Preview from the new issue of the magazine TwoLinesStruggle - UNITE AROUND MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM!

 # UNITE AROUND MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM!
## OUR STANDPOINT CONCERNING THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FORUM
### OPEN LETTER TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT
###### Central Committee<br>Communist Party of Switzerland
###### *June 2026*

> […] it is necessary to create a united International Communist Forum [ICF] today capable of helping to lead the struggles of the proletariat in the capitalist and imperialist countries and in the countries oppressed by imperialism by mobilizing all anti-imperialist forces, the national liberation movements, and the advanced parts of the movements against war, fascism, reaction, repression, genocide, and territorial and environmental devastation. Today, it is necessary to pass through this stage of development, in order to advance towards the reconstruction of the international communist movement and a new Communist International.^[**Source:** *Against Imperialism, Imperialist War, Reaction, Fascism, and the Exploitation, Poverty, and Oppression of the Proletariat and the People! For People’s Democratic Revolutions and Proletarian-Socialist Revolutions in Every Country Throughout the World!* (1^st of May, 2026)]

The Communist Party of Switzerland [PCS-KPS] extends its warmest communist greetings and most profound proletarian-internationalist solidarity to all of the genuine communist parties and organizations that make up the international communist movement today.

This month marks the 40^th anniversary of the Day of Heroism — that is, the heroic uprising of the prisoners of war of the Communist Party of Peru [PCP] and the People's Guerrilla Army [EGP] led by it in the shining trenches of El Fronton, Lurigancho, and Callao on the 19^th of June, 1986, during the people’s war in Peru. It was the blood, sweat, and tears of these and other comrades, combatants, and other children of the Peruvian people that crystallized into the recognition of Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of the ideology of the international proletariat by the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement [RIM] in 1993, and we owe our very existence as an ideological current to these comrades.

Additionally, this year marks the 50^th anniversary of the death of Comrade Mao Zedong, the restoration of bourgeois rule in the People's Republic of China [PRC], and the attempted Shanghai Uprising to restore proletarian rule in China, which resulted in several years of heroic anti-revisionist armed struggle and gave the impetus to the reunification of the Maoist communist parties and organizations in the RIM.

It has also been 60 years since the beginning of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, which represented the largest mass mobilization in human history and the peak of the proletarian world revolution so far, during which Mao Zedong’s Thought developed further and reached the peak of Maoism — that is, the new, third, and higher stage of development of the ideology of the international revolutionary proletariat.

Furthermore, it has also been 70 years since the father of modern revisionism, N.S. Hrusev, denounced Comrade Stalin, restored bourgeois rule in the Union of Socialist Council Republics [USCR] — the world’s first socialist country founded by Comrade Lenin and defended by Comrade Stalin — unleashed a worldwide anti-communist witch hunt, and split the international communist movement for the first time in modern history, thus giving rise to the successive series of splits that have weakened the subjective forces of the proletarian world revolution to such a serious extent since then.

On this tremendous occasion, all communists the world over experience both great pride and profound sorrow. Today, there are no socialist countries anywhere in the world, the first great wave of the proletarian world revolution inaugurated by the Great November Socialist Revolution in Russia has come to an end, and the international communist movement has gone through yet another split since its dispersion that resulted from the collapse of the RIM over 15 years ago.

Under these circumstances, the international communist movement has been dealt yet another serious blow in India, where the people’s war is going through one of the most difficult moments in its entire history since the heroic Naxalbari Uprising of 1967. Moreover, with the relatively recent loss of Comrades Gonzalo and Jose Maria Sison, the international communist movement has been left without some of its veteran prominent leaders, who guided and advised it for decades since the loss of Comrade Mao Zedong 50 years ago. This is indeed an extremely grave situation, and the dispersed status of the communist parties and organizations around the world without an international centre or even a platform for discussion has only added to its gravity.

Nevertheless, at the same time, there are signs that the great ebb of the proletarian world revolution that has weakened us so much since the loss of the last remaining socialist countries in 1976-80 — including the general counter-revolutionary offensive launched by imperialism, reaction, and revisionism and opportunism the world over under the leadership of US imperialism aimed at sweeping away Marxism, the communist parties, socialism, and proletarian rule, as well as anything benefiting the proletariat in the ideological, economic, political, cultural, and military spheres — is beginning to recede.

US imperialism has suffered a tremendous defeat in its war of aggression against the Iranian nation.

Zionism has been humiliated at the hands of the heroic Palestinian, Lebanese, and Yemeni resistance movements.

Hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers lie dead in the quagmire of Ukraine.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] is breaking apart at the seems, with its Anglo-American and European component blocs increasingly going their own ways.

French imperialism has been kicked out of the majority of its former colonies in West Africa.

Japanese militarism is being hammered by the sustained protests of the peace-loving Japanese people.

Finally, the Western imperialist bloc is on the verge of a new cyclical crisis of capitalist overproduction under the conditions of globalized monopoly capitalism, with a rate of profit in free fall due to increasing automation and the gaping wound being covered with the thin bandage of financialization and the bubble economy. A crash like the one in 2008 or even worse — perhaps even the worst crisis in the history of the capitalist system — appears to be increasingly unavoidable.

In other words, the objective conditions for a new revolutionary upsurge throughout the world are maturing, especially in the Global South — where local and regional revolutionary upsurges have succeeded each other ever since the Arab Spring, from Nepal to Serbia, from the Philippines to Ecuador, from Ceylon to Kenya, and from Iran to Azania — but even in certain imperialist countries, where discontent and social decay are simmering just below the surface. A worldwide economic crisis and its mismanagement by the imperialists might be all that it takes for a revolutionary situation to reemerge in many countries of the Global North for the first time since 1968, the end of the Second World War, or even earlier.

There can be no doubt about it. The falling rate of profit, the capitalist destruction of the climate and the environment, and the increasing threat of an imperialist Third World War — among countless other factors — are pushing the world towards a new great wave of the proletarian world revolution, just as Comrade Gonzalo predicted in his speech in 1992. He said:

> **Finally, listen to this. We are witnessing Maoism marching relentlessly forward around the world in its task of leading the new great wave of the proletarian world revolution.** […] **What is happening in the world? What do we need? We need Maoism to be embodied, and this is happening. We need Maoism to create new communist parties to lead this next great wave of the proletarian world revolution that is on the horizon.**^[**Source:** Gonzalo: *The Strategic Turn Is Nothing But a Bend in the Road* (24^th of September, 1992)]

We cannot predict when or where this new great wave will break out; we can only say that the tendency towards it is accelerating, and that it will eventually arrive. In the words of Comrade Mao Zedong:

> […] **Marxists are not fortune tellers. They should and indeed can only indicate the general direction of future developments and changes, and they should not and indeed cannot fix the day and hour in a mechanical way. However, when I say that there will soon be a revolutionary upsurge in China, I am emphatically not speaking of something that, in the words of some people, ‹is possibly coming› — that is, something illusory, unattainable, and devoid of significance for action. No, it is like a ship far out at sea, the masthead of which can already be seen from the shore; like the morning sun in the east, the shimmering rays of which are already visible from a high mountaintop; or like a child about to be born moving restlessly in the womb.**^[**Source:** Mao Zedong: *A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire* (5^th of January, 1930)]

However, when this new great wave of the proletarian world revolution does arrive, in order for it to not be wasted, as so many local and regional revolutionary upswings have been wasted before, we need to fulfil the other part of Comrade Gonzalo’s prediction. Objective conditions for a revolution alone are not enough; objective conditions alone can at most produce political revolutions — today often known as colour revolutions, in which one faction of the ruling class replaces another — but never social revolutions. Social revolutions are the result of revolutionary objective conditions being correctly and appropriately handled by the subjective forces of the revolution — that is, the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communist parties.

