ALLIANCE 46 July
2002:
APPENDIX TWO of: REFLECTIONS
ON CURRENT SECTARIAN FORAYS IN THE INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT.
Correspondences from the e-list of ISML Regarding:
i) Reasons for the Establishment of ISML and
its relationship to the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist
Parties and Organisations (Hoxhaist) [ICMLPO(h)] or the Quito Group;
& ii) on "self-criticism".
Synopsis of the Following Messages:
These messages run in a thread that starts
from a question concerning the differences between ISML and the ICMLPO(h)
.
Messages 2-3 point out that while the ISML has diffrences
with the ICMLPO(h), the latter have repeatedly rebuffed any discussions
with the ISML.
Message 4 from Singh, alleges somewhat disingenuously
- and quite falsely:
"Our (personal) understanding is that a number of organisations outside
the ICMLPO are outside because of their pronounced political differences
with the ML tradition of Lenin, Stalin, the Comintern and Enver Hoxha."
Messages 5-10 encompass a discussion between comrade Gazza &
Singh on the meaning of self-criticism and disagreements in party building.
In the process Singh self-righteously proclaims:
"I must state that given that the ISML was formed subsequent to the
ICMLPO it would seem incumbent on the former to state the reasons
formally why the former was established and what are the political differences
of the ISML with the ICMLPO."
Singh to Gazza: Message 6; June 9 2002.
"Maybe you can also make your own enquiries on the reasons why the ISML
was established despite the prior existence of the ICMLPO. Did this help
the process of establishing international ML unity? Who, then, is responsible
for the disunity in the international movement? Are there not profound
political differences between the international trends? In such a situation
is talk of unity in general correct? "
Singh to Gazza: Message 9: Jun 10, 2002.
Gazza in effect, replies to Singh's accusation with
a statement [far truer than he appreciated at the time] that Singh is engaging
in preaching - in "holier-than-thou" tactics:
"A "Holier than thou" attitude, namely being sectarian, even when you
know what the other's position is and there is no theorectical differences
in principle. This includes the manufacture of positions that are not principled
but have merely been put forward to act as a barrier to further progress
to unity.
I have been around long enough to know that disunity
often just comes down to "bloody-mindedness" sometimes, an unwilliness
to admit one is wrong if the other side has shown that one's position is
wrong, and engaging in the opportunist practice of silence"
Message 8. Gazza to Singh.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Number 1: Message 3212;
From: Nemanja; Jun 3, 2002; Subject: An Inquiry
Number 2:Message 3218: From:
"illyrian85"; Jun 4, 2002; Subject: re: ICMLPO(h)
Number 3:Message 3222 From:
"hari6kumar"; Jun 5, 2002; Subject: Re: ICMLPO(h)
Number 4:Message 3236; From:
"Bhagat Singh; Jun 5, 2002; Subject: Re: ICMLPO
Number 5:Message 3237 of
3289 From: "Marenglen"; Jun 5, 2002; Re: ISML Re: ICMLPO
Number 6:Message 3238 From:
"illyrian85"; Jun 5, 2002; Subject: a personal thought on Criticism
Number 7:Message 3252; From:
"Bhagat Singh; Jun 9, 2002; Re: Criticism and self-criticism
Number 8:Message 3253; From:
"illyrian85"; Jun 9, 2002; Subject: in reply to Bhagat
Number 9:Message 3258 of
3289; From: "Bhagat Singh"; Jun 10, 2002; A Response to Gazza
Number 10:Message 3259
From: "Bhagat Singh"; Mon Jun 10, 2002; Subject: Unity Questions
Message 1: 3212; From: Nemanja; Jun 3, 2002;
Subject: An Inquiry
I have recently bumped into an organisation called International Conference
of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations (Hoxhaist)
[ICMLPO(h)], and I'd like to ask comrades from ISML about their position
on this organisation.
Thank you.
Nemanja
Message 2: 3218 of 3289; From: "illyrian85"; Jun
4, 2002; Subject: re: ICMLPO(h)
Comrade Nemanja,
I think that the "International Conference of Marxist-Leninist
Parties and Organisations (Hoxhaist) is another name for the groups who
signed the Quito Declaration, and whose organ is "Unity and Struggle".
Its strength lies manly in Latin America and the
main feature of the grouping is that it only recognises 1 party in each
country. As far as I am aware there is no offical British contingent of
the ICMLPO(h).
