Unity & Struggle No 05

8/14/2019 Unity & Struggle No 05

1/75


2/75

Workers of all countries, unite!

Unity & Struggle

Organ of the International Conference of

Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations


3/75

Unity & Struggle

Journal of the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations.Published in English, Spanish, Turkish and Portuguese

in the responsibility of the Coordinating Committee of the International Conference.

Any opinions expressed in this journal belong to the contributors.


4/75

This version was created in August 2009 by the Movement for the Reorganisation of the KKE 1918-

55 with use of the texts found in the web page of TDKP (Revolutionary Communist Party of

Turkey).


5/75

UNITY & STRUGGLE AUGUST 1998

5

CONTENTS

CHILE

Introduction to the debate on unity of opposites and the work among the massesCommunist Party of Chile (Proletarian Action)

COLOMBIA

The EPL has a revolutionary mission to fulfil

Communist Party of Colombia (M-L)

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

The anti-imperialist struggle today

Communist Party of Labour of Dominican Republic

ECUADORLetter from the CC of the M-L Communist Party of Ecuador to the CC of the Communist Party of

Colombia (M-L)

Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador

FRANCE

The work of the Party within the working class

Workers Communist Party of France

MEXICO

The programme of social democracy in Mexico

Communist Party of Mexico (M-L)

SPAIN

On the struggle in the unions

Communist Organisation October of Spain

TURKEY

The trade union movement and the problems of trade union struggle

Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey (TDKP)

Third International Meeting of Trade Unionists

Revolutionary Declaration from the Middle of the World

The First International Seminar: The Problems of the Revolution in Latin Americas


6/75


6


7/75


7

CHILE

Introduction to the debate on unity of opposites and the work

among the masses

The struggle against the enemies of the working class and the people (who are innumerable)

and the subsequent triumph

It is necessary to achieve the greatest possible unity between the theory and political action among

the most organised and advanced sections of the people. This task is one of the fundamental

functions of the party as the guide and vanguard of the proletariat. However, this task has to be

multiplied a hundred fold in the heart of the party itself in a single-minded manner with the aim of

ensuring that the party plays its role as the most significant part of the revolutionary struggle. This

signifies not only confronting in a united way all our enemies, from the petit bourgeoisie to big

business to drug traffickers to Trotskyist adventurists up to and including the big monopolist

enterprises, the bourgeois state and imperialism, but also our internal enemies, traitors and agentsand also conciliatory ideas inside our organisations.

Our ideological and political unity enables us to take the measure of our enemies, from those whom

we must attack as a priority, to those who we can afford to ignore, and even those from whom we

may gain support in a particular period; this is if we really wish to make the revolution and conquer

political power. That is to say as Lenin says "to make war in order to destroy the bourgeoisie ... (and

imperialism), a war a hundred times more difficult, prolonged and complex than the most bloody of

the current wars between states, and to renounce beforehand any manoeuvre which may exploit the

contradictory interests which divide our enemies, to renounce agreements and compromises with

possible allies (even though these may be provisional, inconsistent, changeable, and conditional), is

not this something which is indescribably ridiculous?" This quote taken from Left WingCommunism: An Infantile Disorder demonstrates that the activity of the party must orientate itself in

advance in accordance with objective reality, as much within the party itself as within the social and

ideological conditions surrounding us. Only in this way can we put into effect the universal proposal

of Marxism-Leninism, which consists in understanding our ideology as a guide to action and not as a

dogma.

In the following we will attempt as well as we can to put forward some ideas which may or may not

be new, as to how ideologically and scientifically and according to the argument previously

explained, we can develop our work in relation to the forces against us and also our work among the

masses which we aspire to, in accordance with the laws of the materialist dialectic.

In order to carry out in a more or less scientific way our revolutionary work in society -a society

which groups together an infinite number of elements including individuals and organisations- and

in order to understand our policies in relation to our development, our work of making alliances to

build unity and of struggling with the forces against us, we must place ourselves on the terrain of

overcoming contradictions, whether these be primary or secondary, this is because every

transformation from the most elementary to that of the entire society contains contradictions -

contradictions which signify unity and struggle with our enemies. This element deserves study and

application in a conscious manner. What has been said previously on the issue of contradictions and

how to take political advantage of them has been expressed clearly thus in the Communist

Manifesto: "The bourgeoisie produces before everything else its own grave-diggers, its destruction

and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable."


8/75


8

Opposites cannot exist one without the other, they appear together, one engenders the others, the

bourgeoisie engenders the proletariat. To the degree that the bourgeoisie develops, it broadens the

sector of industrial production and increases the number of the proletariat, their number and their

concentration and to the same degree their strength. At the same time the proletariat engenders the

bourgeoisie in as much as it is their labour which produces capital:

"If we suppose that under conditions otherwise equal, the composition of capital is maintainedunchanged, this is because in order to put into motion a determined quantity of means of production

or constant capital, this always requires the same amount of labour power. It is evident that the

demand for labour and the subsistence level of the workers will be created in proportion to capital,

and the more rapidly capital develops the more rapidly this will grow... The reproduction of labour

power which continually has to be incorporated as the means of giving value to capital cannot be

separated from capital. This also means that the relationship of the subjection of labour to capital

always remains and workers have only the option of selling their labour to one capitalist rather than

another. This constitutes the reality of capitalist reproduction. Therefore, accumulation of capital

must mean an increase in the proletariat." (K. Marx, Vol. I, The Capital)

The unity of opposites in the capitalist system is skilfully hidden when it comes to the division

between rich and poor and people of good or bad fortune. In fact, these form a unity as Marx

explained in the previous quote. Those who posses the means of production need to exploit those

who do not posses them; those who have no means of production see that in order to live they must

put themselves at the service of those who posses them. For that reason, it is impossible to overcome

the proletariat without first getting rid of the bourgeoisie.

Opposites clash, struggle without ceasing the one against the other and modify each other

reciprocally. What does the struggle of the bourgeoisie consist of? Its aim is the maximum

exploitation of the workers and prevention of their self organisation.

As regards to proletarian struggle this has reproduced itself since the beginning of the proletariat's

existence and wherever it exists, even though this struggle can take different economic and political

forms, faces different objective limitations, and may sometimes for a while be repressed. However, it

occurs everywhere, because the conditions of existence make it necessary for the transformation of

society. It is in this struggle that class consciousness is created.

The forces of struggle act one upon the other, modifying each other reciprocally, with the forms

adopted for the class struggle changing relation to the balance of forces. For example, the

bourgeoisie tries to prevent all proletarian workers' organisations, such as the Party, and especially

the revolutionary Party which is the summit of all organisations, and when this is impossible or even

counter-productive, when the level of struggle is such that it would be better to try to moderate theconflict, the bourgeoisie then attempts to dominate the workers' organisations and divide them. In the

same way, ideological struggle changes with the progress of revolutionary ideas, and when it is no

longer possible to ignore them, the bourgeoisie propagates the excellence of the capitalist system and

also tries to falsify those ideas by infiltrating them like a Trojan horse, and thus giving birth to

revisionism.

From this we can understand that it is impossible to single out any one of the forces of struggle. If

we study one while forgetting another we cannot understand the manoeuvres of the bourgeoisie,

whether political or ideological, and we may as a result underestimate the workers movement, and

fail to understand it as a class, forgetting that it exists within capitalist rule and that it suffers

formidable pressure from the bourgeois class which dominates and exploits it. From this it follows

that the struggle of opposites is inseparable from the existence of classes, that no conciliation is

possible, and that the struggle will only end with the seizure of political power and with the


9/75


9

formation of a new state of things, in which these opposites will tend to disappear under the

dictatorship of the proletariat. We have to distinguish between primary and secondary contradictions

and we have to be capable of evaluating them in order to be able to prioritise our enemies so that

they can be eliminated or overcome one by one.

