Wednesday, November 14, 2012

against New Sintesis of Bob Avakian "We need to advance further in our goal of building a communist international of a new type, and unite with all of the genuine Maoist forces the world over in this process...

Rishi Raj Baral
(Revolutionary Communist Party (America) has publicized a document entitled `Letter to participating Parties and Organizations of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement'. The Next Front had got this document already through mail and it was under study within our team. This document advocates the meaning and significance of New Synthesis by Comrade Bov Avakian- Chairman of RCP (America).
New Synthesis is the short and symbolic name of the document -'Communism: The Beginning of a New Stage : A Manifesto from the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA,' which was published in Revolution- a mouth organ of RCP(America) in 2008. Up to now it has produced lot of debates and discussions among the parties participating the RIM and other Maoist organizations and Marxist intellectuals outside the RIM. There are a lot of writings for and against this document. Here we are not going to point out the list of those parties, organizations and persons, who are for and against New Synthesis. The document `Letter to participating ..' itself has mentioned the name and comments of those parties, who disagree with the concept of New Synthesis. But, as we know, outside the RIM participating parties and organizations, there are other Maoist parties, organizations and a large number of Marxist intellectuals, who disagree with this document. In this current juncture we can't avoid the role of these organisations and intellectuals, who are actively participating in the Maoist Movement. In fact, New Synthesis should not be the matter of concern only for those participating organisations and the parties of the RIM.
Yes, we agree. Things have changed. Now we are in the second decade of 21st century. We have the history of Peru and Nepal. We have no lack of materials to learn positively and negatively from the Maoist Movement, specially from the People's War of Peru and Nepal. We must review the history of Peru and Nepal with dialectical point of view. We have also the revolutionary history of India. We know the oppressed People of India are fighting against the Indian fascist regime raising the flag of CPI(Maoist). Instead of to waste time in worthless argument and throwing stones to each other, it is necessary to build a strong Proletariat Solidarity to advance the People's War of India in its height. In this regard, we always appreciate the work of PCM-Italy. We all know at present, building a New Revolutionary International the role of CPI(Maoist) will be decisive. And it is natural to be so.
We must start our journey from the new point. To advance the Proletariat Movement in the new direction and to achieve our goal, we must have new debate, discussions and new synthesis. The beginning of RCP-America is praiseworthy. But it does not mean that new stage has begun and time has come to go beyond Mao and Maoism.
What is New Synthesis? Does this document enable to understand international Communist Movement? Does it enrich Marxism-Leninism-Maoism? Or it is just the reinterpretation of MLM? Or it is a document covered with intellectuality and jargon? These are the questions to be answered. In New Synthesis there are some notable assessments to appreciate- particularly the analytical survey of Peruvian and Nepalese Maoist Movement and the issue of K. Venu.
Yes, Communism: The Beginning of a New Stage : A Manifesto from the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, is an analytical document and no doubt, Comrade Bov Avakian is a leader of creative mind. He has deep knowledge on the theoretical aspect of MLM.. But New Synthesis does not generate sufficient rational ground to declare as `new synthesis'. While reading the whole document we are unable to find out the answer: what is new in New Synthesis ? Indeed, after gone through the whole document, it is hard to ascertain and identify that the `new stage' has begun, and Comrade Avakian has discovered a new way out to advance the Proletarian Revolution. In fact, New Synthesis is the analytical survey of the Maoist Movement of the past decades.
We have comments from Maoist Party Afganistan to PCM Italy. We have comments from `The Workers Dreadnought' to CPI (Naxlbari), We have comments from Mike Ely to Joseph Ball . We have comments from Raymond Lotta to Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe of Ceylon Communist Party( Maoist) . I would like to cite some words from Joseph Ball's article:
Bob Avakian's works such as `Democracy Can't we do Better That?' and its sequel are important contributions to revolutionary thinking. The debate between the Revolutionary Communist Party (USA) and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is of utmost importance. But when we study the `New Synthesis' and try to ascertain what it is here that is meant to `save' the communist movement we can only scratch our heads in puzzlement.
We might have differences with Joseph Ball in various issues, but above mentioned text is not irrational and irrelevant. No one can deny this.
What the Nepalese Maoists have made their opinion on this document? Do they have made any official opinion on this? It is interesting and surprising too. In the 6th extended meeting of UCPN(Maoist), Prachand had declared- RCP (America) as the party directed by American regime and Comrade Bov Avakian as the agent of CIA. Nothing to say about Prachand and his Party UCPN(Maoist). Now they are busy throwing chairs ( a funny scene of 7th extended meeting of UCPN) on each other. We all know Prachand and Baburam have turned themselves into the real agent of American imperialism and Indian expansionism.
Now we have another Maoist party CPN-Maoist. But it is the matter of surprise that the leaders of this party also have not shown deep concern on ICM, particularly on New Synthesis. To be very frank, firstly, I would like to mention that most of the CC members of the CPN-Maoist have not gone through this New Synthesis and the `Letter to participating Parties…'. Secondly, most of the senior leaders of CPN-Maoist look exhausted and they are not enthusiastic to study new documents and materials. They want readymade answer in `yes or no'. Perhaps they don't have enough time to study. And thirdly, Bov Avakian's writing is very vague and complicated like him.
