Today we received the text of the comrades of the Editorial Staff of Class Position ["Klassenstandpunkt"] that is hereby documented. The topic of Right Liquidationism is developed more in-depth also in the original Statement of the Editorial Staff of Class Position as well as in the Declarations of the Committee Red Flag and of the Communist Party of Ecuador - Red Sun.

---

Proletarians of all countries, unite!

"Fighting fire with gasoline" or how to dig your own political grave

A commentary of Class Position

Introduction

The right liquidators have run from the two-line-struggle for years. But after the declarationby the comrades from the Committee Red Flag they had to respond1. They can not run any longer. Their backs are against the wall.

Essentially their text is their declaration of bankruptcy. They confirm all the Maoist criticisms against them and are finally forced to expose their web of lies and stories publicly as a whole, not being able to spread it in one-on-one conversation and through facebook comments any longer. Now everybody can see it as the anticommunism on the level of “Animal Farm” it truly is. They obviously view communists in formation not as the vanguard of the proletariat they are, rather describing them like vampires, sucking the life out of young revolutionaries, and like black holes, sucking in and destroying organizations. Everybody can clearly see that people with this views are a lot of things – right liquidators, opportunist, reactionaries, enemies of the proletariat and the Internationalist Communist Movement and a lot more – but there is one thing they are clearly not: Communists.

Because of this they again try to run away from open two-line-struggle. Instead they try to isolate the leadership from the masses using intrigues. They hope some of their bourgeois comments about democratic centralism will stick around in the back of the head of the masses, associating them in daily work, so that discipline subconsciously is linked with the feeling of being a servant.2 Additionally they try to create conflict in the revolutionary movement in FRG and in the International Communist Movement. But they fail at this. Because every idea has a class-character they expose themselves as ugly German revisionists. They try to impress unknowing readers by droning on about things they have no clue about. It is impossible to respond to all of their reactionary and revisionist ideas, while still systematizing the two-line-struggle, which is why we will focus on nine aspects of their text, in which they confirm the maoist criticisms against them, and three principal aspects of their “criticisms”. Not to convince these people, but to fight this German-national, right-opportunistic liquidationism.

 

Opportunism through and through

The right liquidators provide proof of their opportunism right on the first page of their text:

“Also, one thing has to be noted. We write this as Youth Resistance[“Jugendwiderstand”]. It is a revolutionary youth organisation – not a communist cadre organisation, not a party, nor a party construction organization – hence, we are not bound by any guidelines of these and we also don’t accept the overblown theater the people from Hamburg play.”

They clarify, as soon as possible, that they will run away from any form of principle struggle. It is not about making open two-line-struggle, but about whining, stating non-committals and claiming absurd things.3

Lenin explains:

“When we speak about fighting opportunism, we must never forget a characteristic feature of present-day opportunism in every sphere, namely, its vagueness, amorphousness, elusiveness. An opportunist, by his very nature, will always evade taking a clear and decisive stand, he will always seek a middle course, he will always wriggle like a snake between two mutually exclusive points of view and try to “agree” with both and reduce his difference of opinion to petty amendments, doubts and innocent and pious suggestions, and so on and so forth”4

 

Regarding their text

In the following we want to talk about nine aspects of their text, in which they clearly confirm the maoist criticisms raised against them, especially the ones from the declaration of the Committee Red Flag.

1) Splitting instead of two-line-struggle

2) No ideological-political justification for splitting

3) Sabotage against Revolutionary Construction [“Revolutionärer Aufbau”] and others as a means to hinder the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany

4) Military attack against the international proletariat

5) Snitching and police work

6) Agent provocateur

7) Justification for fleeing from two-line-struggle

8) Lies about the PCP

9) 8th of March and the Afrin demonstration

First. The right liquidators split without waging two-line-struggle concerning the ideological and the political line. They did so as a group. They negated the fundamental principals of how communists behave - two-line-struggle, democratic centralism and open struggle - and instead used intrigues.5

Second. The right liquidators founded a new organization without making any ideological and political criticism against the organization they split from.6 They also propagated a diffuse party committee, which acted under changing names, recently as “maoist Communist Party of Germany – Construction Committee” [“maoistische Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands – Aufbaukomitee” ].