In order to study the foundations of this contradiction we have taken as an example the contradiction

between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, which is the fundamental and primary contradiction ofcapitalist society; but this society is not made up only of this contradiction for within it there are

others, for instance, monopolist bourgeoisie against non-monopolist, and the bourgeoisie's various

political tendencies and philosophical currents, etc. With the development of imperialism "new"

contradictions are formed.

Of course, contradictions are derived from the same class division of society; contradictions between

imperialism and the colonies or neocolonies derived from neoliberalism, contradictions occurring

through financial chains between rich and poor countries, national and ethnic problems, etc... All

these contradictions play their historical role and have to be uncovered and approached in a scientific

manner, if we do not wish to simplify reality too much and to fall into vulgar ideas of essentialism oridealism. However, undoubtedly, these cannot all be put on the same level since some contradictions

are primary and others not. On the other hand, at different times the contradictions we have

discussed can change position moving from being principle to being secondary or overcome by

others.

The various contradictions operate, as we have said, one upon the other. Secondary contradictions

depend for their origin on the main ones and they grow with the development of these; for example,

the struggle for greater democracy, for freedom of organisation, for concrete objectives, with

immediate and long-term programmes (as expressed in the Democratic Popular Assembly), do not

immediately signify socialism and proletarian socialism, but certainly they signify a transformation

in the correlation of forces, of the bourgeois state, of national and international capital, at a givenmoment, and they effectively help the advent of socialism.

A truly revolutionary party can and in various conditions must make use of the existence of

secondary contradictions in order to form alliances with one tendency of the bourgeoisie against the

common enemy from the view of a limited objective, (e.g. struggle against fascism, defence of the

country, etc.) or more concretely in the heart of the "left" for aims related to making propaganda for

one's ideas.

Therefore, it is necessary to study also secondary contradictions in order not to be reductionist in

relation to the richness of reality, in order to maintain a political conduct which is flexible and able

to differentiate between different periods, and in order to link these contradictions to the main one.We should not lose sight of what is essential and of the proposition central to our actions and all our

party struggle, that is, to resolve in our favour and in that of the class the contradiction between the

bourgeoisie and the proletariat through the socialist revolution and the following development

towards communism.

Antonio Fierro

Communist Party of Chile (Proletarian Action)


10/75


10

COLOMBIA

The EPL has a revolutionary mission to fulfil

The value of the armed struggle

This is an important time to reaffirm the significance and the validity of the armed revolutionarystruggle. The XIVth Congress proposed that the various forms of revolutionary violence respond to

the reality in which our people live and struggle; to the sharpening of social contradictions; to the

cruel political and economic offensive of imperialism and of the bourgeoisie; to the characteristics of

state domination; to social and historical reasons, and in the conditions in which the struggle for

power is posed. These forms have been generated from political struggle and from the struggles of

the people. They are not alien or mere accessories to those. Nor are they the production of the

subjective will of the left, but rather they are a consequence of reality. While such objective and

subjective factors persist so the armed struggle and the guerrilla movement must continue their

existence, and this expression of revolutionary violence maintains its significance and validity.

We must emphasise the enormous intervention of imperialism in Colombia as being at the root of the

changes in the world situation since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Within this framework we

must not underestimate the importance of the Andina strategy worked out by the Pentagon and the

Southern Command which has the DEA as its main executive given the importance which the US

attaches to it in the struggle against narcotics trade. In the present situation of the country what

stands out is the profound crisis of the state which exhibits the following structural problems:

- A view of the state which promotes social disintegration and national disunity;

- The weakening of the legitimacy of state institutions due to the flagging of their social support and

the failure of confidence generated by this;

- The extreme strengthening of the Executive, especially the President;- The decline and lack of credibility of parliament, corroded by sleaze and scandals;

- The politicisation of the judiciary system which, on top of everything, has oriented itself towards

war, thus exaggerating the contradictions between the State and its citizens;

- The conversion of exceptional measures into normal ones and the extension of the State of

Emergency, that is to say the state of war, now in the name of internal unrest;

- The opposing of ruling casts by the making of changes, however minimal these may be, in favour

of majorities economically, politically and socially;

- Rampant and defiant militarism which puts its plans and its ambitions above national interests;

- The strengthening of militarism and repression as a permanent line of action on the part of the

State;

- The intensification of private and State violence which expresses itself in attacks on protests and

social struggles, and in crimes, threats, and pressures against fighters for the people.

Certainly the profound crisis and the corruption of the State lie behind the grave problems which

characterise the present situation. The State is ready to use force in order to guarantee super

exploitation in favour of a privileged elite, in order to maintain unjust social relations and a closed

political order, to protect the status quo at the cost of the blood and sweat of the Colombians who are

forced to submit to the yoke of neoliberalism.

The State invests many resources in anti-popular warfare and in generalised repression, and every

day it invests less in the people's needs as regards health, poverty, unemployment, hunger, andhelplessness. This situation, as is logical, provokes discontent, protests and popular struggles; this

reality is justification for confronting the violence of the state and of the dominant classes.


11/75


11

The conjunction of the factors described above shows us a closed democracy, alienated from the

needs of majority, that does not allow the participation of its citizens in the solution of the problems

which are the result of its own governance. Some political commentators say that the existence of

the insurgence does not allow any room for the exercise of democracy or of the left opposition, and

with this argument they justify the behaviour of the State. In the concrete conditions of Colombia,

faced with the shutting down of democratic solutions, Pedro Vasquez says that "the struggle is more

like a key than a padlock". It may not seem useful to insist on following this argument in defence ofthe validity of revolutionary armed struggle, however, this is the reference point for many diverse

theories and theses tending to minimise, question or deny it.

The EPL must not lower its banners

It is necessary to reaffirm the statement of the XIVth Congress: "In the present situation of Colombia

it is not enough just to define in principle our adhesion to revolutionary violence and to the

establishment of the revolutionary way to the seizure of power." Revolutionary violence is present

today in the reality of our country expressing itself in the existence of guerrilla forces, in particular

of the Simon Bolivar Co-ordinated Guerrilla Organisation, in the various forms of massorganisations to exercise armed struggle and in the spontaneous uprisings in various sectors and

areas of the country.

There exist in the country elements of popular warfare which are deepening at the same time as they

are maintaining their objectives of social confrontation.

We believe that conditions do not yet present themselves for insurrection in the short-term or for the

total generalisation of popular warfare. Nevertheless, the elements of revolutionary war in existence

should be made more powerful by us as part of the revolutionary accumulation of forces towards the

seizure of power.

The truth is that there do not exist new factors in the present situation of the country which justify

changes contradicting these clear definitions. On the contrary, there has been an accumulation of

new facts which support the necessity of insisting on them. For this reason, I consider it right to

ratify the position of no renunciation of the ideas which guide us, no laying down of our banners nor

going back on the agreements which we have made. Of course, this is an attitude which has practical

consequences and is not only an expression of feeling. It means that the Party and the EPL must

keep our red revolutionary flags hoisted.

In the present situation the war declared by the State has special significance, because this influences

every aspect of the reality of our country. In effect the State has launched a generalised offensive,

political and military, against the revolutionary forces, against the democratic forces, and against theleaders of the people and of the social sectors who are protesting and struggling against the injustices

of big capital and of the State. As outstanding elements of the development of this total war, it is

worth pointing out:

- The intensification of psychological warfare and of black propaganda aimed at de-legitimising the

insurgence, for example, by describing them as narco guerrillas, the abandonment of revolutionary

ideals, the violation of human rights, the compulsory child labour, etc. In this we must take into

account the increased power given to the bourgeoisie through new means of communication.

