MIM NOTES 195	October 1, 1999

Study the successes of Maoism and Protracted People's War On 
Focoism and the Lumpen Proletariat

by Lord Grim

Revolutionary Greetings! Upon a MIM comrade calling my attention 
to the subject of focoism, I am compelled to put my thoughts to 
paper. This article is dedicated to the many revolutionary 
prisoners and the various organizations whom have made or are 
making the transition from neo-colonial org. to revolutionary org. 
I do not ask you all to read and discard this piece, in fact the 
only way to bring focus and progress throughout our quest for the 
most righteous revolutionary route is through debate-dialectics. 
So please write back and tell me I'm wrong and why or tell me your 
agree and why and in each case how can we further the 
revolutionary goal TOGETHER, ya dig?

What is focoism: "Focoism is a popular theory that says that small 
cells of armed revolutionaries can create the conditions for 
revolution through their actions. Demonstrated revolutionary 
victories, the successes of the foci, are supposed to lead the 
masses to revolution. If conditions are ripe, according to 
focoists, a single spark can start the revolutionary fire."(1)

MIM has visited this subject on various occasions, however the 
popularity of focoism causes comrades to keep approaching this 
subject due to its potential to ignite a fire that would send a 
"backdraft" with potentially devastating consequences. I would 
love to believe in the relevance of focoist ideology. I want to 
believe in the focoist ideology espoused by Comrade George 
Jackson. I want to approve wholeheartedly with the Tupac Amaru's 
demonstration in the Japanese Embassy of Peru. I guess in some 
ways I do. Certainly comrade George's "line" was downright 
"righteous" and I'm impressed by Tupac Amaru's "line" as well. 
HOWEVER, we part ways with the tactic and strategy, at least I 
cannot believe in it without accepting the fact that their 
ideology in tactic and strategy would be a suicidal attempt at 
[combating] the imperialists. I would not have said this last year 
but follow me and see why I do.

We begin by analyzing the oppressor in a forthright and honest 
manner. Amerika presently holds the most effective technological 
and conventional fighting force in the world (albeit China has the 
larger amount of soldiers). This alone must give room for pause at 
least in analyzing military strategy and possibility of 
victory/defeat. I do not claim their force invincible, they're 
not, but that goes on the subject of tactic and strategy that I 
will later discuss. We must also take into consideration the 
overwhelming support the govermnet (Amerika) receives by its Labor 
Aristocracy (L.A.) which is willing to go "all out" for their 
settler Amerikan interests.

A realistic theory (though farfetched) of a North Amerikan 
Revolution (Armed) via an Internal anti-imperialist "army," could 
only be fathomed if the "Labor Aristocracy" would forgo their 
support and the privileges received by the settler society 
(Amerika) and join the revolutionary initiative of the people. 
This, coupled with a majority of "National Bourgeoisie" alliance 
would be a viable format for North American Armed Revolution 
without the aid of international comrades. But it is unrealistic 
for the white labor force (aka LA) as a majority to submit to "the 
government," without a dictatorship of the people, Marx's 
"Bourgeoisie within the revolutionists" would rise and perhaps at 
best case scenario we would face capitalism under socialist guise 
as we presently find the situation in China.

Mao said: "The question of China's cities and countryside today is 
qualitatively different from that of the cities and the 
countryside in capitalist countries abroad. It is impossible to 
conceive of a protracted guerilla war carried on by peasants in 
the countryside against the cities in a country such as England, 
America, France..."(2)

Thought not exactly peasants we are whom Mao speaks of in North 
America. In our most imaginative and optimistic [attempt], we 
would under present standards receive a crushing defeat from the 
imperialists. I often dreamt about getting or organizing 10 cells 
of 20 men to do major damage to certain institutions and if one 
could survive infiltration, hell perhaps it wouldn't be 
impossible. (I saw this as possible because there was a time when 
I was a major leader in the ALKQN). But military analysis brings 
forth the jarring truth that such a "stunt" would actually worsen 
the possibilities of revolution. Why? Simply because though we 
could deliver (at our most optimistic) one multi-missioned 
offensive, the backlash of such an offensive would effectively 
cripple whatever preparations the entire revolutionary initiative 
has invested in. We aren't ready!!! .... Yet!