These people expect this organization to be recognized as self-reliant without any ideological political struggle. In this text they expect the organization they deserted from without giving a single criticism, to provide a criticism to be able to develop a relationship.7

Those who split, are the ones who have to formulate a criticism, not the other way around. They have to prove that they allegedly represent the reddest line, which has to be followed. They have to prove that their actions are justified. In their text they prove that they haven’t done this.

Third. In their text the right liquidators confirm, that they actively tried to sabotage the development of the Revolutionary Construction and others, as a means to undermine the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany.8 Instead of encouraging open two-line-struggle in the Revolutionary Construction, they tried to split using intrigues. Their failed fractionism lead to a “Youth Resistance base-unit”, which was so isolated, that “they had to flee and the work collapsed”.

Fourth. The right liquidators admit to physically attacking and threatening our comrades and trying to prohibit the sale of the mass-newspaperRed Post [“Rote Post”].9 They admit to having lead a military attack against the international proletariat, even if in their gang-mentality it was “only a slap”. An action, during which one contingent, under one leadership, with one shared objective, sends out a detachment of people to attack two targets, meaning hitting and threatening them with stabbing, after which they retreat collectively and in an organized manner is clearly a military action. Anybody who denies this has a militaristic understanding, in whichsomething only counts as military if tanks and rifles are involved. The comrades they attacked are the comrades, who have done the work to support the people’s war in India for years and who participated in the nationwide day of action in solidarity with the People’s War in India in Berlin. An attack against these comrades is also an attack against the Indian comrades. The right liquidators even show in their own photograph, that the comrades they attacked were carrying the banner for the 200thanniversary of the birth of Karl Marx, a banner that was carried by revolutionaries all around the world that day. An attack against these comrades is an attack against the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany for one, but it is also an attack against anybody who carries that banner, against anyone who supports this grand international campaign, against this campaign, that unites the most advanced forces in the International Communist Movement and thus furthers the struggles of the international proletariat. The right liquidators prove they aim to sabotage this campaign, but they won’t succeed in this. This aim and this attack is a crime against the international proletariat.

Fifth. The right liquidators claim, that the Maoists in the FRG are snitching. Every single picture and video that was published was uploaded to their facebook page or website by themselves beforehand. Them talking about “personality-profiles” just proves how on point the criticism is and how they recognize themselves in it. The right liquidators were exposed, but they were exposed in front of the revolutionaries in the FRG and in the world, not in front of the cops. That is not snitching.

It is snitching however, to claim, that different organizations and groups are one, which is what the right liquidators are doing in their text. They claim that the website DemVolkeDienen.org is the news-platform of SoL [“Socialist left” / “Sozialistische Linke”]. They explain which organization allegedly became which and founded which.10 They say Committee Red Flag, SoL, Internationalist Collective Berlin [“Internationalistisches Kollektiv Berlin”], Red Women Committee Berlin [Rotes Frauenkomitee Berlin], Red Women Committee Hamburg [Rotes Frauenkomitee Hamburg], Struggle together [“Zusammen Kämpfen”], Red Ruhr Crew [“Rote Ruhr Crew”], Revolutionary Construction, the satire page “Some of my best friends are Antideutsche” [“Einige meiner besten Freundinnen sind Antideutsche”], Kang-Tscheng-Productions and othersare all parts of one organization. They claim that SoL is a memberof theLeague against imperialist Aggression [“Bündnis gegen imperialistische Aggression”], a league, that has never publicly disclosed their member organizations. Only Antideutsche have attacked the league this way so far. This is police work. The right liquidators are trying to provide a ground for a trial based on circumstantial evidence, which would enable the reaction to ban multiple organizations at once on the basis of paragraph 129a [building/supporting a domestic terrorist organization]. The right liquidators are preparing an attack against the whole revolutionary movement in the FRG.