- The tendency towards a greater militarisation of the life of the country and towards giving more

freedom of action to the Armed Forces. As examples we can point out the extreme increase of

resources for war and the seeking of more support from the US for the struggle against the

insurgents.

-The encouragement of para-militarism which is proposing aims of strengthening itself and


12/75


12

expanding to more strategic areas and which is looking for political recognition with the support of

political and social groups which will not undermine it.

Within this situation, the EPL has suffered very serious blows whose effects have not been

completely understood. It is possible that due to the serious situation confronting the organisation

and the attacks by the media, there are appearing cases of demoralisation, uncertainty, lack of

enthusiasm, the desire to retire or to give up everything and not to think about the past. In general,we can say that such positions are linked to a narrow and unfocused view of the present situation of

the country and of the perspectives of the revolutionary movement. It is feasible that there is

ignorance of some situations as they develop or that there are incorrect evaluations of some facts; it

is probable that what is being lost is a view of the positive factors which are accumulating and which

can lead to changes in the political situation. Because of this it is useful and opportune to gauge

correctly, or at least to try to present the development undergone by the insurgency: It is officially

recognised -these are not stories of mine- that in the course of the 1990s the number of activists in

the CGSB has increased by mush more than 50 per cent; the territorial expansion indicates that in

recent years, where there used to be 170 municipalities where the insurgency had a presence, today it

is based in 600 municipalities, with significant political influence; it has achieved important militaryand operational gains; it has also consolidated itself in important social and political sectors, as well

as having widened its international relations.

Although, it is true that the EPL has to confront some very serious difficulties, it has contributed to

that progress which is due to the uprising of which the EPL forms a part, and it is not isolated from

the positive tendencies which are developing, notwithstanding the negative factors which it would be

wrong to underestimate. We must bear in mind the situation around us, because the truth is that we

are not alone, not in Colombia nor in the world.

What has been said beforehand is bound to the belief that the uprising in Colombia will continue to

be a political factor in the transformation of the country's situation. It is completely false to suggestthat the uprising has been affected by decadence or that it is falling into decadence or that it lacks

revolutionary perspectives.

What is in decadence and lacks perspective is the Colombian state and political regime. If we

assume this basic position, it is certain that we can emerge from this serious situation affecting us at

present.

The EPL notwithstanding the complex situation that is confronting it has certain possibilities of

overcoming negative factors:

- It remains present in the actual situation of the country;- It can count on members (no matter the number) who are ready to expend every energy in

overcoming the obstacles;

- It is taken into account in important political and social sectors;

- It can count on the leadership of the party and on correct policies to guide its revolutionary action.

- It is well positioned, with the orientation of the Party and with the support of other forces, to

transform the situation that affects it today.

In the past, faced with situations as serious or even more so than the present, what has allowed us to

continue making progress? Without doubt, it has been the qualities which belong to our

revolutionary organisation.

- The complete conviction that what we are doing is right;

- Confidence in the success of the cause which inspires our struggle and in the objectives which we


13/75


13

put forward;

- Achieving the support of the sectors of the people;

-The readiness of men and women to unite with the struggle and to persist in it;

- The moral principles that we follow;

- The prestige won by our organisation and the recognised authority it has in the political arena.

Fearless in confronting changes

It is evident that significant changes are presenting themselves in the country's situation. How could

it not be so? Problems arise when we interpret these changes, because it is here that differences arise.

With regard to the transformations and actions related to the uprising, we find people putting

forward judgements and prejudices, deductions, speculations and conclusions of the most varied

kinds, sometimes with the explicit intention of discrediting the Revolutionary Armed Struggle. For

example:

- That the collapse of the USSR caused the decadence of the armed movement in Colombia because

it left it without ideological and political foundations. Critics argue that it has lacked consistencysince the USSR has not been a theoretical and political support for the Colombia guerrillas.

- That the guerrillas lack political and objective bases which would allow them to put forward

serious alternatives. The truth is that the uprising, above all since the 1980s, is that which has offered

the most attempts at solutions, up to the point that in many cases they have been adopted by political

sectors or even by the state.

- That the CGSB has not explained its political projects nor has it said what it proposes to achieve

peace, when in fact the CGSB and every one of its organisations has made every effort to explore

ways that might lead to peace with social justice. Since the first years of the government of Belisario

Betancur up until the present this has been constant.

- That the armed movement does not have popular support but instead through violence forces

people to unite with or support it. On top of this it is said that without the voluntary backing of

important popular sectors the armed movement could not exist and even less could it develop.

- That the leaders of the armed movement are "dinosaurs" because they defend an obsolete theory

and out of date objectives which do not have any relevance to the present as if any attack could

destroy revolutionary theory and the longing to transform a reality which is laden with injustices

fought against by revolutionary leaders. The theory which we defend and which we apply is not

static but nor is it incorrect.

- That the guerrilla war is the cause of the country's problems and is an obstacle in economic

development. What is certain is that the uprising is not a cause but a result of society's grave

problems, of unbearable injustice, of social contradictions, of the crisis of the state and of the

violence which this exercises against the people.

- That the uprising has become degraded, that it is turned into "narco-guerrilla", into common

delinquency and terrorism; that it has left behind it its revolutionary demands and its good intentions,

but its main objective is its own enrichment. etc. Even though it is necessary to recognise errors and

recognised cases of bad behaviour, everything tells us that this has not changed the revolutionary

nature of the uprising, nor has it wiped out its moral principles or the higher level of altruism which

is integral to uprising.


14/75


14

-That the guerrilla movement finds itself in a dead end; that there is no way out for it and that for this

reason it has to re-incorporate itself in civil life or struggle for its aims through other means

permitted by society. The facts show, on the contrary, that the uprising continues to be an

irreplaceable factor to achieve profound changes and a point of reference for the transformations

which society requires.

- That the guerrillas has achieved advances in military terrain, but not on the political plane. What iscomplicated is that it is not made clear what is meant by advances on the political plane. One must

understand by this that some people would prefer that the uprising should take the social democratic

way or the road of demobilisation, already experimented with and with the results that we know.

As we can see, all these criticisms are united in their aim of discrediting the uprising and

undermining its validity. Certainly there are differences among those who argue these positions,

differences of intention or of class consciousness. In any case it is necessary to deepen our

understanding of the real meaning contained in them so that we may give adequate answers.

We must also take note that there are some criticisms motivated by the aim of seeking changes inpositions, attitudes or behaviour in the armed organisations: and sometimes it is not easy to establish

clearly the differences between the one and the other. From this we see the necessity of making

analyses with care, with complete seriousness, without prejudices but without a blank mind...

It is obvious that enormous changes have happened in the world and in Colombia which it would not

be correct underestimate, such as the collapse of the USSR, new international relationships,

globalisation, the strengthening of the predominance of the US in Latin America, the processes of

pacification in Central America, the changes contained in the constitution of 1991, the steps towards

demobilisation and towards reintegration, the scandals over corruption, etc.

Also the increase in militarisation, the expansion of para-militarism, the extinction or liquidation ofpolitical opposition, the attacks on all social protest, the consequences of the application of

neoliberalism. All these factors have had a significant effect on political action and on social

relations. And they demand changes in political orientation and action, with the imperative of

responding in a revolutionary way. In this we have serious deficiencies, because it can happen that

the sequence of developments overcomes the dynamic of theoretical explanations.