In order to meet this new great wave of the proletarian world revolution — in order to transform it from possibility into reality — we must constitute, reconstitute, and build up Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communist parties in all countries of the world. These parties must neither be open debate clubs nor secret societies — rather, they must be real and vigorous vanguard detachments of the international revolutionary proletariat in each country that are actually integrated with the masses of the working and oppressed people and actually know how to utilize all possible forms of revolutionary struggle, including armed struggle. The creation of such communist parties is the other aspect of Comrade Gonzalo’s prediction, and without the fulfilment of this task, the other part of his prediction will remain a dead letter.

Moreover, in order to push forward this process of constitution, reconstitution, and construction of genuine communist parties based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in all countries, the international communist movement must overcome its present state of dispersion, which resulted from the collapse of the RIM, reckon with the fact that the movement has once again been split by the dogmatic revisionists through the formation of the so-called ‹International Communist League› [ICL], and soberly, energetically, and patiently work for its reunification in preparation for the second great wave of the proletarian world revolution that is on the horizon.

To put forward the standpoint of our Party concerning this struggle for the reunification of the international communist movement is the purpose of the present document. We hope that all comrades throughout the world will seriously study and discuss it before issuing their replies in a timely manner.

## 1. MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM IS THE IDEOLOGY OF THE INTERNATIONAL REVOLUTIONARY PROLETARIAT
Our Party holds that the only, scientific, and all-encompassing ideology of the international revolutionary proletariat is scientific communism, which today has reached the level of development of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the contributions to the inevitable fourth stage of development of this ideology by various prominent leaders of the international revolutionary proletariat, including Comrade Gonzalo.

However, we understand that the international communist movement goes through a process of uneven development in ideological, political, organizational, and other terms. For example, our Party is much less developed politically and organizationally than other communist parties and organizations around the world, and it would not be our place to tell them what to think, say, or do. While we are willing to fight for our views, and will certainly defend them against any and all attacks, we understand that the correctness or incorrectness of these views can only be determined by revolutionary practice, and that the recognition of these views by our comrades in other countries can only take place on that basis.

Hence, we hold that <u>the ideological basis of unity of the international communist movement today is purely and simply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism</u>, since that is the relative degree of unity that has been attained through the theoretical and practical work of the various communist parties and organizations belonging to our movement.

It is otherwise with the sectarians of the so-called ‹ICL›. They have attempted to impose their own specific conception of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism on the international communist movement, and in the course of this attempt, they have formed a separate organization that it is impossible for other communist parties and organizations to join, given the present difference in their basis of unity — not to mention the fact that the ‹ICL› is a revisionist organization. Hence, the formation of this organization actually split the international communist movement into two separate and mutually opposed camps.

While we maintain our own basis of unity as a communist party, we also see ourselves as a detachment of the international revolutionary proletariat and a component part of the international communist movement, the unity of which we hold extremely dear. Therefore, we want to contribute to the struggle for the reunification of this movement in a correct and appropriate way, and it would be deeply inappropriate to act as the dogmatic revisionists have done. Hence, our only possible starting point in waging this struggle must be the already existing relative basis of unity of our movement, which is simply and purely Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

## 2. THE ADOPTION OF MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM BY THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN 1993 MARKED THE FUNDAMENTAL COMPLETION OF THE CAMPAIGN FOR MAOISM LAUNCHED BY THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism was first taken up by the PCP led by Comrade Gonzalo in the early 1980s as a result of their experience during the initiation of the people’s war in that country. On the basis of this experience, and on the basis of earlier drafts dating back to 1981, Comrade Gonzalo wrote a text in 1988, entitled *On Marxism-Leninism-Maoism*, which was adopted as a part of the basis of unity of the PCP at its First National Congress in 1988-89. Our Party holds that this document contains the most correct definition of Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of development of Marxism, and that it laid the foundation for the great work of synthesizing the content of Maoism out of the experience of the Chinese revolution and Mao Zedong’s Thought.

After adopting Maoism, the PCP launched an international campaign aimed at putting Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in command and guidance of the proletarian world revolution. The dogmatic revisionists of the ‹ICL› claim that this campaign is still ongoing, because very few people outside of their ranks have accepted Comrade Gonzalo’s definition of Maoism provided in 1988 to the letter. However, our Party is of a different opinion.

First of all, how can it be possible that Maoism has still not been accepted by the international communist movement, as the dogmatic revisionists claim, even though the denomination of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism has been adopted by practically all genuine communist parties and organizations in the world, with only very few exceptions?

Secondly, and much more importantly, the vast majority of the genuine communist parties and organizations in the world have actually accepted the definition and content of Maoism outlined by Comrade Gonzalo in his 1988 work, because that definition and content were popularized in the 1993 declaration of the RIM, entitled *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!*, only in a different form than the original document.

While we were obviously not around to witness the formation, existence, and collapse of the RIM, and therefore do not know about all of the specific details concerning that process of development, we have nevertheless conducted an analysis of it on the basis of the facts available to us — and especially our own personal experience with the dogmatic revisionists, which is not generally shared in the international communist movement. We will leave the elaboration of the specific details of the history of the RIM and the synthesis of its experience to comrades who are more knowledgeable on the subject than we are.

From our standpoint, the history of the RIM appears as a heroic undertaking aimed at regrouping the genuine communist forces around the world following the catastrophic defeat of the first great wave of the proletarian world revolution and three devastating splits in the international communist movement. After the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat in China in 1976, the remaining socialist countries fell one after the other in rapid succession. By the year 1980, no socialist countries remained in the world. This fundamentally marked the end of the first great wave of the proletarian world revolution, which had been launched by the Russian November Revolution in 1917.

In connection with the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat in China, a split occurred in the international communist movement between the adherents of Deng Xiaoping, on the one hand, and the adherents of Mao Zedong and Enver Hoxha, on the other hand. Then, when the dictatorship of the proletariat in Albania deteriorated and turned into its opposite in 1978, the Hoxhaites left the international communist movement. These two splits prompted a number of communist parties and organizations around the world to convene the First International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Political Parties and Organizations in 1980, which prepared the ground for the formation of the RIM. However, when it came to actually founding a new international organization of the revolutionary proletariat, another split occurred, and a faction of pseudo-Maoists (including the Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany [MLPD], among others) left the international communist movement as well. Thus, when the RIM was constituted by the Second International Conference in 1984, it represented a greatly diminished international communist movement in comparison with the past.

Nevertheless, although greatly diminished in terms of numbers, the international communist movement was vigorous and militant. Pushed forward by the successive victories of the people’s war in Peru, which had been launched in 1980, the RIM and its participating parties and organizations advanced in answering the necessities of the day, confronting the general counter-revolutionary offensive, and uniting around Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of the ideology of the international revolutionary proletariat. The 1993 statement of the RIM, *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!*, represented the peak of its process of development. To this day, this statement constitutes the existing basis of unity of the international communist movement.

