MIM Notes 35 Jan 23 1989 Draft of an open letter to the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement Dear Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: As the draft constitution of the MIM states, the MIM believes that Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, the nature of the Soviet Union and the Cultural Revolution are the cardinal questions of the day. According to your published declarations, you believe the same. A number of comrades have asked why MIM is not a member of the RIM and what are MIM's differences with the RCP, USA. These are good questions that raise the most fundamental of issues. MIM has had extensive experience with the RCP, USA including three years of experience before your organization formed. Indeed, MIM predecessors and the RCP worked together on some projects. From practical experience, the membership of MIM decided that a vanguard organization would have to be formed outside the RCP. Without a party press or large numbers, MIM predecessors made a difficult decision. Nonetheless, they concluded that it would be bourgeois pragmatism to join the RCP because of its larger size or material resources. After all, Mao had said: The correctness or otherwise of the ideological and political line decides everything. When the Party's line is correct, then everything will come its way. If it has no followers, then it can have followers; if it has no guns, then it can have guns; if it has no political power, then it can have political power. (Schram, ed., Chairman Mao Talks to the People, p. 290) Already in MIM's brief existence, this has proved to be correct and MIM's modest influence has spread nationally and internationally. At the time that MIM's predecessors decided that it was necessary to form an organization outside of the RCP, the decision came principally out of political practice. Since that time, MIM has worked on making a theoretical and ideological statement on the differences between the RCP, USA and MIM. (See "Third Draft of Criticism of the RCP" for background) One of the difficulties of this venture is that the RCP, USA stands the same way MIM does, at least nominally, on whether or not to uphold the Cultural Revolution and Marxism- Leninism Mao Zedong Thought including Mao's scientific analysis of Soviet social-imperialism. Under the conditions of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the bourgeoisie adopts the tactic of waving the red flag to oppose the red flag. However, in current conditions in the United States, the vanguard party does not hold state power. Consequently there is no obvious reason for the bourgeoisie to wave the red flag to oppose the red flag. If there were no material basis for a party in the United States to uphold Mao Zedong Thought and the Cultural Revolution in name only, then MIM comrades would be forced to join the RCP, USA and struggle within that party to correct its deviations from Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought. Comrades would necessarily uphold democratic centralism. MIM comrades would have done this because of the required unity of the international proletariat and especially its vanguard. However, from practice, MIM comrades learned that there was no democratic centralism in the RCP, USA. It was found to be impossible to struggle against deviations from Marxism- Leninism Mao Zedong Thought. Furthermore, from practice and observation MIM has learned that the RCP is infiltrated by agents of the state. The experience of other parties in the United States shows that the FBI is capable of leading parties from the very top leadership position in the party. Obviously, state infiltration is not necessarily fatal to a vanguard party, as the experience of Lenin's Bolshevik party shows. MIM itself is no doubt the subject of state operations. The question is whether or not the state is affecting the practice of the party to the extent that it discredits Maoism. The existence of state agents within the RCP, USA is a powerful explanation of various contradictions in the RCP, USA, a few of which are known generally. For now, MIM would like to point out the following: 1. The name of MIM's direct predecessor was the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement. As the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, MIM's predecessor worked with the RCP. Indeed, the RIM name was on posters with the RCP name. When your organization adopted our name, there was never any explanation from the RCP. Nor were we consulted about the adoption of our name or our joining the RIM. After some time passed, a MIM comrade crossed paths with the RCP and brought up the issue incidentally. One RCP comrade said he didn't know much about how it happened, but said we "should be honored." Another comrade said she was "frankly surprised." Of course, phrases like "communist workers," "revolutionary internationalism" and "anti-imperialism" are used by all stripes of revisionists and communists all the time. It is a different matter, however, when it comes to a name. Giving up the name of RIM was no problem for MIM. RIM simply renamed itself MIM when the "Declaration of the RIM" came out. Obviously possession of a proper name is a very secondary issue. Opportunist handling of the issue--covering it up--is not a secondary issue. The RCP's handling of this and other matters has been dishonest. 