From all these situations political consequences are derived. They reawaken questions, they suggest

innovations or they demand recognition in political orientation. In the past, we have studied or

debated some questions which now acquire greater significance alongside others which are arising in

the present: The characteristics of the Marxist-Leninist party, the relationships between the party and

the different forms of popular struggle, the situation of the popular movement: that of ebbs and flows(is the movement being set back or is it in the process of recovery?); the validity of the Armed

Struggle and the subordination of the armed organisation to the party, the various forms of practice

of revolutionary violence, the popular participation in the Armed Struggle, the development of the

Armed Struggle and its relationship with other forms of popular struggle; in which sectors should the

emphasis put on the building of the FAP? In what areas should guerrilla forces be established? The

political direction of actions, the characteristics of the building of a revolutionary army, the unity of

the guerrilla forces. And many other innumerable questions to be posed and to be answered.

As has been said earlier, these matters should not be posed as something new since there are already

in existence discussions and conclusions which at the very least can serve as reference points. What

is correct is to tackle sharply and with seriousness the issues posed as this will permit us to draw out

clear lines, as opposed to any improvisations or leaps into the unknown.


15/75


16/75


16

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

The anti-imperialist struggle today

In view of the present day problems of the revolutionary process in Latin America it is useful to lay

out the foundations and challenges of the anti-imperialist struggle in the historic conditions of today.

The question of the anti-imperialist struggle, as all propositions derived from previous political

experience and applied to the modes and reflective imperatives of today, is submitted to questioning

and must be re-argued in relation to the new realities that surround it.

The theoretical speculation of post-modernist philosophers and sociologists suggests that every

theoretical vision prior to its own will be incapable of making an evaluation of the reality and the

consequent orientation of actions which put forth an adequate transformation of the above.

According to this point of view, the previous theoretical scaffolding founded on reason and the

illustration in its most revolutionary orientation would be an anachronism.

According to this criterion we are living in a new post-industrial and post-modern era whose essence

will be "fundamentally different from the capitalist mode of production which has dominated during

the (last) two centuries," (Collinicos, A., 1993, Bogota, Against Post-Modernism, p. 25)

The philosophy which serves as the basis of post-modernism comes from the thesis of the French

"post-structuralist" theoreticians among whose authors Michel Foucault stands out. His views can be

summed up as postulating the fragmentary, heterogeneous and plural character of reality, denying to

human thought the capacity of objectively explaining that reality and understanding the human being

as an "incoherent mass of trans-individual impulses...," (op. cit., p. 22).

Sociology, on the one hand, argues the theory of post-industrial society according to which thetransformations that have occurred in the West in the last decades indicate that "the developed world

finds itself in a state of transition from an economy based on industrial production, towards an

economy in which systematic theoretical investigation becomes the main force of change, a

transformation of incalculable social, political and cultural consequences," (loc. cit.).

In the reference previously summed up about the theory of post-modernism it is clear that the point

of the departure on which we should concentrate our analysis and debate is on the following

question: is it true that the present evolution of society is fundamentally different from capitalism as

it has previously been known?

The concept "fundamentally different" refers to a qualitative notion, that is to say it assumes

substantial changes in the essence of the system; a difficult hypothesis to demonstrate if we rely on

the internal logic of the development of capitalism. In the so-called post-industrial and post-modern

era in which there have been technological and social innovations which have drastically spurred on

the form of production, there continues to prevail the objective of individual accumulation and

appropriation of the wealth produced, as well as the condition sine-qua-non of capitalist production:

the exploitation of the wage labour force (surplus-value) independent of the form which this takes in

the context of automisation and robotics.

The fact that the bases upon which the system is constructed continue in force is revealed when we

take into account the persistence of social calamities historically inherent in capitalism:unemployment, lack of work, poverty, danger of war, etc. In the light of this situation the so-called

"new era" only makes sense in the fertile imagination of post-modernist discourse.


17/75


18/75


18

domination about international drug-trafficking, the environment, international migration and

extremist nationalisms.

The present world reality clearly demonstrates that imperialist domination assumes specific

characteristics not seen before, and this forces us to re- establish political theory as well as practice

to persevere in the anti-imperialist struggle with a view to national liberation.

Has the epoch changed?

The validity of the anti-imperialist struggle and social change often is questioned these days by the

argument that such a vision of social reality corresponds to an epoch which has already been

superseded by the evolution of capitalism itself.

Are we perhaps living in a different epoch than that of capitalist domination?

The new realities that exist in the world of capitalist economy, society and culture have to be

appraised and evaluated as to how they affect the characterisation of the system as well as the theory.But the objective approach of such situations does not necessarily lead to the idea that the system

itself has been superseded, as the theoreticians of the so-called post-capitalist, post-industrial or post-

modern era claim.

The distinctive features which primarily brand the present epoch as capitalist and imperialist

continue in force and the recent and important advances of science and technology in the field of

production, circulation and consumption have only caused a renewal of the bases on which the

system rests raised to higher levels by its own reproduction.

The theories in vogue can not annul the reality of the laws inherent in capitalism as the framework in

which all the current technological processes take place and whose impact have given rise to themost fanciful speculations about the supposed arrival of a new historic epoch.

"The theoreticians of post-industrialism... maintain that the advanced societies are leaving behind a

historic era which could be defined as industrial." This is causing a fundamental transformation, of

such a degree that the "fundamental principles" of the society are found increasingly in "theoretical

knowledge" as opposed to "capital-labour." (Lyon, D., 1994, p.173, Post-Modernity, Alliance

Publishers, Madrid).

To claim that the capital-labour relation has been displaced by some other factor such as

"information-processing" as the basis on which the system is built, is to lose sense of reality. Such a

claim can only be maintained by ignoring the process that gives rise to the extraordinary volume ofinformation available today, behind whose production is found precisely the capital-labour relation.

We warn that to accept as true and valid that hypothesis leads to setting up a tendency for the

working class to disappear or lose specific weight, which is another of the post-modernist thrusts. In

this respect we observe that the reality of the facts themselves gives the lie to that claim, if we

remember that the increasing weight of services in the world economy does not seem to be produced

at the expense of industry, but of agriculture. This is made clear by the increasing urbanisation of the

whole social life in all national contexts.

The claim of the "obsolescence of the paradigm of production" expressed in the ideas and concepts

as "post-capitalist" and post-industrialism" leads to the rejection of the theory of the analysis of

capitalism itself (especially Marxism) for the understanding of capitalist society in its present

evolution.


19/75


19

If we accept the fact that the production of services is gaining in contrast to the production of

manufactured goods, as demonstrating that this phenomenon necessarily modifies social relations,

then it becomes evident that the relation of capital and labour and the consequent reproduction of the

exploiting and exploited classes, owners and wage labourers, characterises the primary agents of

production.

For the aims of revolutionary political theory and action it is important to consider some of theimplications that in this sense results from the evolution of contemporary capitalist society.

In the first place, for the analysis of classes one has to re-consider the composition of the working

class since, in the conditions of increasing scientific-technological advances, the level of skill of the

workers is also progressively demanding. That situation together with other factors of the crisis has

been causing the incorporation into the ranks of the working class of a broad layer of professionals,

whose conditions of life and of work are gradually becoming closer to the social culture and practice

of the wage worker. This point can be confirmed by the massive incorporation of these sectors in the

trade union struggles.

What will be the future impact of this situation on the general conduct of the working classes and

how will it influence the processes of the accumulation of forces for social change? The question of

what will be the continuation of the evolution of these phenomena must be considered from the

perspective of free, unprejudiced thought.

