Ganapathi on Jihadists, revisionists in Nepal, Amerikkkans*
(monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com)
In a recent interview, Ganapathi, General Secretary of the CPI (Maoist) elaborates his positions on key issues. Ganapathi correctly describes the revolutionary position on Islamic anti-imperialist movements. It is important to note that Ganapathi’s line is the same as our own and differs from the position of the crypto-Trotskyist RCP USA. Ganapathi on Jihadist movements:
“Q What is your party’s stand regarding Islamist jihadist movements?
A Islamic jihadist movements of today are a product of imperialist—particularly US imperialist—aggression, intervention, bullying, exploitation and suppression of the oil-rich Islamic and Arab countries of West Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, etcetera, and the persecution of the entire Muslim religious community. As part of their designs for global hegemony, the imperialists, particularly US imperialists, have encouraged and endorsed every war of brazen aggression and brutal attacks by their surrogate state of Israel.
Our party unequivocally opposes every attack on Arab and Muslim countries and the Muslim community at large in the name of ‘war on global terror’. In fact, Muslim religious fundamentalism is encouraged and fostered by imperialists as long as it serves their interests—such as in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries, and Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan.
Q But what about attacks perpetrated by the so-called ‘Jihadis’ on innocent people like it happened on 26/11?
A See, Islamic jihadist movements have two aspects: one is their anti-imperialist aspect, and the other their reactionary aspect in social and cultural matters. Our party supports the struggle of Muslim countries and people against imperialism, while criticising and struggling against the reactionary ideology and social outlook of Muslim fundamentalism. It is only Maoist leadership that can provide correct anti-imperialist orientation and achieve class unity among Muslims as well as people of other religious persuasions. The influence of Muslim fundamentalist ideology and leadership will diminish as communist revolutionaries and other democratic-secular forces increase their ideological influence over the Muslim masses. As communist revolutionaries, we always strive to reduce the influence of the obscurantist reactionary ideology and outlook of the mullahs and maulvis on the Muslim masses, while uniting with all those fighting against the common enemy of the world people—that is, imperialism, particularly American imperialism.” (1)
MSH on Islamic anti-imperialist movements and the united front:
“Monkey Smashes Heaven’s (monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com) position is to strengthen the broad united front against imperialism, especially U$ imperialism, while at the same time trying to assert as much Maoist influence within the united front as possible. In other words, we unite on a tactical basis with Islamists, revisionists and others in the oppressed nations, but only when such forces are objectively anti-imperialist. We should strengthen the broad anti-imperialist united front, even when it is organizationally led by non-proletarian forces in the oppressed nations.
At the same time, we should not liquidate into the united front. We should remain organizationally distinct and try to increase our leadership within the united front. We should defend ourselves physically and ideologically within the united front.
We should craft our agitation and propaganda such that it points out the progressive role being played by non-proletarian led anti-imperialist forces. However, we should assert a hard proletarian line within the broad united front. In other words, we should always point out the progressive role of anti-imperialist forces, but we should also point out that they are not capable in the long term of leading the masses to socialism and communism. Establish a hardline true Maoist pole within the broad united front.” (2)
MSH:
“It is more important than ever to uphold the broad united front against imperialism, especially U.S. imperialism. At the same time, it is important to establish an independent, ideologically pure pole within the global resistance movements. The united front is pivotal to achieving communist breakthroughs in the Third World. Currently, only the Islamic resistance has been able to project itself onto the world stage as a regional alternative to imperialism. And, this Islamic resistance should be supported. However, communists must work to put the Maoist-Third Worldist movement on the world stage as a living alternative to imperialism. However, upholding the united front often leads to the watering down of revolutionary science. To combat this, proletarian movements must solidly understand and implement Maoism-Third Worldism. We cannot afford to be wishy-washey ideologically if a proletarian alternative to capitalism is ever to emerge on the world stage.