Other than that I don't have any firm information
on them. I believe (Hari will correct me if I am wrong) that ISML's position
is that we would love to get into bed with them but so far we have been
rebuffed :-)
Greetings from Gazza
Message 3: Message 3222 From: "hari6kumar";
Jun 5, 2002; Subject: Re: ICMLPO(h)
--- In internationalstrugglemarxistleninist@y..., "illyrian85"
GAZZA WROTE: > Other than that I don't have any firm information on
them. I believe
(Hari will correct me if I am wrong) that ISML's position is that we would
love to get into bed with them but so far we have been rebuffed :-)
REPLY:
Cmde Gazza is quite correct:
1) It is the view of ISML that all parties/individuals that call themselves
ML-ists should unite on a principled basis - ie. with the rights and expectation
of FULL discussions aimed to clarify our
history & our current and future programmes. This must of necessity
- we argue - include both honest Maoists and honest Hoxhaites.
2) To this end - we submit - that there is no clearly HEGEMONIC position
of any SINGLE organisation in ANY country that can claim un-impeded recognition
that IT IS "THE ML-ist way";
3) Therefore joint meetings/discussion/non-sectarian unity is required
- which may mean MORE than one group/party/organisation per country.
4) Regrettably - & CONSISTENTLY - the Quito grouping has REFUSED
any such discussions with the ISML grouping.
Hari
Message 4:Message 3236; From: "Bhagat Singh; Jun
5, 2002; Subject: Re: ICMLPO
Dear Nemanja and Gazza,
The early issues of Unity & Struggle are available
on the web. Go to
www.revolutionarydemocracy.org click on Links and then on Unity &Struggle.
Later copies of the print edition of Unity &
Struggle are available from the Editorial
Address of Revolutionary Democracy.
From the links of Revolutionary Democracy one can
reach a number of the websites of the International Conference of the Marxist-Leninist
Parties and Organisations.
Apart from the Latin American Parties there are
important parties in Iran and Turkey, a number of parties in North and
West Africa as well as the parties and organisations in Europe.
Gazza, Unity and Struggle is on sale in your neck of the woods by Flo Giblett
in Southampton and at Housman's, Kings Cross, London.
The ICMLPO was set up in difficult
conditions after the collapse of Socialist Albania and the final dissolution
of the USSR after a lengthy struggle in 1994 by the parties which had been
allied to the PSRA under Enver.
All of the major documents of the ICMLPO have been
published in Revolutionary Democracy.
Our (personal) understanding is that a number of
organisations outside the ICMLPO are outside because of their pronounced
political differences with the ML tradition of Lenin, Stalin, the
Comintern and Enver Hoxha.
With Best Wishes,
BS
Message 5:Message 3237;From:"Marenglen"; Jun 5, 2002:
Re: ISML Re: ICMLPO
Gazza
An association between Alliance and ICMLPO? I, personally, would be
delighted if such a thing occured. I very much enjoy Unity and Struggle.
Don't agree with everything I read in it, mind you - but still good stuff.
Hari, Bhagat: What's the background on ICMLPO /
Alliance relations?
Marenglen
Message 6: Message 3238 From: "illyrian85"; Jun
5, 2002; Subject: a personal thought on Criticism and self-criticism.
Dear Comrades,
From what I have read about the relations between
parties and individuals, I get the impression that people think that "criticism
and self-criticism" is all about apportioning blame: it isn't!
I think that criticism and self-criticism is too
strong a phrase for what the object of the exercise is
all about. I would prefer to use the phrase "Evaluation and self evaluation"
(other comrades may have other words of a similar nature they would prefer
to use).
As Marxist-Leninists we are scientists and
in any scientific endeavour things sometimes go wrong - its the nature
of the business! Finding out what went wrong and why, discovering the strengths
and weaknesses so that the weaknesses can be eliminated and the strengths
built on, is what "Criticism and self-criticism", or "Evaluation and self
evaluation" is about.
This leads to the question of the differences between
parties and organisations. Yes, sometimes, the differences between marxist-Leninists
are due to differences of theory, but some of the time its due to adopting
a "holier than thou" attitude. If we adopt the atitude that we are going
to remain separate until we agree 100% with each other then we will remain
divided for ever, which will please our enemies no end.
Oh, I don't claim that ISML is perfect, but what
I do know is that the path of unity is bloody well dirty and messy and
frustrating (god, is it frustrating much of the time!) but the only way
that marxist-leninists are going to unite in the end is through that dirty
messy frutstrating path of discussion, argument,
criticism and self criticism.