Another aspect of the high strategic value which it is worthwhile to consider is that of the

implications of the globalisation of the economy for nations since the relation established in this

context between nation and market is claimed by the spokespersons of post-industrialism and post-

modernism as the basis to question the validity of the nation-state.

In effect the imperialist strategy has used the word "interdependence" to indicate the terms ofrelations of countries and nations in the context of globalisation of the domination of the so-called

central economies over the rest of the world. In this context the imperialist forces advocate a

supposed mutual dependency among the economies of different countries, which in the logic of the

system can only operate through the continual transference of capital and other resources from the

oppressed nations to the industrialised oppressor nations.

Part of the strategy of imperialist domination, raised in the neoliberal plan, is the disintegration of

the national economies of our countries and by this method the further strengthening of the

multinationals and the world market at their service.

From here on arise the discussion and the plans aimed at annihilating the national states of thecountries subordinated to the large centres of the world economy.

In this situation and in the light of the predominant characteristics in the evolution of the current

economic processes, the question of the nation takes on new meaning for the forces of social change.

The real danger which is derived from the disintegration of the nation obliges the revolutionaries to

place emphasis on the national struggle as the guarantee of preserving conditions which make viable

the plan of social change, which in the framework of a nation liquidated in its historical- cultural

foundations, with an economy and social agents totally eradicated from its territory, will lose all

possibility of constructing its identity.

This approach is objective. The international character of the working class and its interests in the

conditions of imperialism does not ignore but rather presupposes national interests; this is so given


20/75


20

the law of unequal development of capitalism whose logic will always produce the ripening of the

conditions (of crisis) for change in a specific context and not necessarily in the totality of the system.

In this sense it is correct to put forward the national framework as a viable scenario for revolutionary

social change in the conditions of imperialism.

It seems to me that the evolution of the contradictions of society in its present evolution, will place

the national question in the centre of the struggle for social change. That is the reality despite thediversionary theories about a supposed change of epoch.

Aquiles Castro

July 1997


21/75


21

ECUADOR

Letter from the CC of the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party

of Ecuador

to the CC of the Communist Party of Colombia (M-L)Comrades of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Colombia (M-L):

The unity of principles and aims which inspire both our parties, the long standing revolutionary

friendship which we have made through the victories and vicissitudes of the revolution in Colombia

and in Ecuador, the tradition of party relations based Marxism-Leninism and proletarian

internationalism, characterised by openness and sincerity, and by mutual respect, encourages us and

in fact obliges us to participate in the important debate which is taking place within the Communist

Party of Colombia (M-L).

The anti-communist offensive, the repressive activities of imperialism and of the Colombianbourgeoisie by means of their armed forces, of the specialised repressive forces, of secret agents and

of paramilitaries; the divisive activity initiated by the enemies of our class through opportunists and

traitors, all this has inflicted series blows against the working class and the Colombian people,

against the popular revolutionary movement, and in particular against the revolutionary party of the

proletariat of Colombia, against the CP of Colombia (M-L) and against the glorious Popular Army of

Liberation (EPL). These have been strong attacks, and they have imp[lied political and military

battles won by reaction against revolution. However, we are dealing with temporary and partial

defeats, which are part of a process during which the forces of the proletariat and the Colombian

people have themselves also won important victories which although themselves having a partial

character are stages towards the conquest of the popular power.

The CP of Colombia (M-L) and the EPL come from a long and rich tradition of struggle. Having

taken Marxism-Leninism as their theoretical and political guide, they have understood how to

interpret Colombian society and to take the road of social revolution; they have made every effort to

link the forces of the proletariat to that of the people, to the popular masses; they have actively

involved themselves for thirty years in the revolutionary armed struggle taking place in Colombia;

they have known how to defend revolutionary proletarian beliefs and Marxism-Leninism from its

detractors, how to combat opportunism and revisionism both within and outside their ranks, and their

principle aim has been to preserve and defend the role and the nature of the Leninist party; they have

put into effect important contributions to the international revolutionary proletariat, to the fight of

the peoples against imperialism, and to proletarian internationalism.

We, the Marxist-Leninist communists of Ecuador are firmly convinced that our sister party of

Colombia will, once more, know how to defeat adversity, and the attacks of reaction and

imperialism, as well as how to strengthen themselves in the political and ideological struggle now

going on within their ranks. The debate started by the CC and which is taking place within the party

must lead to the affirmation of revolutionary principles and of Marxism-Leninism, it must bequeath

to the party revolutionary politics which are more correct and more appropriate, it must enrich itself

through accumulated theory and experience.

The questions being put forward, according to our point of view, should have to do with the

overriding problems of the Colombian revolution on an international scale. The results of thisdiscussion will have for this reason repercussions in the revolutionary movement of the working

class and of the people and in particular in the international communist Marxist-Leninist movement.


22/75


22

I- In our view, the ebbing of revolutionary forces which has occurred in recent years, is a problem

which must be analysed in its entirety, in its causes and its contradictions. As communists, we must

follow attentively the correlation of forces within our country, on our continent and in the world.

To make a correct social, economic and political analyses, it is necessary to base ourselves on the

progressive factors in the movement of society, to learn to measure the level of consciousness of the

popular masses, their state of mind, to be aware of the strategy and tactics of the class enemy withthe aim of ensuring that in every moment of revolutionary activity we are able to guide the forces of

the revolution, to affirm its social base, to consolidate and broaden it, in brief, to advance the process

of the building of the revolutionary forces.

We, the Marxist-Leninists of Ecuador, in spite of not struggling in Colombia, but with the

knowledge that we have of the social and political struggle taking place there, affirm that just as is

happening in our country this ebbing of revolutionary forces has touched bottom in Colombia and at

the present moment we are dealing with a recuperation of the popular revolutionary movement,

which is expressing itself in important mobilisations and strikes in the working class, particularly

among the public sector workers (for example the strike of February 1997), of the peasantry ofvarious regions (the fighting days of Putumayo, Huila, Santanderes, etc.), and of various sectors and

regions for their rights. This recovery has turned itself into a revolutionary military offensive on the

part of FARC and ELN which in recent times have shaken Colombia. For us the resolutions in the

document "A Necessary Correction" which we print below, are evidence of this statement.

"An important fact is derived from these events: the political movement of democrats, workers and

masses is setting the scene for debate and unification, is proposing a policy and a programme to

reclaim the voice of the revolutionary left and of the guerrilla movement in its discussions, to

intervene openly in national debates and to develop organisational and unifying forms which

however are still embryonic and limited in their capacity for mobilisation and struggle. This

highlights the fact that the guerrilla forces do not have a policy, or that they are finished, or that theyare afraid to confront the army. From this period derives a new stage in the conditions of the armed

conflict, for example, within the context of direct armed intervention from American imperialism,

with the strengthening of every section of the armed forces, and with the widening and legalised role

of paramilitarism. Or, also in certain conditions there may open before us a negotiation on different

bases from those which applied on previous occasions."

We are of the opinion that these lines demonstrate a situation not of ebbing, that they express how

the popular revolutionary movement of Colombia is developing, that they demand from the forces of

the revolutionary proletariat the need of positioning themselves in relation to this situation, of

readjusting their forces in order to involve themselves more actively in this process. The objective

and subjective conditions of the revolution are advancing, the communist forces have an obligationto clarify the direction and to put themselves in front of this new stage of the Colombian revolution.

The attacks of reaction, the defeats of revolutionaries, must be overcome. The counter-revolution is

powerful but it is not invincible. The capitalist nature of Colombia, the deepening of the general

crisis pose the problem of revolution as an immediate question, and the proletariat and its party as

the protagonists in this.