Imperialists have demonstrated that they are not beyond buying off entire resistance movements in order to defeat them. The so-called ‘Sunni awakening’ in Iraq is an example of this. This imperialist bribery may become more pervasive under the Democratic administration in the U.S. In order to combat this, science is more important than ever to the global proletarian movement. Ideological solidity is more important than ever. The proletarian movements will have to rely on science to counter such wholesale bribery. This underscores that proletarian movements will be established on a solid, pure Maoism-Third Worldist basis. Not only is such key to seizing power, it is also key to defeating counter-revolution after seizure of power.” (3)
Ganapathi on the revisionists in Nepal:
“Q How do you look at the current developments in Nepal?
A As soon as the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) [CPN(M)] came to power in alliance with the comprador-feudal parties through the parliamentary route in Nepal, we had pointed out the grave danger of imperialist and Indian expansionist intervention in Nepal and how they would leave no stone unturned to overthrow the government led by CPN(M). As long as Prachanda did not defy the directives of the Indian Government, it was allowed to continue, but when it began to go against Indian hegemony, it was immediately pulled down. CPN-UML withdrew support to the Prachanda-led government upon the advice of American imperialists and Indian expansionists. We disagreed with the line of peaceful transition pursued by the UCPN(M) in the name of tactics. We decided to send an open letter to the UCPN(M). It was released in July 2009.
We made our party’s stand clear in the letter. We pointed out that the UCPN(M) chose to reform the existing State through an elected constituent assembly and a bourgeois democratic republic instead of adhering to the Marxist-Leninist understanding on the imperative to smash the old State and establish a proletarian State. This would have been the first step towards the goal of achieving socialism through the radical transformation of society and all oppressive class relations. It is indeed a great tragedy that the UCPN(M) has chosen to abandon the path of protracted people’s war and pursue a parliamentary path in spite of having de facto power in most of the countryside.
It is heartening to hear that a section of the leadership of the UCPN(M) has begun to struggle against the revisionist positions taken by Comrade Prachanda and others. Given the great revolutionary traditions of the UCPN(M), we hope that the inner-party struggle will repudiate the right opportunist line pursued by its leadership, give up revisionist stands and practices, and apply minds creatively to the concrete conditions of Nepal.” (4)
MSH on revisionism in Nepal:
“Prachanda’s organization flaunted their tossing of the ABCs of Marxism for years. It would be one thing had Prachanda developed the ABCs of Marxism in a revolutionary way. However, this is not the case. Prachanda’s revisionists tossed Lenin’s teaching on the state, dual power and the dictatorship of the proletariat. They embraced the theory of productive forces. They tossed the Maoist teaching on people’s war. They rejected Lin Biao’s global people’s war line; instead, they sought a settlement with the imperialists. They tossed cultural revolution for multi-party democracy. Prachanda’s organization put forward run-of-the-mill revisionisms of almost every variety. Prachanda advanced well known reactionary lines that are associated with revisionists like Kautsky, Liu Shaoqi, and even Trotsky.” (5)
MSH is happy that we continue to have a large degree of unity with the Communist Party of India (Maoist) on these issues. However, the populist and First Worldist tone that Ganapathi takes in the following passage is troubling:
“Q How do you look at the changes in US policy after Barack Obama took over from George Bush?
A Firstly, one would be living in a fool’s paradise if one imagines that there is going to be any qualitative change in American policy—whether internal or external—after Barack Obama took over from George Bush. In fact, the policies on national security and foreign affairs pursued by Obama over the past eight months have shown the essential continuity with those of his predecessor. The ideological and political justification for these regressive policies at home and aggressive policies abroad is the same trash put forth by the Bush administration—the so-called ‘global war on terror’, based on outright lies and slander. Worse still, the policies have become even more aggressive under Obama with his planned expansion of the US-led war of aggression in Afghanistan into the territory of Pakistan. The hands of this new killer-in-chief of the pack of imperialist wolves are already stained with the blood of hundreds of women and children who are cruelly murdered in relentless missile attacks from Predator drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And, within the US itself, bail-outs for the tiny corporate elite and attacks on democratic and human rights of US citizens continue without any change.
