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

Party quality and being swamped with spies

January 30 2008

The fake "Russian Maoist Party" ("RMP") has sprung back to life, by issuing a short document about us more than a year after we broke with them over Iran and other matters. It seems that RMP now says that for RCP=CIA to demonstrate against Iran on International Wimmin's Day 2006 was wrong according to "RMP," but opposing "both" the Islamic regime of Iran and U.$. imperialism is correct by various Liberals who are Iranians in or outside Iran. RMP goes so far as to say that criticisms of RCP=CIA are only allegorical, in plain contradiction of the tip of the iceberg we have shown people.

People who cannot separate exploiter and exploited interests like at the RCP=CIA have no chance in keeping their heads above waters in serious political struggles. MIM has had to be overly generous in not giving all the details of CIA political direction of RCP=CIA.

At this very moment, MIM is still coming under white nationalist bourgeois spontaneous pressure from the RCP=CIA and its circles. The reason for this is that instead of listening to MIM on the need for purges, people who had no ability to resist bourgeois white nationalism stayed around the RCP=CIA. Some such as Mike Ely stayed around 30 years and never figured out what Trotskyism was--as other than a swear word. Because they stuck around for so long, they became involved in issues they would not have had they been purged and off to their social-democratic futures or a self-taught approach where the bar has been set. If no one sets the bar, no one can even speculate that they missed it! So that's a big difference between MIM's idea of struggle and the others' ideas about watering and hand-holding.

Ironically, the same people who try to argue that keeping Mike Ely or the like around that long benefitted the struggle also argue that they have to be careful about granting access to Bob Avakian's persyn. When RCP=CIA would hand-hold people and keep people around, those people get involved in discussing issues they have no capability in. It is the exact same question as tactical access to Avakian.

It is not the proletariat that has an interest in imperialist or petty-bourgeois political triangulation. It is state intelligence agencies that have an interest in having their hands here and there, and splitting the difference or being multi-faced as they go along.

The CIA swamps the U.$. communists by itself. Now, we are going to throw in Russian and other intelligence agencies, plus double agents and their alliances into the mix, and someone wants to tell MIM we are going to survive that without purges? That we can take Joe Blow welfare activist outnumbered by domestic and foreign spies and we are going to come out on top with that? Who is selling these lethal opiates to our intellectuals?

The RCP=CIA is particularly vulnerable because of its construction to serve the CIA internationally. Some of these Medicaid/Social-Security/ welfare oriented socialist parties have less appeal to the CIA. It is the creation of RIM or its equivalent where people have to be on top of struggles or the CIA is going to take over, with relative ease.

Currently, RCP=CIA circles are in a political bloc with the CP=U$A against MIM and they have been for decades. It is a white nationalist bloc. Had the RCP=CIA followed MIM's line on purges, some people there would stand a chance against pig questions, but instead, RCP=CIA glorifies the biographical struggle, as if Rosa Luxemburg were right about appropriate methods of struggle for the united $tates today.

Regarding Islam, again, MIM has already quoted from Lenin and the Comintern back in 1919, when stress between Turkey and England was in the air. Today, the conflict between Islamic peoples and imperialism is magnified well beyond when Lenin warned against taking up Liberal imperialist line on the veil. RCP=CIA is simply incapable of understanding what it concretely means when there is military struggle instead of just struggle to build a persynality cult. There's no transcript yet, but John McCain's Florida campaign comments with Lieberman on Saudi Arabia are exactly the RCP=CIA line.

We should also look at the difference in how Lenin treated Social- Revolutionaries and the monarchists. The imperialist tails talking about "terrorism" should recall that Lenin regarded the Social-Revolutionaries as the most worthy ally among all the other parties. He adopted their agrarian program in full and then amalgamated with a section of them. The reason is simple--the Social- Revolutionaries had roots among exploited and oppressed peoples. It was the same people who sent an assassin to shoot Lenin, but Lenin did not repent his class analysis with some pragmato-empiricist shit about his leadership being so important. We do not drop a class analysis because it fails one time. That is the sure method of having no theory, no direction, no principles and therefore open access to imperialist spy agencies to thwart proletarian upsurge.

Al Qaeda, Hezbollah etc. do have diplomatic strategies and public opinion support, so to dub them as "terrorist" only was always a mistake disorienting the anti-war movement. McCain vows to follow Osama Bin Laden with a posse "to the gates of hell," and the problem for the anti-war movement is that when Uncle $am starts talking about "dead-enders" or "terrorists" instead of liberation fighters, Uncle $am is trying to imply a situation where Osama Bin Laden does not have nine digit support. Sending the sheriff ain't going to work. Nor is it likely that even a million occupiers could do the trick for imperialism in the Islamic countries.