II- The revolutionary forces in Colombia consist of the proletariat and other workers of the city and

of the country. This is undeniable.

With regard to the role of the working masses, of the movement of the working class and other

popular sectors of the city, the document of the CC to which we are referring is clear and forceful.

We subscribe completely to these statements.


23/75


23

With regard to the references to the peasantry and other workers in the Colombian countryside as

actors in the revolution it is necessary to pause a little for consideration. The Document states that

the massive depopulation from countryside has resulted in the last ten years in 85 per cent of the

population living in the cities , and only 50 per cent living in rural areas. We do not doubt these

statistics, but for us the problem goes beyond the number of inhabitants, it has to do with the

productive process and with the political and social attitudes of the classes.

In Colombia, to a high degree, this depopulation of the countryside goes along with the process of

capitalist development, and has accelerated with the globalisation of the economy; it is the result of

the repressive actions of the police, army, and paramilitaries; it is also the result of the diminishing

of the revolutionary war, and of the impact of the rural guerrilla forces which have almost 50 years

of vigilance behind them; this process of depopulation is also a response to the aspirations of the

peasant masses to have access to the benefits of urban life, to their search for work and for

opportunities; and to their desire to escape from violence.

The depopulation of the countryside has economic limits. The system cannot do without agrarian

production and the exploitation of mineral resources. The development of technology, the increasinguse of mechanised agriculture, the reorganisation of the large private properties cannot eliminate the

work of labour individuals, on the contrary they make it more important and more necessary. In no

country of the world have we seen the elimination of the rural economy and even less is this likely to

take place in countries such as Colombia where there is a large availability of land and of other

natural resources such as water and forest, flowers and animals, and biodiversity.

The Colombian peasantry has accumulated significant political knowledge. It has actively

participated in the life of the Republic, and has been a protagonist in civil wars, political movements,

setbacks and revolutions. During the last fifty years it has been deeply involved in large-scale social

and political mobilisations, for its own rights. (Witnesses to this are the great days of the 60's and

70's, and the presence of the Anuc., etc.). It has made up the social base, the bulk of the combatants,and an important part of the leading cadres of the revolutionary guerrilla force which is active in

Colombia. In the present situation of economic migration to the cities, the massive displacements

caused by the reactionary violence of the armed forces and paramilitaries, and the impact of the

guerrilla war, important movements are taking place in various regions of the country, with their

own democratic demands, and some of these demonstrate a high level of militancy and of links with

the guerrilla movement. It is undeniable that the military offensive of the FARC and the ELN have

among their activists significant groups of peasants who are integrated with the guerrilla forces.

The foregoing facts, what is happening now and the tendencies which we can see developing allow

us to affirm that the countryside and peasants have a transcendental role to play in the revolution.

This has been understood by the CP of Colombia (ML), and as a result the Party has the benefit ofimportant organisational, political and military experiences in its work with the impoverished

country people of Colombia.

These phenomena demonstrate that in Colombia the proletariat needs to look for an alliance with

the poor and middle peasants, it must incorporate them actively in the revolutionary process, and it

must avoid allowing the peasantry to be manipulated by the bourgeoisie or won over by other

political sectors interested in the revolutionary struggle; this is particularly important if we take into

account the socialist direction of the revolution.

It is clear that we do not advocate an agrarian or peasant revolution in Colombia, however, we do

affirm the necessity of including the peasantry in the organisation of the social revolution.


24/75


24

III. On the necessity of using all forms of struggle: The social revolution of the proletariat requires

the utilisation of every forms of struggle. This axiom of Marxism-Leninism must be understood and

applied in relation to concrete conditions. Voluntarism in its application can lead us to subjective

interpretations, adventures or to reformist positions.

The revolutionary armed struggle is one form of struggle. According to the definition of Marxism,

war is the continuation of politics by other means.

For Marxist-Leninist communists the revolutionary armed struggle, independently of the forms

which it takes, is the only way to conquest power. All other forms of struggle, strikes and

mobilisations, elections, stoppages and demonstrations, are forms of struggle which enable us to

build our forces, however, by themselves they do not lead to power. On the contrary, they develop

within the confines of capitalist system and they serve naturally to subvert it, to undermine it and to

strike it in vulnerable places; they are also instruments of the revolutionary proletariat for the gain of

strength and of experience, to widen the social base of the revolution, but they do not allow us of

themselves to make an assault on power.

These problems, among others, indicate positions between revolutionary proletarians and reformists,

between communists and revisionists. This was one of the main pillars in the constitution of the

Marxist-Leninist parties. This continues to be the foundation stone which differentiates Marxist-

Leninists from revisionists and opportunists of every complexion.

The Colombian comrades, in the important debate which they are undertaking, touch on this problem

in relation to the validity and relevance of the rural guerrilla struggle, as a form of armed

revolutionary struggle.

One of the special features of the Colombian revolution is the existence of guerrilla war for a period

of 50 years. Throughout this period, and alongside the guerrilla struggle, we have seen the activities,intermittently and in an uneven way, of many and varied groups: The revisionist party, petit

bourgeois revolutionary organisations, "politico-military organisations", Trotskyist groups,

anarchists, and the Marxist-Leninist party, all of these have been and are present, active, occupying

various grounds of struggle, increasing their forces, gaining experience, winning victories, and

suffering defeats. The Colombian revolutionary guerrilla movement has not been defeated either

politically or militarily, and it remains a reality which nobody can deny. Certainly, the guerrilla

movement has not conquered power in spite of its long development; this is a problem to be

resolved.

The rural guerrilla movement has undergone ebbs and flows; it has had moments of upsurge, and of

development, and it has also suffered significant defeats. In the present moment, the guerrillamovement threatens the government, and is one of the factors involved in the sharpening of the

general crisis affecting Colombia. Imperialism and the dominant classes have attempted by every

means to wipe out the revolutionary guerrilla movement. For many years, Colombia has existed in a

more or less permanent state of emergency and of an internal unrest; at various times, the order has

been given to make total war against subversion; the guerrilla movement has been infiltrated and the

government has achieved its partial subversion; the government has orchestrated processes of

pacification, of betrayal of guerrilla fighters, and of their co-option into social and political life.

None of these measures. nor all of them together, have achieved the objective of eliminating the

guerrilla forces or moving them from the social and political life of Colombia. At the moment it is

well known by public opinion in Colombia and elsewhere that there is taking place an important

military offensive on the part of the guerrilla forces. It is obvious that the guerrilla struggle has not

led to the seizure of power in Colombia. This is something which nobody can deny. However, this

does not mean that this is a form of revolutionary armed struggle which has lost its validity in the


25/75


25

process of preparing for the final assault on power. In our opinion, the problem before us is how to

utilise the guerrilla movement in the process of the accumulation of forces, how to combine the

various forms of struggle, how to involve the guerrilla forces in the social and political movement

developing in Colombia, and, more concretely, how to use the guerrilla forces and their struggle in

the preparation for popular armed insurrection.

We assume the correctness of the concerns and the analyses of the comrades on the limitations,difficulties and mistakes of the guerrilla forces and guerrilla struggle. We think as you do that they

have committed very serious political errors, that some guerrilla sectors have degenerated into

banditry, and even towards paramilitarism, that others have assumed the role of the "liberators" of

the masses, that they have used methods of retention and of taxation in an indiscriminate manner

affecting various social layers, including the popular masses; finally, a whole series of political and

military mistakes, even deviations. We believe that this practice has limited the growth of the

guerrilla movement, and above all, its connection with the popular movement of city and

countryside. It is evident, even outside Colombia, that the guerrilla movement which has concrete

political projects and proposals, is disconnected to the major popular movements which, with their

own demands and policies, are developing within the cities, because the popular masses do not haveany political reference point with the guerrilla struggle. These are the problems and these are limits

of the guerrilla forces. For ourselves, we think it is necessary to emphasise perspectives and

tendencies; we must analyse limits and errors in order to overcome and correct them.