Sixth. They are acting as agent provocateur. With their provocations in Hamburg they were trying to provoke a fistfight in front of undercover cops and cameras, to provide the reactionaries with an excuse to take action against the communists in formation.11 But the communists in formation didn’t fall for it, they led two-line-struggle and sold newspapers to the masses, including some of the masses of the right liquidators. With their fantasies and provocations about the activities during G20 and the 1st of May they aim to do the same. They talk about maoists, who shouted “Youth Resistance, we know that already - Allahu Akbar instead of revolution”, even though they know that these were people from from the alliance, who at that point couldn’t be considered maoist at all. They try to provoke statements about who did what and self incrimination.

Seventh. The right liquidators try to justify their avoidance of two-line-struggle, by claiming that they demanded two-line-struggle, which was denied. How is it not two-line-struggle to discuss at events, or to write texts with criticisms? What was their reaction to this? Running away, trying to prohibit and to ignore it.12 We want to emphasize, it’s still a fight, even if only one of the participants is a willing fighter, while the other one just takes it and tries to flee.

Eighth. Their claim about the practice in the Communist Party of Peru,that the “photos of the children of the militants should be burned”, shows how they have no clue about the Party and are spreading lies.13 Such a decisionwas never takenby the Communist Party of Peru.

Ninth. Regarding the 8th of March we were told that two masses who sympathize with the right liquidators and live in Hamburg attended the demonstration of the comrades from Hamburg, where they wanted to carry their eclectic hammer and sickle flag. After being asked if they are maoist one of them responded that one is not a maoist, just because of carrying that flag. They were informed, that the revisionist flag wasn’t welcome in the demonstration and were offered a maoist hammer and sickle flag, which they gladly carried through out the entire demonstration.

Regarding the Afrin demonstration, we are unaware what incident the right liquidators are talking about. We were told, that a female and a male comrade, so two comrades, sold newspapers there and meet the aforementioned masses of the right liquidators. Neither our comrades from ATIK, in whose block the incident supposedly took place and who are quick to react in such situations have spoken to us regarding this, nor can we explain where the ten additional “activist”, who supposedly threatened the two masses may have appeared from. This story is as believable as “polish assault” on the German Reich – and serves the same purpose14.

The only explanation we are able to come up with is, that the comrades were near these two people when other attendees of the demonstration expressed their hatred for the right liquidators. It is certain, that no organized Maoists have been involved in this incident.

 

Regarding the ideological-political criticism

1. Opposition against the Party

The Communist Party is the vanguard of the proletariat. It is composed of the best children of the class. Its members promise to break with their old lives, to dedicate their life to the revolution and to accept death, if the necessities of the revolution demand it. Its members are taught through two-line-struggle. They are taught through the struggle between the red proletarian line and the black bourgeois line, in which the red proletarian line proves itself through criticism and selfcriticism and through forging of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the universal contributions of chairman Gonzalo as a science. Its members submit their Individual under thought-through, collective discipline. They submit to democratic centralism, so that not individualism, but the ideology of the proletariat is the line.

This is progressive, meaning in the eyes of the right liquidators it’s “crazy”. It’s not liberal, meaning they consider it “authoritarian”.

They say maoist are tyrants, freaks and nerds. From the view of the petite-bourgeois and the lumpen proletariat democratic centralism may appear to be tyranny against the lumpen-like bourgeois individualism. If the reactionary follow- don’t-lead understanding of the massline is what one is aiming for, communists in formation may appear to be “weird Freaks”. If one denies the science of Marxism, communists in formation may appear to be “Nerds”. If one is opposed to the party, any development towards it may appear to be “elitist”.

The right liquidators try to turn the masses against the reconstitution of the Party.15 They don’t understand the massline, which when applied means to systematize the ideas of the most advanced parts of the masses and to propagate this systematization back to the masses, while the right liquidators apply a follow-don’t-lead-policy. This is not the massline of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the masses they reach this way are not the most advanced parts. This follow-don’t-lead-policy doesn’t lead to the vanguard, but to the coolest group of macho-men. This is clearly expressed in their claims about “the supposed reactionary character of hooliganism” and in their stance towards “Allahu Akbar”-paroles on their 1st of May demonstration. If these paroles were shouted after their mobilization followed a clear line and included correct analysisof Yankee imperialism and the mass murder in Palestine the situation would be different and their claim about it “happening under the leadership of proletarian revolutionaries” would actually be correct. But considering their actual paroles (that means the condensed expression of their politics) were “Fuck the USA” and “Fuck Israel” no-one should be surprised they mobilizedpeople who consider “Allahu Akbar” to be the correct political line, instead of the most advanced parts of the masses. This has nothing to do with the ideology of the proletariat. Their talk about “the Sect from Hamburg” also is an expression of their opposition against the Party. The ones who want to overcome the fractuation of the left and constitute the Party are often called “sects”. Red Guards Austin in the USA are also currently attacked using this claim16.