The oppressed people and nations of the world are now confronting an even more formidable and dangerous enemy in the form of an African-American president of the most powerful military machine and world gendarme. The world people should unite to wage a more relentless, more militant and more consistent struggle against the American marauders led by Barack Obama and pledge to defeat them to usher in a world of peace, stability and genuine democracy.” (6)
MSH states:
“Obama’s regime represents a more effective imperialism. Obama represents turn away from the the unilateral, cowboy approach of the George W. Bush administration. Obama is the new-age imperialist, sensitive and sophisticated. If George W. Bush was the bad cop of modern imperialism, Obama is the good cop.
Obama more than any other recent US president represents a globalist turn in imperialism. The Obama administration seeks a world order where the Europeans and other imperialists have a say and cooperate alongside the US. Obama represents an imperialism that is both globalist, but still with the US at its center. Obama is the imperialist for an age without significant inter-imperialist rivalry. Obama is the imperialist antagonist of Lin Biao’s Long Live the Victory of People’s War! Obama is the imperialist in a world where inter-imperialist rivalries have been replaced, for the moment, by inter-imperialist cooperation against Third World peoples. Obama represents a more mature and stable imperialist system.
The imperialists learn from their mistakes just as people’s movements do. A lesson that imperialists have learned from the last century is that to let inter-imperialist rivalry get out of hand threatens the capitalist order itself. World War 1 led to the Bolshevik revolution, the first sustained socialist state in history. After Europe destroyed itself in World War 2, Europe was unable to hold onto its colonies. A wave of decolonization, national liberation and socialist movements, swept across the world. And, the inter-imperialist nuclear rivalry between the US and social imperialists, at times, threatened all life on Earth. Obama’s globalist path is the one that imperialism will most likely follow in the next decades. Thus it is important that people’s movements adapt. In the struggle against imperialism in the decades to come, it will be important to emphasize the unity of people’s forces and anti-imperialist forces in the Third World over largely futile attempts to divide the imperialist camp. In this respect, people’s movements should take their cue from Lin Biao’s global people’s war strategy.” (7)
Communists agree with Ganapathi that the nature of imperialism is the same despite who is president in the US. Ganapathi’s populist tone, his targeting of “corporate elites” juxtaposed to “US citizens,” is the same old social imperialism that is promulgated by the entire First Worldist “left.” Corporate elites and Amerikan workers do not have antagonistic class interests. Overall, their relationship is one of unity, not disunity. Whatever contradictions that may exist between them are non-antagonistic and easily dealt with within the system. If Ganapathi is looking for revolution, he is barking up the wrong tree by pandering to First World peoples. Even though Ganapathi is careful not to commit himself overtly to First Worldism, his tone is a fence-sitter one that panders to First Worldists and it undermines genuine proletarian forces. Contrary to Ganapathi’s fence sitting, communists know that virtually the entire First World should be considered bourgeoisie. The minor ups and downs of various sectors of the US bourgeoisie matter little to the people’s movements in the Third World. The proletariat, concentrated in the Third World, cares nothing about the housing bubble bursting in the US. Who cares if the richest people in the world lose some of their wealth? Do we really need yet another Chicken Little yelping that the sky is falling? Do we need another Jose Maria Sison to bore us to death?
Instead of “see no, speak no, hear no evil,” dare to be Marxist. Prairie Fire of MSH:
“A global, socialist distribution of the world’s wealth implies a distribution that approaches egalitarianism or a distribution where the only inequalities that exist are ones that benefit the proletariat and most oppressed segments of the global population. These distribution principles, taken together, can be described as roughly, reasonably egalitarian vis a vis the current world economy. The question that every serious Marxist must ask is whether Amerikans, and First World peoples generally, benefit or lose out under a socialist distribution of the world’s income. If the incomes of the First World working class, like the imperialist bourgeoisie, are so inflated that they need to be lowered under a socialist distribution, then there is no meaningful sense in which the First World working class is exploited. And, if, like the capitalists of the imperialist countries, the First World working class do not benefit under such a distribution, then there is no reason to consider them part of the revolutionary subject, as part of the proletariat.” (8)
There is no reasonable sense in which First World peoples are exploited. (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) First World peoples are not a social base for revolution; they are a social base for reaction, for fascism. To suggest otherwise is social imperialism and social fascism. Ganapathi is correct that there are important struggles for civil liberties being waged in the US. Maoist-Third Worldist forces and their allies were central to campaigns to defend Ward Churchill from fascist attack, for example. However, Ganapathi is incorrect if he is suggesting that such struggles in the First World represent acute class contradictions between the imperialists and the masses. There are no masses in the First World, only asses.