Up to a point, it is logical and dialectical that things should be thus. Nobody should believe that the

guerrilla movement is going to convert itself into the political vanguard of the workers and popular

movement. This has not occurred in any country of the world or on any occasion. The guerrilla

forces and the guerrilla army are a form of organisation and of action of the revolutionary armed

struggle which respond to a military and political conception of an organisation or party.

For revolutionary proletarians, the guerrilla movement is a form of military organisation and theguerrilla struggle is a form of struggle which aims to wear out the bourgeois army, to demoralise it,

to inflict blows on it; which allows the building of political and military forces, which in conjunction

with higher and more generalised forms of the revolutionary armed struggle and of the political

action of the masses can bring down the bourgeois government. By itself the guerrilla forces are

unable to generate an insurrection movement of the masses. In a moment we will clarify this

problem when we focus on the debate around thesis and practice. Meanwhile to claim that the rural

guerrilla forces, including those organised and directed by the party of the proletariat, can convert

itself into the main instrument for the conquest of power and because it has not done so, that this

undermines the validity of the revolutionary struggle, this does not correspond to serious analysis.

It is not up to us and we do not have sufficient information to analyse the causes and events whichled to the setbacks and difficulties, which at the moment, are affecting the EPL. However, we feel

obliged to make known clearly our point of view on this. Has the leadership of the party done

everything in its power to give politics and Marxist-Leninist convictions to those combatants and

leaders? Have we educated communist workers on these positions? How much responsibility do we

ourselves hold for the ideological and moral breakdown of certain combatants and leaders? Were we

always on time and right in our characterisation of the political military situation? How much did we

have illusions in the perspective of the EPL? Finally, this concerns on our part questions which we

must ask and which we believe require a response which can only come from the CP of Colombia

(M-L) and the EPL.

It is up to communists to resolve our problems, face our difficulties, and overcome our errors. Thistask is not going to be undertaken by the bourgeoisie nor by the petit bourgeois revolutionaries.

More specifically, it is up to the Colombian communists to take on the responsibility of confronting


26/75


26

and resolving the problems of the Colombian revolution. It is up to the communists of other

countries, and the Marxist-Leninists of Ecuador, also to direct ourselves towards these problems, that

is why we feel obliged to express our opinion and make suggestions which we consider valid. The

Colombian Marxist-Leninists are free to accept or reject these points of view, but in any case they

have a duty to examine them. We permitted ourselves in a conversation with the comrades of the

national leadership of the CP of Colombia (M-L) to express these opinions which we now repeat,

about what to do and how to do it in relation to the EPL.

At this time we said that we recognise the heroic tradition of struggle of the EPL, that we were

certain that it held an important position in the revolutionary struggle taking place in Colombia, that

it openly expressed the politics of the proletariat, and that because of this it has conquered an

important position among the guerrilla forces. We emphasised that none of the blows, the setbacks,

and problems that have taken place have destroyed the revolutionary nature of the EPL; that

certainly they have signified great difficulties and losses, but they have not in any way destroyed the

EPL. Let us remember, within the limitations of our knowledge, that in the past the EPL has

overcome perhaps even greater difficulties and has raised itself again, like the phoenix, to continue

the struggle and that, we are sure, it will again do the same on this occasion. We insist that the EPLwas, apart from being the armed wing of the CPC (M-L), one of the shock brigades of the

International Communist Movement Marxist-Leninist.

We demonstrated also the need to pay attention to its difficulties to examine them with the comrades

of first rank with the aim of empowering them politically and militarily. We emphasised that it was

not right or suitable to change the name. It seemed us very right to make every effort to bring the

revolutionary armed struggle to the popular masses who live, work and struggle in the cities, and we

believed that the rural guerrilla forces and more concretely the EPL could play an outstanding role in

these aims; that the existence and development of other expressions of the popular armed forces and

the EPL were not incompatible, but that on the contrary they complemented each other.

We agreed with the comrades in the necessity of taking great steps forward, of correcting the

mistakes, of opening new roads, of leaving behind blueprints, so that they are more in touch with the

actual problems of the revolution. The CP of Colombia (M-L) can be effective within the EPL and

can reach it directly with corrective measures. We are convinced that the sister party, in a supportive

role, and always within M-L, will know how to open up a new way and to go forward, and that it

will find in the Ecuadorian communists the alliance of class brothers.

Returning to the question of forms of struggle, we wish to insist on the necessity that communists

should be open to all known forms, and above all, sensitive to the expressions and forms used or

developed by the popular masses in the course of their struggle. What is important is to keep in mind

the problem of the conquest of power, since the various forms of struggle may or may not lead to it.By themselves the various forms of struggle, including the highest forms, cannot produce the final

objective of the seizure of power if there is not a political vanguard which combines and directs

them. In the ideological and political confrontation with the Krushchevite revisionists we come to an

important point, as to how the political movement of the masses can lead, raising its level to

revolutionary armed struggle. We, as Marxist-Leninist communists, affirm the importance of the

factor of the revolutionary theory, of political consciousness, and of how this cannot arise

spontaneously from the masses, even though these may be intensely and massively mobilised; since

the role of the party is indispensable. According to our point of view these arguments have not lost

their validity.

The organisation of popular insurrection does not have phases, stages, stages which have to followedin a systematic manner. The objective and subjective conditions can develop in some cases,

independently of our will or our work, but in this case insurrection does not follow a revolutionary


27/75


27

proletarian course, even if it happens always victorious. In our countries, in Colombia, Ecuador and

in many others, Marxist-Leninist communists have responsibilities to fulfil and have the possibility

and probability of sowing the right road to revolutionary struggle. Popular insurrection demands the

existence of its own military force, of a force which leads it, sustains and protects it. To organise

insurrection, we as revolutionary proletarians must make every effort to bring political movement to

the working masses, we must educate the people about the decision and the need for the seizure of

power, we must arm the masses with the desire to arm themselves, we must empower in foresightand in action the revolutionary violence of the masses, we must bring out the activity of the party, of

its cadres and leaders, we must expect to have our own military forces.

The organisation of the revolution demands from communists a permanent revolutionarisation. We

cannot give ourselves the luxury of sitting back of what is already established. Marxism-Leninism is

a guide to action, and we claim to be dialecticians, to be aware of the interrelationship of political,

social and economic phenomena, to be bold in our proposals, to open up new roads, to assume fully

that the revolution signifies changes and that these changes must also be produced in the

revolutionaries themselves, in their thoughts and in their actions. The new situations which are

taking place in our country require from us, in every moment, positions and activities which takethem into account. As communists we must do this, differentiating ourselves from those who are

defeated by pessimism; we affirm the validity of Marxism-Leninism and on this basis stands our

political and theoretical work.

These points of view make up the position of us, the Ecuadorian communists, in the important

debate taking place in the rank and file of the CP of Colombia (M-L). Certainly, all this does not

take into account the many-sided nature of the discussion, and without doubt, we lack complete

knowledge of the problems, and for this reason we do not consider these points to be definitive; we

are ready to continue discussing these and other problems on every occasion and in the conditions

that the revolutionary process permits.