The declaration pointed out:

> […] In the past nine years, our Movement has been engaged in a long, rich, and thoroughgoing discussion and struggle, in order to more fully grasp Mao Zedong’s further development of Marxism. During this same period, the political parties and organizations of our Movement and the RIM in its entirety have been engaged in revolutionary struggle against imperialism and reaction. The most important such struggle has been the advanced experience of the people’s war led by the PCP, which has succeeded in mobilizing the masses in their millions, sweeping away the state in many parts of the country, and establishing the political power of the workers and peasants in these areas. These theoretical and practical advances have enabled us to further deepen our grasp of the ideology of the proletariat and to take a far-reaching step on that basis — namely, the recognition of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of Marxism.

It added:

> Mao Zedong elaborated many theses on an entire series of vital questions facing the revolution. However, Maoism is not just the sum total of Mao’s great contributions; rather, it is the comprehensive and all-round further development of Marxism-Leninism to a new and higher stage. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is an integral unit; it is the ideology of the proletariat synthesized and developed further to new stages — from Marxism to Marxism-Leninism to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism — by Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin, and Mao Zedong on the basis of the experience of the proletariat and humankind in the class struggle, the struggle for production, and scientific experimentation. It is the invincible weapon that enables the proletariat to understand and change the world through revolution. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is a universally applicable, living, and scientific ideology, which is constantly developing further and being enriched through its application in making revolution, as well as through the advance of human knowledge generally. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is the enemy of all forms of revisionism and dogmatism. It is omnipotent because it is true.

Finally, it concluded:

> Every great milestone in the process of development of the ideology of the revolutionary proletariat has been met with bitter resistance and only achieved recognition through intense struggle and through its application in revolutionary practice. Today, the RIM declares that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism must be put in command and guidance of the world revolution.

While we are of the opinion that Comrade Gonzalo’s definition is more precise and correct, it is nevertheless the case that it was generally adopted by the international communist movement in the form of the 1993 declaration. Since then, even the communist parties and organizations outside of the RIM have approached this definition and generally adopted its content in both theory and practice. Hence, the only possible conclusion that we can draw today is that the campaign to put Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in command and guidance of the proletarian world revolution was fundamentally completed in 1993.

Obviously, there is still work to be done in this regard. Not everyone has the exact same understanding of Maoism, and we do need scientific clarity in order to uphold, defend, and apply our scientific ideology. There are also a few genuine communist parties today that have not yet accepted the denomination of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism due to their isolation from the international communist movement. Moreover, there are clearly three different currents within the international communist movement today — namely, those who completely accept Comrade Gonzalo’s definition, such as ourselves; those who accept its popularization by the RIM, such as its former members; and those who have their own definition influenced by the two former ones, such as the Communist Party of the Philippines [CPP] and others.

However, this only means that we need more unity and more principled struggle for the sake of achieving an even higher degree of unity, and absolutely not that we should split our movement over minor differences of opinion. Moreover, this struggle can only be carried through to the point of achieving a higher degree of unity <u>on the basis of practice</u>, and not through online debates largely conducted by organizations with no revolutionary experience, which is the case for the absolute majority of the members of the ‹ICL›.

In synthesis, the ideological basis of unity of the international communist movement today is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism pure and simple. This is the ideological basis on which the ICF that we need should be founded. As for the few genuine communist parties that have not yet adopted this denomination, a concerted effort should be made to unite with them and to fight in a principled way for them to accept it in preparation for the convocation of the Forum.

## 3. THE REVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES OF THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT LIVE ON AS THE RELATIVE BASIS OF UNITY OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT TODAY
In addition to having served as the vehicle for the fundamental acceptance of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism by the international communist movement, the RIM also united the majority of the genuine communist parties and organizations of the world for several decades and served as the vehicle through which they analysed their experience, synthesized their lessons, and waged struggles over their principles. In the course of such analysis, synthesis, and struggle, the RIM adopted a series of revolutionary principles that obtained the common acceptance of the genuine communist parties and organizations both inside and outside of the RIM, and to not take these principles into account would mean taking a step backward from the actually existing relative basis of unity of the international communist movement achieved by the RIM.

Our Party holds that the most important revolutionary principles of the RIM are as follows:

**1.** The «recognition of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of Marxism». «Today, there cannot be any Marxism-Leninism without Maoism. Indeed, to deny Maoism means denying Marxism-Leninism itself.» «We must uphold, defend, and mainly apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.»^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!* (26^th of December, 1993)]

**2.** The recognition of the universal validity of the military doctrine of the proletariat for «both kinds of countries — that is, both the countries dominated by imperialism and the imperialist citadels themselves — in accordance with the concrete conditions of each country»,^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *For a Century of People’s Wars!* (1^st of May, 2000)] the need to «launch revolutionary war wherever possible and stepping up preparations for it wherever the conditions for such revolutionary war are not yet mature»,^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)] and to make «the necessary ideological, political, and organizational preparations with this goal in mind and strive to launch the armed struggle for the conquest of power as soon as the conditions for it are mature».^[**Source:** First International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Political Parties and Organizations: *To the Marxist-Leninists, the Workers, and the Oppressed People of All Countries!* (Autumn 1980)]

**3.** The recognition of the fact that the «point of reference for elaborating a revolutionary strategy and revolutionary tactics in the colonial and semi-colonial (or neo-colonial) countries remains the theory developed by Mao Zedong during the long years of revolutionary war in China»,^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)] including the predominantly sub-contractor capitalist (or comprador-bureaucratic capitalist) oppressed countries, in which «a concrete analysis must» nevertheless «be conducted of these conditions, and appropriate conclusions concerning the road, tasks, nature, and alignment of class forces must be drawn».^[**Source:** First International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Political Parties and Organizations: *To the Marxist-Leninists, the Workers, and the Oppressed People of All Countries!* (Autumn 1980)]

**4.** The recognition of the fact that «the November Revolution […] remains the fundamental point of reference for […] strategy and tactics»^[**Source:** First International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Political Parties and Organizations: *To the Marxist-Leninists, the Workers, and the Oppressed People of All Countries!* (Autumn 1980)] in the imperialist countries, but that such strategy and tactics must nevertheless be situated within the framework of the «comprehensive military doctrine of people’s war».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *For a Century of People’s Wars!* (1^st of May, 2000)]

**5.** The recognition of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution as «the most advanced experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the revolutionization of society» and the fact that «only those who extend the recognition of the class struggle to the recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the recognition of the objective existence of classes, antagonistic class contradictions, the bourgeoisie within the party, and the continuation of the class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat throughout the entire historical period of socialism until the realization of communism are Marxists».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!* (26^th of December, 1993)]

**6.** The recognition of the fact that the «primary contradiction is the contradiction between imperialism and the oppressed nations»,^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *For a Century of People’s Wars!* (1^st of May, 2000)] that the «alliance between these two revolutionary currents» of «the proletarian-socialist revolution carried out by the proletariat and its allies in the imperialist citadels, on the one hand, and the national liberation or new-democratic revolution carried out by the nations subjugated by imperialism, on the other hand», «remains the cornerstone of revolutionary strategy in the era of imperialism».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

**7.** The recognition of the fact that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism «has taken shape and developed through a constant struggle against those who cut out its revolutionary heart or render it a stale and lifeless dogma» — that is, in the course of «fierce battles on the ideological front between Marxism, on the one hand, and revisionism and dogmatism, on the other hand» — and the fact that «dogmatic revisionism continues to be a bitter enemy of revolutionary Marxism».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