Unfortunately, Ganapathi incorrectly implies that the principal contradiction is between the “oppressed nations and peoples” verses imperialism, especially US imperialism. Rather, Maoist-Third Worldists maintain that the principal contradiction is between the exploiter countries as a whole/the First World/the global city versus the exploited countries as a whole/the Third World/the global countryside. This is no minor point, as any real Maoist should know.
What should we make of the CPI(Maoist)? On the one hand, they have taken the Maoist line on many important global issues. On the other hand, the CPI(Maoist) cannot bring itself to speak plainly and honestly on issues of global class. The most obvious and important feature of our world today is the relationship between the First and Third World. Those in the First World, with very few exceptions, live lives of luxury and leisure at the expense of the vast majority of humanity in the Third World. It is truly shameful that “Marxists” cannot speak about this elephant in the room.
All kinds of movements traffic in the name of the CPI(Maoist) even though such movements have next to nothing in common with the CPI(Maoist) except for a shared reverence for Mao. It is pathetic and sad that liberalism, not politics, is in command, but that has always been the M.O. of Avakian and his school. By contrast, communists state their unity and disunity openly. Let’s hope that Ganapathi moves in the correct direction and embraces Maoism-Third Worldism. The bell has been run. Humpty Dumpty can’t be put back together again. The false paths are endless. There is only one real path, one communism: Maoism-Third Worldism. We welcome all with the courage to take these first steps with us.
Sources:
1. http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/we-shall-certainly-defeat-the-government
2. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/iron-five-productions-video-its-right-to-rebel-msh-on-the-united-front/
3. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/may-day-thoughts/
4. http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/we-shall-certainly-defeat-the-government
5. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/excerpt-interview-with-ganapathy-general-secretary-cpimaoist/
6. http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/we-shall-certainly-defeat-the-government
8. Real versus Fake Marxism on Socialist Distribution http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/real-versus-fake-marxism-on-socialist-distribution/
9. ibid.
10. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/global-inequality-and-socialist-equality/
12. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/the-average-joe-amerikan/
13. http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2009/07/05/some-tentative-thoughts-on-%E2%80%9Cthe-social-factory%E2%80%9D/
* This post has been significantly updated since its original appearance a day ago.
I am still amazed at those self-defined “Maoists” and “Marxist-Leninists” who still find a United Front with the Islamic upsurge so evil.
It should be argued that both comrades Mao and Stalin had temporary alliances, with not only the bourgeoisie, but also with a section of Imperialism against the greater enemy. They proved that a socialist movement, can have temporary alliances with class enemies, and still go on to advance the anti-imperialist and proletarian revolution, as both the USSR and PRC proved.
It is key to recognize the primary contradiction, and its affect of the proletarian struggle, as lined out by comrade Lin Biao.
True. The USSR allied itself with the united $nakes during World War II. Why should we rule out a united front with anti-imperialist Islamic movements?
Real world religion is not only an airy fairy thing of nice heavenly ethical ideas when down on the dirt and amongst the class wars of the real world . From Catholicism’s traditional support for Feudal property relations to Brahmanist caste led Hinduism on the Indian subcontinent, or religiously justified Euro-settler Zionism in Palestine ,Or “got mit us” National socialism (Nazi).
