Refreshingly non-dogmatic or tediously opportunist?

There is a clearcut distinction between the creative articulation of Maoism as the summation of the most advanced practical applications of historical and dialectical materialism in the concrete struggles of the masses till now and the liquidation of all the previous experience gained from the movements of the proletariat and the popular masses  in the name of “creativity” and “realism”.

New theories capable of serving as a valid guide to action are only produced out of the class struggle, the highest most advanced points of social practice of the masses. In short they are forged in civil war.

Marxism was the intellectual reflection of the class struggle of the proletariat in West Europe in the 19th Century. It found its conformation in the struggles around the International and in the Paris Commune.

Leninism was the intellectual expression of the struggle of the Russian proletariat to seize and hold power. The summation of the first (albeit partially) successful struggle to impose the dictatorship of the proletariat. The revolutionary working class worldwide was regrouped under its banner.

Maoism is the synthesis of the experience of protracted revolutionary war and continuation of the class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat in China and of the ongoing processes of People’s War worldwide which remain the most advanced extent manifestations of proletarian counter-power.

On every level and despite its own fatal limitations the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution remains the furthest advance in the struggle for communism till the present day. Maoism is no more then the synthesis of this immense experience of the masses as first asserted by the Peruvian Communist Party in the course of carrying out its own tremendous mass movement of armed struggle for power.

For small groups of intellectuals to assert that they have “transcended” MLM-to declare the lessons of the accumulated revolutionary experience of the world proletariat as “obsolete” and to substitute in place of the knowledge gained from real social practice, their own idle, individualist and inconsistent speculations is utter and shameless idealism worthy of the Holy Family.

Revolutionary theory worthy of consideration is the product of successful revolutionary practice and nothing else. Its not a question of restricting oneself to a closed canon; We are happy to pay close attention to the writings of Amilcar Cabral for example, because he won a war.

But as for the intellectual megalomaniacs who think they can overturn the concentrated knowledge gained from the sacrifice and struggle of millions to transform the world over more then a century with a few blog posts or pretentious and incomprehensible contributions to the Verso catalog, we are not offended we are merely amused.


This entry was posted in Editor's desk, opinion, strategy and tactics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.