From KP16, August 4, 2001
There is somebody who has been "wondering" why the APK whole-heartedly
supports the struggle and "People's War" being waged by e.g. the Communist
Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the Communist Party of the Philippines, which ideologically
adhere to both Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought. But there is no reason
for wonder, and the APK has not changed its position.
The APK supports the revolutionary struggles, which are really attacking imperialism
and reaction and are being waged by the working class and the peoples everywhere
in the world on the basis of the Marxist-Leninist position that imperialism
and reaction never give up power voluntarily, but can only be removed from power
by an armed revolution.
Where Maoist parties, as in Nepal and the Philippines, are heading this revolutionary
struggle, and have obtained considerable progress, it would be not only sectarian,
but also positively reactionary, not to support them.
The developments in Nepal, one of the poorest and most backward countries in
the world, with a small working class and a huge and very poor rural population,
show that the organization of the People's War and the armed uprising, joined
with the mobilisation of the workers and students, and the creation of a national
front consisting of progressive forces against the fascist clique of Gyanendra
and Koirala, is both right and necessary. It is not on these questions that
there exist decisive differences between the Marxist-Leninist and Maoist point
of view. Nor do they exist in relation to the concrete, strategic objective
of the struggle in Nepal: the establishment of a so-called New Democracy (a
variant of people's democracy and a progressive form of government with the
working class in alliance with other progressive forces, but not yet the dictatorship
of the proletariat), the abolishment of the reactionary and illegitimate monarchy,
which is in the pocket of imperialism, and the establishment of a republic and
the adoption of a new constitution.
It is the position of the APK that declared Communist parties have to be assessed
concretely, that is, according to their general line, their actions, strategy
and tactics, first and foremost regarding the struggle in their own countries.
A lot of declared "Marxist-Leninist" parties have proved to be disguised
revisionists, and many declared Maoist parties, including the ones in the developed,
capitalist and imperialist countries, as was the case in Denmark with the now
defunct Communist Workers' Party of Denmark (KAP), ended up abandoning and betraying
the revolutionary struggle. To the APK, parties making great sacrifices and
winning the position as the leader of the struggle of their countries and peoples,
are parties of the revolution, no matter the ideological and political differences
and disagreements that might exist. Therefore, the APK is pleased with their
victories, and therefore we show solidarity with them in hard times, too.
All this does not change the general position of the APK towards Maoism, which
we regard as a variant of modern revisionism, and which at the end will not
lead to the creation of socialist societies under the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The development of Mao Zedong's China, during and after him, is the proof of
this thesis. The fundamentally not Marxist-Leninist character of Maoism, its
character of first and foremost being a national liberation ideology and theory,
and its lacking ability of creating a truly socialist society under the dictatorship
of the proletariat, was not revealed until a prolonged, historical process clarified
the matter - and the battle on the assessment of Maoism has not ended yet.