The right liquidators value the emotion, experience and spontaneous consciousness of parts of the working-class over teaching the comrades Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the practice of the international proletariat and the worlds peoples synthesized into theory. That is subjectivism and the same argument as usedby post-structuralist enemies of the proletariat. It means they think some chauvinist dudeshanging around in Neukölln know better than Marx, Lenin and chairman Mao.

They oppose the construction of the party from top to bottom. They oppose centralism for the independent kingdoms. They agreed with organizational principalson a platonic level, but don’t act according to them.

This is why the maoist in the FRG call them right liquidators.

2. German nationalism

They don’t want Germany to die.17 They don't want to criticize the ocean of black-red-yellow flags during the public viewing during football world-cups, which means they don't want to criticize the identification with German imperialism. Based on their wrong understanding of the German nation, they claim such a criticism would be against the masses and the people.18 This means they negate the massline and two-line-struggle and capitulate to the imperialist chauvinism of the German nation. They equate the German people with German imperialism. This is the bourgeois understanding of what the people are.

The territory of the German nation is soaked in the blood of massacred Slavics. It has an economy based on the blood and sweat of the peoples of Europe and the oppressed nations all around the world. Its language and culture are an expression of its national characteristics, which are based on imperialist chauvinism, Prussian servant-mentality and officialdom, not on worker- and soldier-associations. This nation is not represented by Thälmann, but rather by Noske.

This acceptance of the standpoint of the German nation also expresses itself in their views on proletarian internationalism. They are shocked to hear, that the maoist do all of their work in service of the proletarian world-revolution. They are upset that the plan for the actions during the G20-summit included sending a message of international solidarity and supporting the oppressed people’s morale in their fights.

This is why the maoist in the FRG call them German-nationalist, imperialist chauvinists.

3. Gonzalo-thought or Gonzaloism.

Even a puddle of vomit has a certain structure to it. We have tried to summarize the views of the right liquidators regarding Gonzalo-thought and its application as structured as possible:

1.They claim, Gonzalo-thought is only the guiding thought in the revolution in Peru and is therefore not applicable in Germany19

2. They say, Gonzalo-thought has provided some universally applicable contributions to the ideology of the proletariat.20 This is contradictory to the first point.

3. They claim, wanting to apply Gonzalo-thought in Germany means to negate the concept of a guiding thought.21

4. They note, that the Class Position explains the necessity of a guiding thought in the revolution in the FRG. Apparently this sadly didn’t prompt them to overthink their third point.22

5. They claim the applicability in the FRG necessitates a new stage of Marxism, meaning they don’t understand the dialectic between universal applicability and a new stage.23

6. They claim Gonzalo-thought solves no new problems and open questions in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.24 We’d like to remind them of the militarization of the party and the concentric structure of the three instruments they even acknowledge themselves.25

7. They claim Maoism to be the last stage of Marxism.26 They deny the dialectic of practice ad theory.

8. They claim talking about Gonzalo-thought and applying it, as that is what the comrades of the Committee Red Flag are doing, is secret Gonzaloism. They say this negates Maoism and Gonzalo-thought and its universally applicable elements.27 This means they are trying to negate Gonzalo-thought using Gonzalo-thought, which is about as eclectic as one can get.