Birds of a feather flock together and the parsons of the faith bless and justify the class crimes and property relations based morality and power of the ruling class flock
UN’s caste declaration riles India By Neeta Lal ..Extracts.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ20Df02.html
“DELHI – The United Nations Human Rights Council’s (UNHCR) recent decision to declare discrimination based on the caste system a “human-rights abuse” – thereby acknowledging centuries of bias against the world’s estimated 200 million Dalits (untouchables) – has evoked a sharp reaction from India.
The UN decision came about despite robust opposition from the Indian government and its aggressive lobbying to get the council to delete the word “caste” from its draft. Instead, the UNHCR is now set to ratify draft principles that recognize persecution of Dalits worldwide.
No other country has opposed the move as vehemently as India” …..
“What most weakened India’s case in the UNHCR was Nepal’s acquiescence to the move. Wresting the opportunity, the council has now called on India to follow Nepal’s example even as New Delhi feels this amounts to “international interference” in a sensitive internal matter .” End extracts.
Is organised economic class/ caste exploitation of a permanent proletariat over generations the same as or simply cultural /religious “humans -rights -abuse” ?
Religions and their ideas play their role in the world and not necessarily all bad as many Moslim Jihadis show
and it is necessary for the proletariat to unite with the positive aspects of all religious peoples who struggle against oppression and imperialism.
On the Indian sub-continent there is great potential for Communists in uniting people in Peoples War by overcoming differences between the huge numbers of poor Hindu poor Muslims and especialy proletarian Dalits in the fight for socialism and national independence against oppressors ,who ideologically justify their class /caste oppression and oppression of religious minorities , internal Nations and Tribal peoples and Landlord/bourgeios capitalist rule , not only by capitalist ideologies but also by the Brahminist Hindu religion . And its ideological conditioning agents who divide the peoples and promote fighting between the religions along religious lines. But the main problems facing the peoples are not religious problems, but forming unity in struggle against all oppressors , religious ,
caste/class ,capitalism and First World imperialism.
It is so obvious that the First World is completely bought-off. I don’t know why some people just can’t come out and cut the bullshit. There are 1000 flavors of First World so-called Marxism, all unable to organize beyond a few dozen. A group that manages to organize 50 cadre is viewed as very successful in the US. They all talk about mass line and whatever bullshit that happens to be trendy. But they are all utter failures by any reasonable standard.
I have read Ganapahty’s statements over the years.He doesn’t strike me as a stupid person. He seems promising. Ganapathy must know, as all honest thinking people do, that First World workers are not revolutionary. They aren’t even exploited. So why is Ganapathy pandering to First World populists. Here is this important leader who leads an organization that probably has tens of thousands in it pandering to tiny First World jokes like RCP or Kasama or WWP or the latest flash-in-the-pan. It really boggles the mind.
I found this an interesting follow-up to the story: In the United Communist Party of Nepal’s journal “Red Spark” there was recently an article by a prominent member that contained the line, “Trotskyism has become more relevant than Stalinism to advance the cause of the proletariat.” That this passed Party criticism speaks volumes on the current leadership of the UCPN, I think.
There is an article being circulated about this in a Trotskyist online journal: http://www.marxist.com/communist-party-nepal-recognises-role-of-trotsky.htm
I think the reason that Leftists groups in the Third World pander to First World “leftism” is because the latter is … First World.
That is, First World Leftists are in a position of power, privilege, and dominance *relative* to the Third World Left.
This Third World Left often gives unearned ideological deference to their First World masters, sorry … I mean proletarian counterparts.
Cultural, ideological, and political imperialism are some of the perks of being a First World citizen–no matter if you are a Neocon or Trotskyite!
First Worldism is the main revisionism of today. Parties that fence sit aren’t Marxist. To take on the imperialists this next time around, we need more science not less. We need to learn. The CPI(Maoist) can play a pivotal role or they can fall into ideological obscurity, another irrelevant party — like the “Marxist-Leninists” or “Hoxhaists.” If your basic outlook doesn’t match up to the world, then you need to update your outlook. It’s called science:Maoism-Third Worldism.