Thats my feet in my mouth contribution anyway :-)
Greetings from gazza
Message 7:Message 3252; From: "Bhagat Singh; Jun
9, 2002;
Subject: Re: ISML a personal thought on Criticism and self-criticism
Gazza, yes, it is important to have a correct and not a distorted understanding
of the notion of criticism and self-criticism.
The root of differences in political line have to
be located in differences in theory and politics. In the long run there
is no other way in trying to elucidating the differences in the movement.
By arguing that the question is sometimes one of
a holier than thou attitude one is- surely - avoiding trying to get to
the bases of political differences.
One actually has to get down to this and not talk
in generalities about "the dirty, messy frustrating path of discussion
argument" etc;
At the risk of incurring the wrath once again of
Kumar and his calls of get off the list I must state that given that the
ISML was formed subsequent to the ICMLPO it would seem incumbent on the
former to state the reasons formally why the former was established and
what are the political differences of the ISML with the ICMLPO.
With Best Wishes,
BS
Message 8: Message 3253; From:"illyrian85"; Jun 9, 2002;
Subject: in reply to Bhagat
Oi you Bhagat :-)
Hello!
Well, differences can be down to a number of factors:
1) Differences in political consciousness and theorectical
capabilities, i.e., differences in one's level of knowledge - not everyone
has the same level of understanding, which can and often does lead to
misunderstandings
2) Lack of information; I heard about the ICMLPO
long after I had heard and joined ISML;
3) A "Holier than thou" attitude, namely being sectarian,
even when you know what the other's position is and there is no theorectical
differences in principle. This includes the manufacture of positions that
are not principled but have merely been put forward to act as a barrier
to further progress to unity.
I have been around long enough to know that disunity
often just comes down to "bloody-mindedness" sometimes, an unwilliness
to admit one is wrong if the other side has shown that one's position is
wrong, and engaging in the opportunist practice of silence - refusing to
even acknowledge the other's existence, or even worse, resorting to slander,
when you know that you
can't put forward a principled reply to the other's position.
The above is not an exhaustive list as to why the
United Front tactic fails in practice, even when everyone agrees with it
in theory. I don't know the history of ICMLPO/ISML differences but I do
know that the way forward is by opening up both organizations to the other's
arguments so that the supporters of both organisations can judge for themselves
who has the more cogent and coherent strategy to move the interantional
M-L movement forward.
At the end of the day, disunity hurts every Marxist-Leninist,
whether they be supporters of ICMLPO/ISML/CominternM-L, etc.
Thats good old cynical Gazza's point of view anyway,
Greetings from Gazza
Message 9: Message 3258; From:"Bhagat Singh"; Jun 10,
2002; Subject: A Response to Gazza
There can be little difference,Gazza, on many of
the general statements you make here on the
reasons for there being differences in the movement.
Again one can understand that there can be lack
of information. Concretely in this case that
there is lack of information on the history of the ICMLPO. This can be
easily remedied by examining the relevant literature and then getting back
to the list with your conclusions. We would be
interested in any informed analysis which would then be arrived at.
Maybe you can also make your own enquiries on the
reasons why the ISML was established despite the prior existence of the
ICMLPO. Did this help the process of establishing international ML unity?
Who, then, is responsible for the disunity in the international movement?
Are there not profound political differences between the international
trends? In such a situation is talk of unity in
general correct?
Regarding the origins of the Comintern ML I must
admit I do not have any information on this. We do not know about the organisational
membership of this trend in various countries and the differences between
them and the ISML. Our limited knowledge of the German language, which
seems to be the working language of the Comintern ML, is a handicap
here.
Cheers,
BS.
Message 10: Message 3259 From: "Bhagat Singh";
Mon Jun 10, 2002; Subject: Unity Questions
This sounds great, Gazza, and no doubt is correct.
But there has to be agreement on a
political basis for unity. This requires unity on the major questions.
So far as the ICMLPO is concerned there is
the joint statement of Quito of 1994 which was the basis of many
parties and organisations across the globe to unite. You may know about
this document as
it was published by the Communist League.There are the subsequent statements
and resolutions of the International Conference. All of them have been
translated and published in Revolutionary
Democracy over the years and can be checked out at their website at www.revolutionarydemocracy.org
We would be interested in your reactions to these documents once you have
scrutinised them.
Cheers,
BS.