**8.** The recognition of the fact that, while «the RIM and other Maoist forces are the inheritors of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, and they must firmly base themselves on this heritage», «they must also dare to criticize its shortcomings» «on the basis of this heritage».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

**9.** The recognition of the existence of an unfortunate «situation without a socialist country» in the world today.^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

**10.** The recognition of the fact that the international communist movement must set itself the future objective of «the formation of a Communist International of a new type on the basis of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. The proletarian world revolution cannot advance to victory without forging such a weapon, because, as Mao Zedong taught us, either we all enter communism or none of us do»,^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!* (26^th of December, 1993)] but that this will only be possible as a result of «the evolution of a general line and a correct and viable organizational form conforming to the complex reality of the modern world and the challenges that it poses».^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

In synthesis, these revolutionary principles can be summed up as follows:

**1.** The recognition of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the ideology of the proletariat.

**2.** The recognition of the military doctrine of the proletariat.

**3.** The recognition of the road of encircling the cities from the countryside as the starting point for elaborating the strategy and tactics of the national-democratic revolution in the oppressed countries.

**4.** The recognition of the road of the November Revolution as the starting point for elaborating the strategy and tactics of the socialist revolution in the imperialist countries.

**5.** The recognition of the necessity of continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat in the form of proletarian cultural revolution.

**6.** The recognition of the proletarian world revolution as a process of socialist revolutions and national-democratic revolutions both led by the proletariat against imperialism and reaction.

**7.** The recognition of the necessity of the struggle against revisionism and dogmatic revisionism.

**8.** The recognition of the necessity of critically synthesizing lessons from the past positive and negative experiences of the proletarian world revolution, including the positive and negative experiences of the RIM itself.

**9.** The recognition of the non-existence of any socialist countries in the world today.

**10.** The recognition of the necessity of working for the reunification of the international communist movement and the elaboration of a general line for it through consultation and unanimity.

We understand that not all of the main political parties in the international communist movement today were participants in the RIM. Nevertheless, the acceptance of these revolutionary principles has attained a relative degree of unanimity among these political parties, both as a result of the positive external influence of the RIM and Marxist-Leninist-Maoist forces both inside and outside of it and as a result of their own practical experience. Hence, we believe that it should be possible to find common ground on these principles, which constitute the existing relative basis of unity between the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communist parties in the world today.

At the same time, the experience of the RIM was not entirely positive either, and while we have attempted to make a contribution to the synthesis of lessons from its positive experiences here, we must also emphasize that lessons still remain to be drawn from its negative experiences as well. In the words of the RIM itself:

> The synthesis of our heritage is a collective responsibility, which must be carried out by the entire international communist movement. Such a synthesis must be conducted in a ruthlessly scientific manner, be based on Marxist-Leninist principles, fully take into account the concrete historical conditions that existed back then and the limitations placed by them on the proletarian vanguard, and above all be conducted in the spirit of making the past serve the present, in order to avoid the metaphysical errors of measuring the past with today’s yardstick and disregarding historical conditions. Such a thorough synthesis will undoubtedly take a fairly long period of time, but the pressure of international events and the opening up of revolutionary prospects require that certain key lessons must be drawn today, in order to enable the vanguard forces of the proletariat to better fulfil their responsibilities.^[**Source:** Revolutionary Internationalist Movement: *Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement* (12^th of March, 1984)]

In its document, entitled *Our Standpoint Concerning the Formation of an International Organization of the Proletariat* (February 2017), the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) [CPI (Maoist)] already put forward its initial analysis and synthesis of some of the negative experiences of the RIM, which we think will serve as a good basis for discussion of this question in the future.

## 4. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COLLAPSE OF THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT LIES SQUARELY ON THE SHOULDERS OF THE AVAKIANITE AND PRACHANDAITE REVISIONISTS AND THE GERONIMOITE DOGMATIC REVISIONISTS
It is well-known in the international communist movement that the RIM collapsed following the betrayal of the people’s war in Nepal. This has led the dogmatic revisionists led by ‹Geronimo› of the Communist Party of Brazil [PCB] and ‹Constantine› of the Committee Red Flag [KRF] (and formerly of the Peruvian People's Movement [MPP]) to lay the blame for the collapse of the RIM on three of their enemies — namely:

**1.** Robert Avakian, the Chairperson of the Central Committee of the Revolutionary Communist Party of the United States of America [RCP-USA].

**2.** Prachanda, the Coordinator of the ‹Nepalese Communist Party› [NCP].

**3.** Comrade Miriam, the wife of Comrade Gonzalo and the only remaining member of the Historic Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the PCP.

The dogmatic revisionists argue that the defeat of the people’s war in Peru (which they pretend is still going on, despite the fact that the KRF recently admitted that no armed actions have been carried out by adherents of their line since the early 2000s) was caused by what they call the second right-opportunist line in the history of the PCP, which they attribute to Comrade Miriam, even though this line is the work of Comrade Gonzalo himself, and everyone has known this since the show trial against him in 2005 at the latest, when he shouted the slogans of the so-called ‹right-opportunist line›.

This is not the place to argue about who or what caused the defeat of the people’s war in Peru; here, we merely want to state that <u>it is completely absurd to accuse Comrades Gonzalo and Miriam of having contributed to the collapse of the RIM, since their faction of the PCP was effectively expelled from the RIM in September 1995, when the RIM adopted a resolution condemning the supposed ‹right-opportunist line›</u>. This was before the people’s war in Nepal had even been launched, so how is it possible to claim that any actions taken before September 1995 could have led to the collapse of the RIM, even though one of the main factors leading to its collapse only came about ten years later? It is absurd. Moreover, the international campaign to support the people’s war in Nepal marked one of the peaks of the public activity of the RIM, so the accusation does not hold any water.

(Here, we would like to emphasize that we do not necessarily agree with the strategic turn made by the PCP under Comrade Gonzalo’s leadership in 1993 and the Party’s subsequent policies and actions. However, it is our Party’s standpoint that these policies and actions should be evaluated critically and seriously, with all of the discretion that such a complicated question requires, especially considering that it was Comrade Gonzalo who first defined Maoism as the new, third, and higher stage of development of Marxism, and who began the great work of synthesizing its content. It is our standpoint that Comrade Gonzalo is the sixth classic of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, that he was a great Marxist, and that his positive contributions are primary, but that he also made serious mistakes. Moreover, we hold that it is mainly the responsibility of the international communist movement to make a critical synthesis of his positive and negative aspects alike. As for the line of the PCP for the Peruvian revolution since 1992 in particular, the task of making a critical evaluation of it mainly falls on the shoulders of the Peruvian comrades, and it would be wrong for the international communist movement to interfere in the internal affairs of the PCP, as it actually did in September 1995, which we hold was a mistake that should be rectified. Moreover, the faction of the PCP led by Feliciano since 1992 and by Jose since 1999 did not and does not adhere to the correct Marxist-Leninist-Maoist conception of the struggle between two lines and has used and continues to use violence and repression against Party members as a means of imposing its line by force. Since it is a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist principle to unite, and to not split, and since Gonzalo’s Thought holds that communist parties that have fallen off course and become revisionist must be reconstituted from within the existing party organization as long as that is possible, we also hold that the process of the second reconstitution of the PCP, which has been on the agenda since 1992, should take place within the existing Party organization historically led by Comrade Gonzalo and now led by Comrade Miriam, and not outside of it, and especially not inside of the so-called ‹Militarized Communist Party of Peru› [MPCP], as the dogmatic revisionists essentially believe. Finally, it would have been and still would be much more conducive to a positive outcome of the struggle between two lines within the PCP if the international communist movement were to engage with it — as the Communist Party of Turkey — Marxist-Leninist [TKP-ML] does, for example — than to ignore its existence or to fight against it.)