For now, we will affirm again, as always, our position as class brothers, as comrades who wish to

work for revolution, within our own country and on international scale. We reaffirm our feeling of

revolutionary friendship with the CPC(ML), with the EPL, with the working class and the

Colombian people. We are convinced that the unity of our two parties and peoples will be

strengthened and that one day we will celebrate together the revolutionary proletarian victory.

CC of the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador

Ecuador, April 1997


28/75


28

FRANCE

The work of the party within the working class

The tasks of the communist party within the working class are essential. In order to deal with them

what is required is to determine the main currents that today's class struggle raises in our country. Atthe same time, we should not leave aside the fact that they are linked to the international events and

inversely. Doing so, we will thus be in best position to fix the frame of the main efforts that will lead

our communist party to be ideological and political headquarters of the working class. In other

words, that our party be able to work for the growing " awareness towards the irreductible opposition

of their (the labourers, ndlr) interests to the whole political and social order in existence, meaning the

social democrat consciousness"(1). The class struggle on which this "irreductible opposition" to the

capitalist imperialist system rises. Along the class struggle, and according to its importance and its

features, some workers stand out, who reach a certain level of consciousness of the fundamental

reactionary and oppressive nature of the capitalist imperialist system. We usually point them out as

"the most advanced members of the working class". But since 1995, we call them "the sections

ahead of the workers' and peoples' movement". Their number is more or less important. It dependson the development of the class struggle itself, but also on the level of the political and organising

abilities that the party gains along its experience (history).

Elements of the history of the labour movement before, during and after November and

December 1995

1981: Social democracy comes to power and manages capital's business in direct alliance (with the

help and complicity of the revisionists) with the French revisionist party (French Communist Party -

PCF) until 1984. This same year, the PCF ministers leave the government. Then social-democracy

leads capital's politics alone (with the support of the French Communist Party inside the Parliament).

1986-1990 and 1993-1995 (the two 'cohabitation') were two periods during which social democracy

had to deal with politics in the same way as the right wing. Before and after 1981, and with the

support of its allied section inside the working class, the PCF, social-democracy endeavoured to

maintain the ideological influence of reformism in the working masses and to lead them along its

trade-unionist and political frame. The first real protests against the domination of French social-

democracy finally took place in 1986. It happened when the SNCF rail workers wont on a long

standing strike. A series of protest movements inside important companies will stamp the years

following 1986. They happened also in whole sectors such as SNECMA, aeronautical construction;

RATP, metro, Air France; Peugeot; Alsthom, electro-mechanical construction; hospitals, etc. These

movements were mainly of an economic character. They have a trade-unionist origin (2). They have

not led and will surely not lead to a wide spread protest against government policy. They willrelatively remain isolated. Nevertheless, they ended up in stirring the sympathies of the other strata

of workers as both the former and the latter mentioned above call on one another, particularly when

it comes to demanding wage increases.

The opposition movement against the Gulf war will stand as the point of no return. Though limited

to some sections of the working class, this opposition pushed these sections, weeks long, out to the

street against war politics of French imperialism. Their slogan was : French troops, out of the Gulf:

The movement against the Gulf war, being mainly of a political nature, will lead the most conscious

labourers to a fundamental breaking off with Mitterrand and social-democracy. (These two proved to

be entirely submissive to the interests of French imperialism which drove them to imperialist war. -

revoir)

Then, during the November-December 1995 social movement, the class antagonisms of the French

capitalist society are brought back wide-open to the fore front. This movement corresponds in many


29/75


29

ways to Lenin's definition of class struggle. "The struggle waged by the workers turn into a class

struggle only when all the vanguard representatives of the working class as a whole in the country

develop the consciousness of belonging to the sole and same working class and start acting not only

against such and such boss but also against the entire class of capitalists and against the government

that backs it up. Only when each worker gets conscious of being a member of the working class as a

whole, when he considers that fighting daily for immediate claims against such bosses or such

official, accounts for fighting against the whole bourgeoisie and all the government. Only then, hisaction becomes class struggle" (3). The 1995 social movement put forward an important section of

advanced workers ("vanguard representatives of the working class in the country"), who stood at the

head of the country-wide strikes and street demonstrations that mobilised millions of men and

women week after week against government policies at the service of capital (4).

Before this important social movement, such workers, mostly employed in the public State sectors,

have been at the forefront of lengthy battles much for wage increases as opposed to the erosion of

their working conditions. For years, part of them have been pointed out as "rich" and "privileged" on

the pretence that their jobs are guaranteed. On the other hand, the weight and the ability of the

reformist unionist leaderships to keep the workers of these sectors in their union frame were strong.In spite of this massive strikes took the workers of these sectors in their union frame were strong. In

spite of this massive strikes took place apart from any order issued out of union headquarters. This

was already happening before December 1995. In other words, then, the workers at the head of these

movements were already gaining authority and some independent range of action with respect to

unions leadership.

During the months of November and December 1995, and though they had quasi-totally called

together for the strikes, the unions worried most about restricting the protests to the "particular

pension systems' and the State status in favour of the SNCF rail workers. That they wished to see

other sections enter the protest movement was but in support of this line thought.

It was significant to note that, while demonstrations were raging in December, the CGT was holding

its 45th Congress in its head offices at Montreuil, a suburban city next to Paris. Although millions of

people were marching in every city, the union leaders kept the delegates locked in to look into the

legitimacy of the renunciation of the reference to class struggle in the statutes of the unions!

During the preparatory events of the congress, numerous union activists rose their voices in defence

of the validity and the actuality of class struggle trade unionism. Through our unionist activists and

its organ, our party took part in this battle. And, instead of spending their precious time speaking on

class struggle at the congress, the great majority of the activists who take side for class struggle

chose to strike and demonstrate in the streets shoulder to shoulder with their comrades.

The movement widened mainly because these militants and other active strikers knew that the

previous strike experiences had not succeeded in pushing the State-boss and the private bosses

leaderships to retreat because of the lack of active solidarity.

This time, however, solidarity was able to stand out on the objective basis of common interests since

the "Juppe Plan" was, in a way or another, taking it out on all the workers. This solidarity was

proved through the slogan: Withdraw the "Juppe Plan"! As to the "All together" call, it was, beyond

the different situations, the uniting spontaneous expression of regained class consciousness. Through

their success in fixing the slogan "Withdraw the Juppe Plan!" to the movement, the most advanced

sections of the workers put, actually, the movement along a line in opposition to of the different

reformist organisations, be they trade unions or political organisations. The slogan itself was, at that

given time, the political expression of the resolute opposition of millions of workers to the policies


30/75


30

that the dominating class and its allies had decided for the preservation of their profits. It was this

advanced fringe which led those millions of demonstrators and bore this political slogan.

All these weeks of struggle against the government during which the working class played an

ascendant role, a large number of workers considered themselves as a whole society protest against

the capitalist system. And the current of solidarity developed by the workers and labourers of other

countries towards the movement reinforced the awakening of this consciousness.

The way the movement speeded up to reach its potency proves that its origins are way far in time. It

strengthens and amplifies the abilities of large sections of the working class and, in general, of the

peoples, to win their autonomy with respect to trade-union and political organisations lead by the

reformists and the revisionists. The advanced sections of workers felt reinforced in taking up actions

and initiatives during this movement. They developed their faith in millions of others. An important

breach opened up in the struggle against capital during the days of November and December. We

also witness the emergence of the break up with the politics practised for decades at the service of

the monopolies. Hence, (on verra apres) ... We leave this matter aside for the moment.

Acting with the advanced members of the working class

During all these weeks, our party, its members and sympathisers helped the movement to reach its

Documents

Unity & Struggle No 05