When the vanguard party keeps its head above water, it hammers the anti-war movement on the question of not allowing war in the guise of the terror question. Instead we have RCP=CIA catering to the most backward sections of whites, saying they need to "wake up" in exactly the same slogan the KKK uses in its opposition to the state.

It is useful to remember that in the end the Cadets and Mensheviks were no use to the Bolshevik Revolution, but a section of Social-Revolutionaries went the whole way into October. So even on that level of simplistic argument, what is being said against the fact of oppressed unity against imperialism is not Leninist.

Some others are going so far as to say that party leadership is so principal that they fear the Maoists would be swallowed up by the Taliban or Osama Bin Laden, if the Maoists do not cater to U.$. imperialism through triangulation tactics. First of all, to look inside the united $tates, in what way is the anti-war movement going to be "swallowed up" by Al Qaeda? This is a crude joke that should be in fact a marker of ultra-reactionary status, not the mark of a scientific communist concerned about the party. Likewise, in Afghanistan, why are these scum concerned about being swallowed up by the Taliban but not u.$. imperialism, even when U.$. imperialism has troops there? Only multi-faced state agencies can talk like that: Leninists have direction. The RCP=CIA has already been swallowed up by the Democrats and CIA, because its members do not have the capability to do otherwise yet, and in this time of movement ebb it is damn difficult to do otherwise in the imperialist countries.

"Oh, that's just those mean MIM people purging everyone!" There is nothing better than significant others from the environmentalist movement, but calling them party just so one can avoid being "mean" is stupid.

The RCP=CIA is catering to the type of white people who now know that Al Qaeda is promoting Malcolm X. Malcolm X studied the dictionary from front-to-back in prison. So if we find a dictionary in the backseat of a car, whiteys better call Homeland Security--that kind of whitey. It's equally stupid as saying Malcolm X is not in the party, so no united front with him. There are only two sides in struggle, never three. Mao never said three, and those pretending otherwise are simple sectarians or state agents interested in multi-faced politics.

At this time, when MIM is receiving threats on behalf of Russian intelligence-- threats saying that the only reason MIM knows people is so that they can betray MIM later with fabrications--MIM looks to the future and the dragons coming along now. The same stupid people 25 years ago in the RCP=CIA circles did realize that MIM was right about some of those struggles 25 years ago--just not fast enough. Now there are people in the tow of Gorbachev-lovers and the Democratic Party, because they are not quite yet ready to admit that they have been an impediment to MIM-led advance for decades.

Instead of setting a bar and having people cross and thus betting on the capable, people are still betting against the capable on behalf of multi-faced politics. The hand-holding recruiting strategy is connected to creating space for multi-faced politics and opening the party to ultra-democratic bourgeois spontaneous pressure "from below."

And this kind of thing is influencing radical people. Here is what Grace Lee Bogs said: "it's a question of whether we encourage the movement and unleash the movement of people from below or whether we try to run things from above, from the White House. And though I consider myself a feminist, I have to look at what Hillary stands for in terms of top-down leadership."(1)

OK, Grace Lee Boggs and Barack Obama have faith in whitey. Why do we need a Leninist party to have faith in whitey? Granted no faith in Hillary Clinton, and granted if Obama has the youth vote, then he is the candidate of change from below,(2) but why can't the so-called Leninists figure out it is time to say something different, that MIM was right all along that the lines of those other parties do not differ from the Democratic Party.

"The debate took place on a national holiday, Martin Luther King Day, and the last question for all three was why the great civil rights leader would back them, if he were alive today. Edwards emphasized his southern upbringing and his support for civil rights. Obama said he did not think King would endorse anyone, but he said change starts from the grassroots and that he would support that kind of change."(3)
It is Clinton and Obama supporters who have to worry that Martin Luther King day not be turned into "hate whitey day."(4) Seriously, some of the left-wing of parasitism people should go look at these discussions between Obama and Clinton supporters and figure out that what the RCP=CIA is saying is too mainstream to pull in any direction. The liberals are already saying what the RCP=CIA is saying and simultaneously they are not attending "Drive out the Bush regime" rallies in any proportion to the effort expended, a four digit quantity of people to the contrary as the pay-off for watering.

Let the people who want higher welfare payments or rah-rah activism within a five or six-digit range of imperialist country petty-bourgeoisie go to their non-Leninist futures. Purge every last one as lacking judgment. The masses have spoken in the nine digits for Osama Bin Laden; the real masses have acted with Hezbollah in Lebanon--tough shit on us Maoists. Had we not tolerated all these cracker utopians calling themselves "Marxist" all these decades we would have a better global image right now.

Notes:
1. http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/22/ive_never_had_this_much_hope
2. Another comment echoing Obama,
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/01/14/edwards-takes-sides-in-clinton-controversy/
3. http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-01-22-voa7.cfm
4. See the first comment http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/ravic/CGCZm