No, the collapse of the RIM occurred much later — namely, in the 2000s. Specifically, it took place in 2006, when the last issue of the magazine *A World to Win* was published and the Committee of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement [CoRIM] began to cease its public activities. What happened in 2006? On the one hand, Prachanda and other leaders of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) [CPN(M)] sold the people’s war for 30 pieces of silver at a time when it was on the strategic offensive and victory was within the Party’s grasp. On the other hand, supposedly on Avakian’s insistence, *A World to Win* published an article admitting that it was no longer possible to deny that Comrade Gonzalo was behind the supposed ‹right-opportunist line›.

This latter event sent the dogmatic revisionists, who were then almost exclusively organized within the MPP, which had been handed the PCP’s seat at the table in the RIM in September 1995, into a frenzy. They began condemning member parties and organizations of the RIM left and right and stepped up their attempts to organize separate international conferences of the RIM without the approval of the CoRIM. Now, we can argue about whether or not it would have been correct to organize such an international conference — and it certainly would have been if it is true that Avakian was dominating the CoRIM and forcing the RIM to cease its activities, as the dogmatic revisionists claim, but we just do not know the truth ourselves — but what is certain is that these specific conferences were a complete sham. They were meant to impose a dogmato-revisionist line on the international communist movement by using the prestige of a fake ‹Central Committee of the PCP› that the MPP itself subsequently admitted in 2011 did not actually exist. While these conferences probably had a positive aspect to them — once again, we just do not know very much about this period in the history of the international communist movement, besides what documentation is publicly available — we can say for sure that the MPP used them in an extremely negative way, which only served Avakian’s plans to disrupt the RIM.

Why do we say this? Because Avakian was trying to disrupt the RIM. At the very latest, he had already begun doing so in 2000, when he ordered the RCP-USA to withdraw its signature after the fact from the declaration, entitled *For a Century of People’s War!*, because he disagreed with some of its content. Likewise, Avakian also published an article in the final issue of *A World to Win*, in which he began his work to revise Marxist philosophy on a large scale. However, we can also go further back in time and ask the question: Why did the CoRIM insist so much on settling the struggle between two lines within the PCP on an international level by interfering in the PCP’s internal affairs and effectively expelling one of its factions by changing who represented the PCP in the RIM back in 1995? While we do not know all of the details, we do know that Comrade Gonzalo attributed this manoeuvre to Avakian at the time, so he must have had some undue influence within the CoRIM. Nevertheless, by the time when the article, entitled *A Sober Look at the Situation of the Peruvian Revolution*, was published in *A World to Win*, Avakian knew exactly how the dogmatic revisionists would react to this kind of provocation. The fact that he had the influence to publish something like this also meant that he could have chosen to reactivate the RIM afterwards, but it instead fell into inactivity.

Finally, there is Prachanda, whose betrayal of the people’s war in Nepal objectively meant that the RIM lost the main part of its practical basis. After the defeat of the people’s war in Peru in the 1990s and the serious losses suffered by the Maoist Communist Party of Turkey and North Kurdistan [MKP] in the 2000s, and considering the fact that the CPI (Maoist) and the CPP were not members of the RIM, the RIM simply lost the main part of the ground that it was standing on when the people’s war in Nepal was betrayed.

In synthesis, our Party holds that the responsibility for the collapse of the RIM lies squarely on the shoulders of Avakian, Prachanda, and the dogmatic revisionists, but primarily the two former criminals. As for the MPP, while it had already fallen to the point of dogmatic revisionism by this point — here, we are referring to its 2006 statement, *Gonzalo’s Thought Is the Theoretical Basis for the Communists Today*, which is a concentrated expression of the sectarian role that it played in the collapse of the RIM — its role can largely be attributed to the small-bourgeois ‹revolutionary zeal› of its politically infantile members, and it would have been forgivable if they had later made a self-criticism and come clean about their guilt — but they have unfortunately chosen to repeat the same crime again, and thus lost any semblance of their infantile innocence.

## 5. THE GERONIMOITE DOGMATIC REVISIONISTS HAVE VIOLATED THE REVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES OF THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT AND SPLIT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT FOR A SECOND TIME
In our June 2026 reply to the Norwegian dogmatic revisionists, who accused us of ‹right-wing liquidationism›, we rhetorically asked:

> Was it the ‹right-wing liquidators› in Switzerland who liquidated the relative basis of unity of the international communist movement, which had been achieved through decades of struggle both inside and outside of the RIM on the initiative of the PCP, and split the international communist movement by forming a separate organization on a sectarian basis of unity, or was it the dogmatic revisionists of the ‹ICL›?^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of Switzerland: *‹Stop the Thief!›* (June 2026)]

Indeed, it was the dogmatic revisionists of the ‹ICL› who committed this crime.

Why do we call these people dogmatic revisionists?

In synthesis, they are primarily dogmatic revisionists because their dogmatic adherence to a version of Gonzalo’s Thought petrified at its level of development in 1992 and distorted through their own semi-Hoxhaite lens leads them to deny a number of fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and secondarily because this leads them to hollow out the revolutionary essence of Gonzalo’s Thought itself.

In more specific terms, Geronimo and Constantine specifically promote the following dogmato-revisionist distortions of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and Gonzalo’s Thought:

**1.** In terms of the philosophy of dialectical and historical materialism, on the pretext of upholding the principle that the law of contradiction is the only fundamental law of dialectics, they deny the existence of other laws of dialectics, and they openly deny the existence of the law of negation and affirmation or the negation of the negation. They also distort the Marxist theory of knowledge in an idealist way, distort the principle that the masses are the makers of history by promoting the worship of leaders, uphold vulgar evolutionism by considering qualitative leaps backward to be impossible, and promote the most vulgar and metaphysical pseudo-materialism imaginable.

**2.** In terms of proletarian political economy, they deny the evolution of feudalism through semi-feudalism into sub-contractor (or comprador-bureaucratic) capitalism in the oppressed countries, deny the predominantly capitalist nature of many of these countries, deny the existence of globalization, deny the existence of a new wave of original accumulation, and promote the Appelian (or ‹Third-Worldist›) revisionist theory that the non-migrant proletarians in the imperialist countries are generally labour aristocrats.

