This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.

This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
Maoist Internationalist Movement

India Communists bulletin board endorses MIM line

Earlier this week, the "India Communists" Internet bulletin discussion board announced its support for the MIM line. The banner across the top of indiacommunists.proboards61.com opposes Khruschev revisionism. Khruschev was the leader of the Soviet Union after Stalin. Khruschev's secret speech of 1956 denounced Stalin and signalled the movement to restore capitalism in the USSR.

MIM is only partially aware of the struggle that led indiacommunists to endorse the MIM line. There are always more twists and turns in any struggle.

As usual, MIM makes no claim regarding security of comrades who work at indiacommunists.proboards61.com. The enemy is very busy spying and spreading provocations. Comrades need to work together while taking into account the activities of British, U.$. and other intelligence agencies. We should not give out persynal information to someone just because he or she claims to support the MIM line. Comrades have the duty to protect themselves to the utmost.

MIM does not organize in India or any Third World country except for internal semi-colonies such as Boricua. At the same time, we do not stop Indians from organizing their own parties with their own lines if they can do it. One criticism of the old international party idea of the Comintern is that international parties may end up propping up leaders of no capability to stand for themselves. So we should try to unite without an international party.

One positive development on indiacommunists' bulletin board is that in addition to fighting revisionism, there was also an attempt from the beginning to figure out what pseudo-feminism is. It shows that the comrades there are going to treat the question of feminism the same way they treat the question of revisionism and struggle over what is advance and what really is not. Too many communists think they can just avoid controversy over the question with some vague words. The India Communists board is an exception.

The action of the "India Communists" forum comes at a difficult moment for the international communist movement. A phony organization of Maoists has strangely taken to opposing Iran's nuclear energy program and timed demonstrations on International Wimmin's Day to coincide with announcements of support by the U.S. State Department. The moves make sense only in terms of Bush's internal crackdown on intelligence assets, in which they must serve the president more openly and loyally or face purge--pressure that people all across the U.S. Government from the CIA to the State Department in particular have complained about.

If left unrebutted, these phonies can lead those with false consciousness into Khruschevism, a conciliation with u.$. imperialism in alleged exchange for social reforms in their home countries. The moves by the phony Maoists dovetail completely with the wing of the Democratic Party in favor with the real purists of the intelligence agencies, the agents' agent. In their story, Iraq is unwinnable and way too costly while Amerikans owe I$rael support in Lebanon.

At the same time, there is a group of conciliators seeking to straddle fences for the purposes of artificial unity. These conciliators take the petty- bourgeois line across-the-board. When it comes to Stalin, we have one conciliator writing that says we have to defend a spotless image of Stalin or none at all. This reflects that for the petty-bourgeoisie, "the revolution isn't worth it" unless it is perfect and costless. This was all known to Lenin and Mao who both remarked on the barren fanaticism of the petty-bourgeoisie.

On the question of Bush's attacks on Islam, the petty-bourgeoisie equates Islam, a religion, with a system of class rule called "imperialism." Their slogan, straight from the Trotskyists is "neither imperialism, nor Islam." This formulation again sidesteps the class and national issues involved in why we owe internationalist solidarity to the Lebanese people for example, despite their being mostly Islamic. The question should not be posed as "neither imperialism, nor Islam," but "neither U.$. imperialism nor I$raeli."

At root of all these conciliator views is a directly petty-bourgeois outlook on the class structure of the imperialist countries. The conciliators say that there should be unity among those supporting the Cultural Revolution and opposing Khruschev revisionism. By this means, they seek to smuggle the bourgeoisie into the ranks of the scientific communists under a red banner.

Yet it is no longer a secret that the Soviet revisionists catered their politics to appease the Western petty-bourgeoisie instead of the aspirations of the Peoples' Wars. This appeasement of the Western petty-bourgeoisie had major assistance from the imperialist country parties who provided no class basis for the Soviets not to appeal to their so-called workers. Most of the world's bourgeoisie is in fact misnamed Western "workers" by the revisionists. Not surprisingly, by taking into account these "workers," the Soviets and others found themselves confounded and ended up tailoring bourgeois appeals to bourgeois people. The role of the imperialist country parties was so sinister that we cannot rule out that some Soviet leaders were not simply duped into missing most of the world's bourgeoisie. Conducting class struggle without knowing where most of the bourgeoisie is is of course frustrating in the short-run and impossible in the long-run.

Gorbachev's public opinion poll ratings in the united $tates went sky high while the red flag was trampled on the ground and even the white flag of the social-imperialist USSR fell to the ground. Once the decision by Khruschev to cater to the Western petty-bourgeoisie with "peaceful coexistence" came about, the rest was inevitable. It is but little distance from there to assuaging Phyllis Chesler by creating an image for the Western petty-bourgeoisie of a communist movement that opposes the "routine crime" of not letting wimmin wear bikinis in Afghanistan.

Likewise, the betrayal of Stalin in Russia had one set of roots, but it had another set of roots in the communist parties of the West. Eurocommunism arose easily and in conjunction with Khruschev revisionism because of confusion regarding parasitism and the role of imperialism.

This month, the anti-war movement managed to purge Joe Lieberman from the Democratic Party. In his place came war-monger Lamont in favor of all-out action against the Lebanese but opposed to the Iraq War. Nonetheless, within their reformist logic, we see what the Democratic Party wing of the anti-war movement meant by this purge. It was a signal that the movement opposing the Iraq War means business and all political activists and politicians better take notice.

Likewise, in the international communist movement, we need a signal that the communists must focus their thoughts on opposing the imperialist wars and bringing solidarity to the Third World people waging armed struggle against imperialism. MIM is sending that signal now: we have no fraternal relations with any alleged Maoist organization that fails to make a public break with the distribution center for the CIA known as the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). Sectarianism is not breaking with a handful of state assets and scores of zombies. Sectarianism is dividing Iran with sexual liberalism and opposition to Iranian nationalism and preparing the division of Lebanese people in combat with imperialism just because their leaders are Muslim. That is the real sectarianism attempting to divide millions of people.