Just dealing with "Martial Law" would be overwhelming never mind 
whatever other offensives Amerika would have planned... The goal 
of a few revolutionary cells would be cancelled by such focoist 
actions!... The long term and short term effects of fighting the 
oppressor while unprepared is destructive to the steadily growing 
movement of anti-imperialism. ...and frankly in my eyes anti-
revolutionary. The focoist idealism in present internal colonized 
comrades, particularly the transforming organizations such as the 
ALKQN, Bloods, Five Percenters and comrades like myself in "the 
belly of the beast" is emotion based ... anger ... wanting to 
attack for the sake of revenge against the oppressor without 
thinking of the waste of good comrades and/or the consequences of 
such actions. The correct revolutionary bases his actions on the 
science of revolutionary practice and is not emotion-led to rash 
decisions.

The words of Lin Biao: "If they are to defeat a formidable enemy, 
revolutionary armed forces should not fight with reckless 
disregard for the consequences when there is a great disparity 
between their own strength and the enemy's. If they do, they will 
suffer serious losses and bring heavy setbacks to the 
revolution."(3)

Prisoners are famed for quoting The Art of War, however even in 
the logic of the Masters of Martial Arts the words are repeated:

"...Preparedness is the greatest task of the nation. A small 
mistake can make a huge difference. When the force of momentum by 
soldiers are killed and generals are captured can move with sudden 
rapidity, should we not be wary?"(4)

The need for revolution to be adventurous NOW poisons the minds of 
comrades whom otherwise would make viable revolutionaries. The 
bottom line is that, at present, the job isn't "armed struggle for 
revolution." This means certain components that are of immense 
importance need to be established before Armed  Revolution becomes 
a reality

MC5 explains it clearly:  "The failure to carry out repetitive 
tasks necessary for the revolution is an example of liberalism. 
This kind of liberal likes to fight in big glorious battles that 
can be won close to 100% of the time if the effort is applied."(5)

Prisoners often quote Machiavelli, Niccolo, which I feel is an 
error since his philosophy embodies the essence of imperialism, 
nevertheless if getting through to comrades as to my point is 
necessary then what the f***, I'll go there. 

Listen to what HE says: "He who does not lay his foundation 
beforehand may by great abilities do so afterwards although with 
great trouble to the architect and danger to the building."(6) 
Those that bomb buildings and correct political figures in an 
unprepared stage of revolution endanger potential resources for 
those whom "Build to Win". Such are not to be considered comrades 
whom have traveled under the science of "revolutionary practice."

I wouldn't turn my back on focoists with the M-L-M philosophy but 
I ask, plead, for comrades to study revolution before setting 
about a focoist course, for having studied through the eyes of 
revolutionary practice you would find focoism to be deficient. 
[MIM adds:  If a person is advocating focoism, we consider that 
person to have some significant disagreements with Marxism-
Leninism-Maoism.]

Before I go on, I want to clarify that I do not object to armed 
struggle for survival or self-preservation. For instance when it 
comes to the demise of comrades in the movement and those who 
would see them dead, who do you think I will choose? No Duh! In 
prison "Blue murder" is committed every day (Blue Murders are pigs 
whom procure, incite, hire, set-up, or actually kill a prisoner 
via any one of these avenues.) I differentiate between armed 
struggle for survival and armed struggle for revolution. I am 
anti-focoist not pro-pacifist. In prison such deadly situations 
are virtually unavoidable. It ain't the streets where you can just 
retreat.

Two questions are left to be answered. After expressing in detail 
the pitfalls of focoism we are left with the following: if picking 
up the gun is not our designed present tactic then what do we do 
now? Second question: when is the right time for armed 
revolutionary struggle?