**3.** In terms of revolutionary strategy and tactics, they promote a view of the ruling classes as a monolithic force, uphold the insane idea that the proletarian world revolution is at the stage of its strategic offensive and will win victory by the year 2062 at the latest, tail the national bourgeoisie in the oppressed countries, tail the lumpen-proletariat in the imperialist countries, support the most reactionary movements of clerics and landlords under the guise of support for the national liberation movement, promote a hopelessly vulgarized version of the military doctrine of the proletariat as a get-rich-quick scheme for making revolution, deny democratic centralism in favour of bureaucratic centralism, deny revolutionary parliamentarism, deny proletarian feminism in favour of small-bourgeois ‹radical feminism›, deny the interrelated and concentric construction of the ‹Three Revolutionary Weapons› in favour of the construction of a single ‹political-military organization›, twist the meaning of the revolutionary united front, try to split the labour movement into various mutually opposed trade unions, deny the need for mass work among the masses of the soldiers, deny the need for mass work among the masses of the peasants in the imperialist countries, deny the differences between the imperialist superpowers and the imperialist powers, vulgarize the militarization of the communist parties in favour of a distorted and militarist concept of carrying out actions for the sake of actions, deny the principle of going against the tide, distort the theory of the struggle between two lines, deny the existence of capitalist climate change, and so on, and so forth.

In synthesis, we are dealing with a truly dogmato-revisionist current, the specific features of which we will deal with in greater detail in a future series of polemics, which has been in the process of preparation for several years at this point. Suffice it to say that the dogmato-revisionist current first emerged as an opportunist current in the faction of the PCP led by Feliciano after 1992 on the basis of certain ‹left-wing› deviations committed by Comrade Gonzalo before his capture; it developed further into a revisionist current in the MPP after Feliciano’s capture in 1999; it spawned a Brazilian variant in the 1990s and 2000s and a German variant in the 2010s; and these three variants — namely, the Peruvian exile, Brazilian, and German variants — reunited in a single definite current within the international communist movement in 2012, when they issued the first of many joint international May Day statements. Since then, the major players in the dogmato-revisionist camp have largely been the same — namely, the MPP (that is, those who split in 2011 from the faction of the MPP that runs the magazine *Red Sun*, which itself split from the rest of the MPP in 1993), the PCB (which was called the Red Faction until a few years ago), and the KRF in Germany. The officially and explicitly recognized paramount leader of this current is Geronimo, the Chairperson of the Central Committee of the PCB — in fact, Geronimo was officially proclaimed to be the deputy leader of the <u>entire</u> international communist movement seconding Chairman Gonzalo at a meeting of the ‹Coordinating Committee of the Unified International Maoist Conference› prior to Gonzalo’s death — and his deputy leader is Constantine, the leader of the KRF, who used to be in charge of the dogmato-revisionist faction of the MPP.

Between 2012 and ’22, the dogmatic revisionists carried out a number of actions intended to usurp, split, or isolate various communist parties and organizations, so as to force the international communist movement to adopt their dogmato-revisionist line. In the course of these mere ten years, the dogmatic revisionists infiltrated almost every Maoist-aligned communist party and organization on the planet in an attempt to bend them to their will, either usurping, splitting, or attempting to slander and isolate communist parties and organizations in Germany, the United States, Anatolia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, France, Spain, Italy, Canada, and elsewhere.

Finally, on the 26^th of December, 2022, after usurping as many organizations as possible and trying to destroy those that they could not control, the dogmatic revisionists got together for what they called the ‹Unified International Maoist Conference› and founded what they call the ‹ICL›. This organization does not count a single communist party actually engaged in people’s war among its ranks. Moreover, it adheres to a dogmatic distortion of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and a revisionist petrification of Gonzalo’s Thought at its level of development in 1992, both of which it tried to impose on the entire international communist movement in an extremely sectarian way. As we have already said, the international communist movement already has a common basis of unity — namely, the statement *Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!* — and in order for this basis of unity to be developed further in any way, there must first be an organizational form built up on the already existing basis, in which discussions and debates concerning this basis of unity may take place. Thus, by skipping this essential step and proclaiming their basis of unity to be that of the entire international communist movement and their organization to be that of the entire movement, the dogmatic revisionists objectively split the international communist movement and left it forever.

In synthesis, it can be seen that the dogmatic revisionists adhere to the exact opposite principles of what we communists adhere to. We practise Marxism, while they practise dogmatic revisionism; we unite, while they split; and we are open and aboveboard, while they intrigue and conspire. It was never possible to unite with these people, and everyone should have realized it all the way back in the 1990s, when they began to sabotage the PCP and the RIM. However, better late than never — since 2022, we doubt that anyone in the international communist movement with a sense of hindsight still sincerely advocates uniting with these people. For all intents and purposes, the dogmatic revisionists have expelled themselves from the international communist movement by splitting it. Of course, it will always be possible for individual dogmato-revisionist parties, organizations, and individuals to self-criticize and return to the fold, but the dogmato-revisionist current in its entirety is done for.

In explaining why they chose to not participate in this crime against the unity of the international communist movement, the Galician comrades from Spain, who had been working closely with the dogmatic revisionists for well over a decade, stated the following:

> From our standpoint, launching a new international organization with political authority without being able to hold a unified conference first is a practice that leads to separating one part of the international communist movement from the rest of it. […]^[**Source:** Construction Committee of the Maoist Communist Party of Galicia: *Concerning the Unified International Maoist Conference and the International Communist League* (January 2023)]

This indeed gets to the heart of the matter. Even though the Galician comrades proceed to adopt what we believe is a centrist standpoint concerning the question, they nevertheless correctly point out that the only possible result of the creation of such a separate organization would be the creation of «a dynamic ‹forcing› each current to differentiate itself from the rest».^[**Source:** Construction Committee of the Maoist Communist Party of Galicia: *Concerning the Unified International Maoist Conference and the International Communist League* (January 2023)] That is indeed what has occurred since the formation of the ‹ICL›. The international communist movement has been split into two separate, mutually opposed, and irreconcilable camps.

Why are our two camps separate from each other? Because one of them is united in an international organization that the other one refuses to recognize, as is clear from the limited membership of the ‹ICL›.

Why are they mutually opposed? Because one of them has an ideological and political line that is unacceptable to the other one, as is clear from the countless polemics against the line of the ‹ICL› published by numerous communist parties and organizations around the world.

Why are they irreconcilable? Because one of them wants to impose its own programme on the other one, while the other one cannot accept this without ceasing to exist as a current, as is clear from the efforts of the ‹ICL› to infiltrate as many communist parties and organizations as possible, usurp their leadership if possible, split them apart if it is not possible to usurp their leadership, and attack and isolate them if it is not possible to split them (see our recent document, entitled *‹Stop the Thief!›* and dated June 2026).

Therefore, the split in the international communist movement is a fact that no one can deny.

Although the Indian comrades are much more diplomatic than we are with regard to the ‹ICL›, we nevertheless believe that the CPI (Maoist) essentially recognized this fact when it stated:

> In order to make the appropriate preparations in the ideological, political, organizational, and other spheres for the realization of an international organization of Maoist political parties, the broadest possible consultations among the different political parties are necessary. This process of consultation was not taken up appropriately by the Unified International Maoist Conference. The different ideological, political, and organizational attitudes of the respective political parties were not considered. The process of struggle between the two lines launched on the international level has not yet been completed. Therefore, the ICL formed in the name of this ‹unified› conference actually only reflects the attitude of one kind of Marxist-Leninist-Maoists, and does not represent the unified understanding of several political parties.^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concering the Formation of the International Communist League* (19^th of May, 2023)]


## 6. THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION OF ‹REUNIFICATION› WITH THE DOGMATO-REVISIONIST SPLITTERS
There has certainly been a differentiation of two different currents within the international communist movement for a long period of time. Now that the ‹ICL› has been formed, these <u>different currents</u> have developed further into <u>separate camps</u>.

