
the same publication the sect says the truth: It is important, that the
revolution in Germany brings forth its ow guiding thought.”
23“To
think it is possible to apply Gonzalo-thought as an ideological base in
Germany implies that Maoism made a leap and was now correctly called
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism-Gonzaloism.“
24“In
that case they need to explain which open questions in Maoism
“Gonzaloism” answers and which problems in the new-democratic,
proletarian or the cultural revolution it solves.”
25By
the way the concentric structure is not the inner, but the outer
structure of the party, meaning the relationship to the army and the
front. The right liquidators didn’t understand this either.
26“[…] Maoism as the third, highest, final stage of the ideology of the proletariat[…]”
27“We
believe the raising of Gonzalo-thought to Gonzaloism, and even if the
don’t to do this, the sect actually prepares to do this, negates
Maoismus as the third highest final stage of the ideology of the
proletariat for one and the great contributions of chairman Gonzalo and
Gonzalo-thought, which is the guiding thought of the Peruvian
revolution, including universally applicable content”
28„Jefatura [Great Leadership] from Hamburg“
29„They raise themselves as authorities and claim Jefatura for their persons“