Victorious armed revolution will be possible when the oppressors 
are weak in the Amerikan imperialist state. The following quote is 
by a Weatherman focoist. Like MIM, I find his quote helpful to my 
point. The irony does not escape me. He says:   "Witnessing state 
power in the United States will occur as a result of the military 
forces over-extending themselves around the world and being 
defeated piecemeal; struggle within the United States will be a 
vital part of this process but when the revolution triumphs in 
theUnited States it will have to be made by the people of the 
whole world."(7)

This quote essentially explains two points I agree with. #1 that 
for a successful offensive against amerika to occur, its armed 
forces must be over-extended and #2 that revolution is an 
international struggle by the people. I agree that submission by 
the labor aristocracy will not come willingly. Therefore an 
occupying fighting internal force is non-negotiable for the near 
future. We count on our international comrades to support armed 
revolution when the time comes. Consider the revolutionary as a 
world citizen. Conditions will furthermore be favorable when 
popular opinion is on our side.

Having said that, let me proceed to answer the question of what do 
we do now with the following quote: "The major strategic stages as 
seen in history so far crystallized in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism 
[MLM] (principally Maoism) take the following form in North 
Amerika: 1. NOW: Create public opinion and independent 
institutions of the people to prepare to seize power. 2. After an 
accumulation of power in the first stage, the second stage is a 
qualitative leap characterized by armed struggle for state power. 
3. New democracy is an abbreviated stage relative to that in Third 
World countries. This stage includes dictatorship of the oppressed 
nations over the oppressor nation. 4. Individual dictatorships of 
the proletariat within the oppressed nations; joint dictatorship 
of the international proletariat over the euro-amerikan nation.(8)

The first stage of that quote is relative to this article the 
others I put in for more information. As yet we do not obtain the 
public opinion in majority, however, we steadily grow to it at 
amazing speed. The quote was written in 1995 and four years later 
I see a marked increase in the growth of anti-imperialism. The 
independent institutions however need more effort placed upon it 
and this is fairly known by all. This means that armed revolution 
cannot be a serious question until the preparations in the first 
stage are realized -- at least that's what history teaches us.

Certainly for Lumpen Proleatarian prisoners this is not the most 
exciting stage. But if you joined the revolutionary initiative for 
adventure, revenge, or emotion-based actions, then you've joined 
for the wrong reasons. This ain't no "be all you can be" 
adventure. This shit is real and every stage is essential to 
assure success. What is unknown shall be known through practice. 
Failures come but sticking to the aforementioned agenda will bring 
about victory. I close this dialogue inviting all comrades to a 
bout of debate and may the truth guide our path.

Write to Comrade Lord Grim c/o MIM. Para mis companeros y 
companeras de la raza y diferentes organizaciones anti-
imperialistas les exhorto que me escriben para montar un dialogo 
donde la verdad nos guiara. Latinos unidos!! Del proletario viene 
la revolucion!!! Send S.A.S.E. (self addressed stamped envelope).

Build to win,

Comrade Grim, INTIP CORI

Notes: 1. What is MIM?, p.11. 2. Stuart R. Schram, ed. The 
Political Thought of Mao Tse Tung, Praeger; New York, 1969, p.288. 
3. K. Fan, "Long live the victory of peoples war", Mao tse Tung 
and Lin Biao, NY Anchor Press. 4. Zhuge Liang and Liu Ji, 
Mastering the Art of War. Chapter: "Way of the General" 5. MIM 
Theory 7, p.55. 6. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, p.53. 7. What 
is MIM, p.11. 8. MIM Theory 7, p.16.

MIM adds: We have a few things to add to this essay. First on the 
distinction between line, strategy and tactics, we would say that 
the failures in strategy and tactics by the Weathermen, George 
Jackson, and the Tupac Amaru are based in their incorrect line. 
Tactics can change from situation to situation, while strategy is 
a more long-term plan that will change based on historical stage. 
Both are based on political line. This is why MIM says that the 
focoists arrive at the incorrect strategy because of their wrong 
line. The failures of this line and strategy are detailed very 
well in this essay.

At the same time, we would not look favorably on the Tupac Amaru's 
line because we know their history working with the imperialist-
puppet governments in Peru and objectively aiding 
counterrevolutionary forces in spite of their words to the 
contrary. The Communist Party of Peru has demonstrated itself as 
the vanguard in Peru through its unwavering Protracted People's 
War and Marxist-Leninist-Maoist leadership.