The point on which we differ with the Galician comrades is that we do not believe this differentiation of currents to be «a sum of useless confrontations between various currents» and «not a struggle between two lines».^[**Source:** Construction Committee of the Maoist Communist Party of Galicia: *Concerning the Unified International Maoist Conference and the International Communist League* (January 2023)] Quite the contrary, comrades! The rest of the international communist movement has quite rightly refused to recognize the ‹ICL›, to accept its ideological and political line, and to submit to its programme. This is not a bad thing, but rather a good thing — it is great!

Once upon a time, Friedrich Engels pointed out:

> […] **The process of development of the proletariat everywhere takes place accompanied by internal struggles** […]**. Unification is perfectly fine, provided that it works, but there are things that take precedence over unification. Moreover, when one has spent a lifetime fighting harder against self-proclaimed socialists than against anyone else, as Marx and I have done (since we simply regarded the bourgeoisie as a <u>class</u> and hardly ever took issue with individual members of the bourgeoisie), one cannot feel very unhappy just because the inevitable struggle has broken out.**^[**Source:** Friedrich Engels: Letter to August Bebel (28^th of October, 1882)]

Indeed, the attitude of these comrades towards the split that has taken place cannot help but remind us of the following passage by Lenin:

> **In this connection, I cannot help recalling a conversation that I happened to have at the Congress with one of the centrist delegates. He complained:** «How oppressive the atmosphere is at our Congress! This bitter fighting, this agitation by one person against another one, these biting polemics, and this uncomradely attitude!» **I replied: «What a splendid thing that our Congress is! A free and open struggle. Opinions have been stated. The shades have been revealed. The groups have taken shape. Hands have been raised. A decision has been taken. A stage has been passed. Forwards! That is the stuff for me! That is life! That is not like the endless and tedious word-chopping of you intellectuals, which does not stop because the question has been settled, but rather because you are too tired to talk anymore.»**
> 
> **The centrist comrade stared at me in perplexity and shrugged his shoulders. We were speaking different languages.**^[**Source:** Nikolaj Lenin: *One Step Forward, Two Steps Back* (February-May 1904)]

However, it is one thing to speak of our attitude towards this split, and it is quite another to speak of the solutions to the questions posed by it. On the one hand, some comrades in the international communist movement seem to be under the impression that it is possible to reunite our movement with the dogmato-revisionist camp. On the other hand, we and other people reject this idea and view it as erroneous, for the following reasons:

**1.** It is impossible. The dogmatic revisionists have already formed their own separate organization, and they cannot dissolve it without ceasing to be dogmatic revisionists. They have already adopted their own ideological and political line, and they cannot abandon it without ceasing to be dogmatic revisionists. They have already decided to impose their programme on the international communist movement, and they cannot stop trying to do so without ceasing to be dogmatic revisionists. Therefore, in the words of Lenin, this **«opportunist <u>trend</u> can neither disappear nor ‹return› to the revolutionary proletariat»**, and there **«is not the slightest reason for thinking that these political parties will disappear <u>before</u> the social revolution»**.^[**Source:** Nikolaj Lenin: *Imperialism and the Split in the Socialist Movement* (October 1916)]

**2.** It is harmful. This type of dogmatic revisionism is an ideological reflection of a certain section of intellectuals hailing from generally middle-class backgrounds. These people are not proletarian in origin, and they can only join the proletarian movement by abandoning their own class standpoint and adopting that of the proletariat, which is exactly what their dogmato-revisionist ideology prevents them from doing. It is a good thing that the international communist movement has gotten rid of this corrupting small-bourgeois influence. Once again, in the words of Lenin, dogmatic revisionism **«was a boil that just had to burst, and now it has burst. Here is the question: Is it worth it to try and force the pus back into the body for the sake of ‹unity› (with the pus), as Kautsky and company are doing, or should the pus be removed as quickly and thoroughly as possible, regardless of the pang of pain caused by the process, in order to help to bring about the complete recovery of the body of the labour movement?»**.^[**Source:** Nikolaj Lenin: *Opportunism and the Collapse of the Second International* (January 1916)]

No, what is needed now is not to put the genie back into the bottle, but rather for our camp to regroup, prepare, and organize, so that we will have <u>our own international organization, our own ideological and political line, and our own programme</u>! While our organizational form, line, and programme will correspond to our already existing basis of unity at first, once we have them, they will inevitably be raised through practice and discussion, as we have already stated, and in the end, we will have reached a far higher level of unity then the house of cards that is the ‹ICL›.

In its proposal for the ICF, the CPI (Maoist) correctly pointed out:

> […] Besides adherence to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the international unity of the Maoist political parties and organizations today also requires clear lines of demarcation from the new revisionism of Prachanda and Bhattarai, on the one hand, and the new revisionism of Avakian, on the other hand. It is absolutely necessary to insist on this orientation and to firmly reject any opportunist plans for bringing together all political parties in the name of ‹broad unity›, irrespective of their ideological and political standpoints.^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concerning the Formation of an International Organization of the Proletariat* (February 2017)]

We wholeheartedly agree with this firm standpoint adopted by our Indian comrades, to which we would only add that the recent split in the international communist movement has necessitated drawing a clear line of demarcation from the dogmatic revisionism of Geronimo as well.

## 7. THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT CAN ONLY BE REUNIFIED IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FORUM PROPOSED BY THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA (MAOIST)
At the present time, the only appropriate organizational form corresponding to our already existing basis of unity is the ICF proposed by the CPI (Maoist). In the words of the Galician comrades:

> We must also take into account that the CPI (Maoist) has proposed the creation of an international Maoist forum. The realization of this forum depends on many variables outside of our control, but the CPI (Maoist) is the largest existing communist party of today and leads the largest red army in the people’s world war. This makes it a point of reference for us.^[**Source:** Construction Committee of the Maoist Communist Party of Galicia: *Concerning the Unified International Maoist Conference and the International Communist League* (January 2023)]

In its original proposal, the Central Committee of the CPI (Maoist) wrote the following:

> […] The socialist revolution in the imperialist countries and the new-democratic revolution in the oppressed countries are the two component parts of the proletarian world revolution. The revolution in every country is a component part of the socialist world revolution. An international organization of Maoist political parties must address both of them, as well as the entire spectrum of struggles, revolts, and rebellions of the masses and the diverse sections flowing into them. Other than this, the possibility of this organization becoming a forum for debate and struggle focused on synthesizing standpoints concerning key ideological and political questions facing the international communist movement should also be explored. We must always be clear that this international organization should neither replace nor weaken the independent initiative of its constituent parties, their bilateral relations, or the relations that they maintain with other revolutionary political parties and organizations.^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concerning the Formation of an International Organization of the Proletariat* (February 2017)]

It added:

> Instead of the type of process of formation gone through by the ICL, our Central Committee is of the opinion that there is a strong need to mobilize for the creation of a common forum, which will work on the basis of the approval and unanimity of all political parties, so that […] all of the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist revolutionary political parties and organizations that are ideologically close can mutually exchange their experiences and ideological and political standpoints; issue joint statements on international issues; take up joint action campaigns based on their common opposition to imperialism; draw clear lines of demarcation from various revisionist and new revisionist currents (such as those of Prachanda and Avakian) and wage a joint struggle against them; take up joint campaigns with the objective of establishing new democracy, socialism, and ultimately communism in the light of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; exchange mutual aid among various political parties; and make mutual proposals and constructive criticisms for the sake of further developing the revolutionary movements. Besides, our Central Committee is also of the opinion that the necessary preparations should begin to be made for the formation of broad common forums against imperialism on the basis of the above-mentioned forum together with determined anti-imperialist forces and national liberation struggles. […]^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concering the Formation of the International Communist League* (19^th of May, 2023)]