But we think these are not the problems to make opinion on New Synthesis. The main problem is the determination to come out with bold and concrete decision. CPN- Maoist has reorganized the International Department and there are the members who have more or less knowledge in ICM as well as New Synthesis. Albeit, CPN-Maoist has not come out in any official decision. But as we know, most of the members of the party CC and the members of International Department, who have gone through New Synthesis are not agree with RCP's conclusion.
We always respect and appreciate the contribution done by Comrade Avakian in the past. Comrade Indra Mohan Sigdel `Basant' in an article entitled-'The International Communist Movement and Nepalese Revolution' has appreciated the role of Comrade Bov Avakian, played to develop the revolution in Nepal. As he has mentioned:
However, along with unity our party had serious differences with RIM parties including RCP on various ideological and political issues and we have now too. Particularly, there are problems with the RCP on the question of understanding the dialectics between theory and practice. Among others, our party does not agree with the one-sided emphasis they lay on the development of theory. In spite of this dissension, it will be a blunder to minimise the positive role the RIM and RCP played to develop the revolution in Nepal.
Yes, Comrade Basant is quite right. But it is not only the question of Nepal, we can't deny the role of Comrade Bov Avakian played in the International Maoist Movement after the death of Comrade Mao. After the death of Comrade Mao, the work of RCP(America) to bring together all revolutionary parties and organizations, was very important. RCP (America) has the merit of this successful work, which led in 1984 to the International Conference that founded the RIM on the basis of its Declaration. New foundation was laid down in the initiation of RCP(America). We always admire RCP(America) and Comrade Bov Avakian for this utmost contribution. But it does not mean that we are forced to support New Synthesis.
We welcome `Letter to participating Parties and Organizations of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement' But we are not agree with the conclusion of New Synthesis. What is new in New Synthesis, is hard to understand and to follow. In fact, what New Synthesis wants to convey us is not clear. The basis is not sufficient and does not create any rational ground for the `new stage', that going beyond Mao and Maoism. It is the matter to note that, all those who are advocating the significance of `social practice' are not pragmatists, empiricists, instrumentalists, nationalists and so on. Why the Comrades of RCP (America) are so aggressive in `social practice', it is hard to understand. Their tendency to limit Marxism into the narrow boundary of intellectual activity, has worried us.
It is true, New Synthesis has produced a lot of questions. But we must be clear that Comrade Bov Avakian is not a renegade and RCP (America) is not a `counter revolutionary' party. Basically we appreciate the spirit and essence of the document of Maoist Communist Party of Italy entitled-'Intervention by PCM-Italy at the Hamburg Conference.' And we also appreciate the main spirit of the Resolution by the Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan; Communist Party of India (M-L) [Naxalbari] and Maoist Communist Party–Italy, released on May 1st, 2012. But we the members of Revolutionary Cultural-Intellectual Front Nepal disagree with the following conclusion -mentioned in that press statement.
To build this new international organization we must break with revisionism in all its aspects and particularly with those that have led to the current crisis and collapse of the RIM, namely the post-MLM `new synthesis' of Bob Avakian in the Revolutionary Communist Party,US and the revisionist line established by Prachanda/Bhattarai in the UCPN(M).
No doubt, UCPN(Maoist) led by Prachand-Baburam has damaged the world proletariat revolution. They are against Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and they have betrayed the Nepalese revolution. They are the real renegades of 21st century. But we can't place and address Comrade Avakian and RCP–America like this. We think this is a hasty and prejudiced conclusion. We are not agree with the conclusion of New synthesis. But we can't place Comrade Bov Avakian and RCP(America) with Prachand-Baburam and their Petofi Club.
We must have new synthesis to build the New Revolutionary International. We know RIM is an embryonic centre to unite the genuine Maoists and communists and a step towards a genuine Communist International. For this, first of all we have to come out from the tunnel, that we have made in our territory. New forces are emerging in the Maoist Movement and we can't avoid them to participate. For the new synthesis we need more and more participation and discussions from the new point. Today we need a further step that should draw on the positive and negative lessons of our Movement. We have left behind the positive and negative history and now we have to complete the new course to move ahead.
I would like to remind the press statement released by CoRim on the occasion of May Day 2005. And it was posted also in on May1, 2005. It states:
We need to advance further in our goal of building a communist international of a new type, and unite with all of the genuine Maoist forces the world over in this process, as well as reaching out to revolutionary activists who are yet to be won to the liberating truth of communist ideology.
We must think over this statement sincerely. New synthesis should not be the demarcation and certificate that defines the revolutionary and non revolutionary line. It should not be the great wall for building the Communist International of new type. It should be the proposal to study, not the final decision. It means we are not minimizing the question of ideology and the significance two line struggle. There must be fierce two line struggle within Maoist Movement. But debate for debate and prejudiced attitude must be abandoned. This type of attitude does not enable to achieve our goal.
Yes, we need new synthesis to build a new Revolutionary International. And we have to follow Comrade Mao's following statement: Where do correct ideas come from? Do they drop from the skies? No. Are they innate in the mind? No. They come from social practice, and from it alone; they come from three kinds of social practice, the struggle for production, the class struggle and scientific experiment.
Let us move ahead. Debate and discussions are not prohibited.

No comments:

Post a Comment