As the right liquidators’ text only serves to spread confusion on this question, here for once with all clarity:

Marxism-Leninism-Maoism develops based on revolutionary practice. Based on the practice theory is developed, which is used as the basis of new practice once more. Some of the theory is disproven, some of it is confirmed and developed. Marx, Lenin and chairman Mao developed the ideology of the proletariat in all its three aspects, philosophy, political economy and scientific socialism and with this raised it to a new stage. Today the ideology of the proletariat is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and Gonzalo-thought. This means on a global scale it’s Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism. Gonzalo-thought principally is the guiding thought of the revolution in Peru, but it also has some universally applicable aspects, as Chairman Gonzalo also made contributions to the ideology of the proletariat, that not only need to be applied in Peru but everywhere. In the left of the Internationalist Communist Movement it’s being currently discussed whether these contributions should be called Gonzalo-thought. Of course the right liquidators know nothing of this as they are neither a part of the left of the Internationalist Communist Movement nor of the Internationalist Communist Movement at all. Claiming this ideology won’t develop further based on class-struggle until communism is metaphysical and negates the dialectic of theory and practice.

This ideology needs to be applied to the concrete circumstances and be developed into a guiding thought. Talking about “-thought” in no way negates the concept of a guiding thought.

Consider the struggle for the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Peru lead by Chairman Gonzalo and the Red Faction as an example. The Communist Party of Peru declared following as their Party Unity Basis during their sixth conference in 1969; “Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought, the thoughts of Mariategui and general political line”. In May of 1977 they declared: “handling the line in international class-struggle demands three things. Firstly to define Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought and to apply it with determination; secondly, the reuptake of the line of Mariategui about international politics and its development; thirdly, the summary of the experience of the party regarding this problem and especially the struggles about this question.” We emphasize its development. While the CPP at this point talked about Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung-thought, this development later became the guiding thought of the party, then it developed into the guiding thought of Chairman Gonzalo, then Gonzalo-thought. The formulations guiding thought and Mao Tse Tung-thought were used at the same time.

The central committee of the CPP determined that chairman Gonzalo made contributions to the development of Marxism, but is not a forth sword himself, during a meeting in August of 1993(“SESION DE TRABAJO, COMITE CENTRAL, PARTIDO COMUNISTA DEL PERU“). This means there is no such things as Gonzaloism, but chairman Gonzalo made contributions towards a fourth stage of Marxism. As far as we know the aforementioned document is not available on the internet, but it was an important part of the two-line-struggle in the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement in the mid 1990’s.

Another point showing the rottenness of this people, is that they attempt, with the same tricks as Avakian and those converging with him, to portray “Great Leadership” as something extremely strange and mystical. The German translation of “Führerschaft” is the exact translation of the Spanish Word “jefatura”. The translated document that is quoted by them very much clarifies the question of Great Leadership28. Still they insist on the term jefatura29. It is the same Trick everyone in the International Communist Movement knows from the Avakianists, precisely to run away from the struggle on the basis of principles and to suggest the Communist Party of Peru would be “dogmatic” and “quasi-religious”. This the exact core of the defamation campaign against the Communist Party of Peru (and more importantly, a significant part of the counter-revolutionary warfare).

The right liquidators just spread confusion, instead of making clear and concise criticisms, learning Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and facing the two-line-struggle in the Internationalist Communist Movement.

They don’t care about the ideology of the proletariat. They have no redder line than the communists in formation in the FRG. Where is their criticism of our line-documents like “The aim of German imperialism to develop into a superpower”, “People’s War – The solepath to Liberation” or “One class, one ideology, one party, one revolution”? Where is their position about the People’s-War-document (they even talk about in their text, criticizing one point, without taking a stance about it as a whole) or the document about the position of the anti-imperialists to the PKK written by Alexandra Becker, which was, among others, also published at DemVolkeDienen.org and which has been widely discussed in the revolutionary movement in the FRG?

This is why the Maoist in the FRG call them right opportunists.

Conclusion

In their helpless attempts to deal with the two-line-struggle they can not flee from anymore, the gang of right liquidators, with their backs to the wall, confirms all maoist criticisms that have been formulated towards them, especially those conclusions drawn in the statement of the Committee Red Flag. They are right liquidators. Because everything they do is against the Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Germany. They are a German-nationalist pile of trash. Because they use the bourgeois understanding “people” and conciliate with imperialist chauvinism. They are right opportunists. Because they can not combat the ideology of the proletariat. So they have act as they would represent it.

 

Editorial Staff of Class Position

23nd of May, 2018