The Party also correctly stated:

> The task of building up such an organization requires appropriate preparations in all spheres and as broad as possible consultations between the various political parties. […]^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concerning the Formation of an International Organization of the Proletariat* (February 2017)]

At the same time, it also made its standpoint clear in the following terms:

> From the very beginning, our Party has held the standpoint that a centralized organization like the RIM functioning as an embryonic political centre is not suited to the existing subjective conditions of the international Maoist movement. We still hold the same standpoint. […] However, we have never ruled out the necessity of an international organization suitable to the present situation of the Maoist political parties. […]^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist): *Our Standpoint Concerning the Formation of an International Organization of the Proletariat* (February 2017)]

Therefore, we understand the proposal by the CPI (Maoist) as a proposal for an international forum for the international coordination of activities, exchange and analysis of experience, and synthesis of lessons by Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communist parties and organizations around the world. In our opinion, this is the only organizational form possible today that will be capable of uniting all of the genuine communist parties and organizations around the world, given the existing basis of unity of the international communist movement. Therefore, we wholeheartedly support it as a step in the right direction.


## 8. ANY INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COMMUNIST PARTIES ENGAGED IN PEOPLE’S WAR IS A SHAM
In order for the ICF proposed by the CPI (Maoist) to actually serve its stated purpose and function with a view to raising the relative basis of unity of the international communist movement in the future, it is absolutely essential for <u>all</u> genuine communist parties and organizations with direct experience with actually making revolution to participate. Otherwise, the ICF would inevitably turn out to be a sham like the ‹ICL›, which does not include a single communist party engaged in people’s war, despite its claims to the contrary (the Communist Party of Turkey / Marxist-Leninist [TKP/ML] is engaged in some limited armed struggle, while the ‹PCP› that the ‹ICL› claims as a member is actually the MPP under a different name).

Since the CPI (Maoist) has made it very clear that the Indian comrades consider long-term consultations among Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communist parties and organizations on the broadest possible basis to be essential prior to the convocation of the ICF, and since we consider this demand by the Indian comrades to be in full accordance with the subjective conditions of the international communist movement today, <u>we oppose any attempt to convene the ICF before such extensive consultations have taken place</u>.

In our opinion, there will be no serious basis for convening the ICF without it being premature and essentially sectarian before all of the genuine pro-Mao communist parties and organizations that have either past or present experience with people’s war or armed struggle, as well as all of those that play an important role in the international communist movement, have at least been invited to participate in the formation of the ICF and serious efforts have been made to convince them to do so.

Additionally, we think that as many genuine communist parties and organizations from all continents as possible should be invited and helped to participate, especially those from formerly socialist countries like China and Russia and those from the African continent, which has the greatest revolutionary potential of any part of the world today, and which sorely needs Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to guide its revolutionary movements.

## 9. THE TIME IS NOT YET RIPE FOR A NEW COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL, BUT IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE
Without a socialist country capable of serving as a base area for the proletarian world revolution, the reconstitution of the Communist International on the basis of democratic centralism would be premature, as it would lack a base of operations and too easily be subject to imperialist and reactionary surveillance and repression.

Moreover, without drawing lessons from both the positive and the negative experiences of the Communist Third International, as well as the Communist League, the Workers’ First International, the Socialist Second International, the Informational Bureau of Communist and Labour Parties, and the RIM, the reconstituted Communist Fourth International would inevitably end up repeating the mistakes of the previous international communist organizations, which would unnecessarily hold back the further development of the international communist movement.

Hence, it would not be appropriate to put forward the immediate reconstitution of the Communist International at the present time.

As for the question of the formation of an international organization with a lower degree of centralization than the Communist International, but with a higher degree than that of the ICF, this idea is not currently acceptable to certain communist parties presently engaged in revolutionary struggle. For example, the CPP has clearly stated:

> Being primarily responsible for leading the revolutionary struggles in their own countries, communist parties and organizations must strive to raise their capacity to become independent and self-reliant. At the same time, it will benefit them to draw lessons from the history of revolutionary struggle in different parts of the world, and to exchange views and experiences with communist parties in other countries. However, it will be counterproductive for them to subordinate themselves to a presumptive international centre and lose their independence and initiative in carrying out revolutionary work within the scope of their competence and leadership.^[**Source:** Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines: *On the Announced Formation of the International Communist League* (18^th of January, 2023)]

Since the reunification of the international communist movement without the participation of these comrades would be an empty phrase, it should not be proposed at present. This is another reason why the formation of the ‹ICL› was bound to provoke a split in the movement instead of advancing its process of reunification. Moreover, it is also the reason why the ICF is the only appropriate organizational form for the reunification of the international communist movement at present.

Hence, our Party does not propose the immediate reconstitution of the Communist International or the immediate formation of a somewhat less centralized international organization, but rather the formation of an ICF as a step in the right direction of the <u>future</u> reconstitution of the Communist International.

After the formation of the ICF, the creation of a more solid international communist organization should be discussed, but our Party maintains that it would be premature to discuss the nature of such an organization at the present time, since only the ICF would be the correct and appropriate forum for such a discussion.

## 10. LET US UNITE AROUND MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM IN AN INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FORUM!
In synthesis, our Party holds that the reunification of the international communist movement in the ICF proposed by the CPI (Maoist), which is a step in the right direction of the future reconstitution of the Communist International, should take place on the following relative basis of unity:

**1.** Acceptance of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the ideology of the international revolutionary proletariat today.

**2.** <u>General</u> acceptance of the revolutionary principles of the RIM listed above.

**3.** Rejection of Avakianite revisionism, Prachandaite revisionism, and Geronimoite dogmatic revisionism.

The ICF should not be convened right away. Rather, its convocation will require long-term and broad consultation among as many genuine pro-Mao communist parties and organizations as possible, while only excluding those that participate in the ‹ICL› and those adhering to the revisionism of Avakian or Prachanda.

Furthermore, it would be premature to convene the ICF before the dogmato-revisionist line of the ‹ICL› has been fully exposed and repudiated in the form of public polemics, just as the revisionist lines of Avakian and Prachanda were in the past.

Finally, it will be necessary to find an appropriate organizational form by reaching out to and consulting with all genuine communist parties and organizations, in order to work out a proposal for an organizational form for the ICF acceptable to all of them.

This is the standpoint of the PCS-KPS concerning the ICF and the conditions for its convocation. We believe that the proposals outlined above should prove to be acceptable to all of the genuine communist parties and organizations in the world, even if it will require a certain amount of struggle before the convocation of the ICF. However, if these proposals still prove to be unacceptable to certain parties and organizations, then it will be necessary to adjust them, so as to arrive at a basis of unity that is acceptable to everyone, for the sake of the great unity of the international communist movement.

###### UNITE AROUND MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM!
###### COMBAT GERONIMOITE DOGMATIC REVISIONISM AS THE MAIN DANGER!
###### FIGHT FOR THE REUNIFICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT IN AN INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FORUM!

<