2. The RCP, USA is infamous within revolutionary and progressive circles for its stance on homosexuality. After much struggle with MIM and others, the RCP, USA seems to be improving somewhat over the years. In particular, the RCP, USA is exposing the pogromist Ramboism of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the United States. On the other hand, MIM Notes 34 points out that the RCP, USA is still content to play into the hands of the ruling class and its dominant ideology on many issues concerning homosexuality. Most importantly, an RCP comrade has informed MIM that there is an unwritten rule against not only homosexual ideology but homosexual sexual practices within the RCP. In other words, the RCP will not accept homosexual Maoists. This is a criminal way to draw a dividing line to the detriment of the unity of the supposedly vanguard party and undermines the struggle around the cardinal questions. Once again, a small issue handled incorrectly becomes a fundamental one. 3. MIM has other knowledge of RCP dishonesty and opportunism. One publicly known example that reeks of state infiltration is the slogan "smash busing!" At a time when the KKK and similar groups were organizing in Boston to stop busing for racially integrated schools, the RCP's predecessor marched under the slogan "smash busing!" This rendered tremendous service to the state, which could not have hoped for a better way to discredit Maoism. (Of course, busing and integration are merely reformist answers to the oppression of national minorities. The issue here is the handling of the context.) 4. The RCP's lack of democratic centralism, its hero worship, indeed its cult complete with its imitation of Lin Biao's deification of Mao is itself an indication that something in the RCP besides scientific Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought is afoot. True, Stalin and Mao did enjoy something of a personality cult. However, the RCP has chosen to copy those aspects of the personality cult explicitly repudiated by Mao. Bob Avakian's Bullets is in exactly the same format that Lin Biao used for Quotations from Chairman Mao--the red book. 5. Bob Avakian makes assorted Trotskyist comments on the united front, Stalin and World War II, especially in Conquer the World. In Raymond Lotta's America in Decline, there is an elaborate rehash of Trotskyism that does away with Mao's distinction between the internal basis and external conditions of contradiction. Lotta finds one giant world contradiction. In Harvest of Dragons, Avakian incorrectly attacks Lin Biao for overestimating the revolutionary potential of the Third World, while he criticizes followers of Mao who are always talking about the "masses, the masses, the masses." In MIM's support of Kostas Mavrakis's book On Trotskyism and MIM's persistent criticism of Trotskyism, one RCP comrade asserted that MIM was really attacking the RCP! Well, if the shoe fits, wear it! 6. The RCP has yet to retract Avakian's chauvinist assessment of Jiang Qing, who, "I believe, was capable of more than a little subjectivism." (Revolution and Counterrevolution, p. 104) This is not to mention Avakian's evaluation of the Gang of Four "Perhaps they were not as good as Stalin." (Mao's grade for Stalin was 70; did the Gang of Four flunk in Avakian's book?) In practice, the RCP has done comparatively little to expose Chinese revisionism. Perhaps Avakian's opinion of the Gang of Four is the reason. As for the RIM, MIM does not have enough information. It appears that MIM is in overall agreement with the RIM. MIM has had some questions about the "Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement." For example, there is the interpretation of this quote from the "Declaration." "The Marxist-Leninists in the advanced capitalist countries face the task of continuing to combat the pernicious influence of revisionism and reformism in their ranks. The key to doing this remains the fight for principles developed by Lenin in the course of preparing and leading the October Revolution." (p. 45) Before the publication of your magazine commemorating Mao, this seemed an especially suspicious statement to MIM. It seemed to dovetail with RCP moves to say that Mao was irrelevant to the imperialist countries. RCP comrades have defended the above quote in the "Declaration" by saying that it should be read simply in the context of fighting social-democracy-- the necessity of armed struggle and the struggle against reformism and economism. Before MIM could say it upholds the RIM, it would also want to know what organizational principles the RIM uses. In particular, some in the United States have called the RIM an RCP, USA publicity ruse. Do the different countries involved in RIM get equal votes? What proportion does the RCP, USA play? Who leads? MIM would like to hear from RIM on the above issues. Overall, it seems that there is no excuse for having two Maoist parties in one country except where there is a question of genuineness. One might expect that the RIM is aware of the RCP, USA's nominal positions. However, it seems unlikely that RIM has the MIM's capability to assess the RCP, USA's domestic political practices. MIM has tried to avoid spending too much time in polemical struggle with the RCP. This is in accordance with the weight Mao gave to practice over theory. On the other hand, it is MIM's duty to inform RIM of various issues and seek a higher level of unity of the international proletariat. It is also MIM's duty not to cover up political and ideological issues. Finally, MIM calls on RIM to respond to this letter and work to help correct the RCP, USA and MIM on various issues. Some issues mentioned above are quite involved. We look forward to settling them with RIM over time. Some issues are rather simple and straightforward. MIM calls on RIM to immediately repudiate the line that would divide the international proletariat and its vanguard parties on the basis of sexual orientation. MIM also calls on RIM to provide whatever information it may have on how the RIM adopted its name. Finally, the MIM calls on the RCP to retract the above- mentioned evaluations of Jiang Qing and the Gang of Four and asks the RIM to influence the RCP, USA in the same direction. Maoist Internationalist Movement