Collected Works of Communist Party of Peru Volume 2 : 1988-1990
——————————
1988 - Fundamental Documents
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line
       - Democratic Revolution
       - Military Line
       - Construction Line
       - Mass Line
       - International Line
1988 - Interview with Chairman Gonzalo
1990 - Elections, no! People's war, yes!
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - Concerning the Programme of the Communist Party of Peru
       - On Chairman Mao' s thesis "three worlds delineate themselves"
       - On the Document "Concerning Gonzalo Thought"
       - the Second World War is a Transcendental Fact in World History
       - Barricades, Detachments and People' s War
1988 - Outline of the history of the Party and three moments of the history of contemporary Peru
1989 - China(Excerpt from the Summary Document of the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru)
1989 - Summary Document of the Third Session of the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
1989 - Special Resolution: Honor and Glory to Comrade Norah!
1989 - Speech by Chairman Gonzalo：In Commemoration of the 40th Anniversary of the Chinese Revolution
1990 - Honor and Glory to the Proletariat and People of Peru!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Fundamental Documents
Contents
1 On Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
2 Concerning Gonzalo Thought
2.1 Historical Context
2.2 Ideological Basis
2.3 Contents
2.4 What Is Fundamental
2.5 Forged in the Two-Line Struggle
3 Programme and Statutes
3.1 Programme
3.2 General Programme of the Democratic Revolution
On Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
--

In the furnace of class struggle, the ideology of the international proletariat emerged as Marxism, afterwards developed into Marxism-Leninism and later Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Therefore, the scientific ideology of the proletariat, all-powerful because it is true, has three stages or landmarks in its dialectical process of development: 1) Marxism, 2) Leninism, and 3) Maoism. These three stages are part of the same unity which began with the Communist Manifesto one hundred and forty years ago, with the heroic epic of the class struggle, in fierce and fruitful two-line struggles within the communist parties themselves and in the titanic work of thought and action that only the working class could generate. Today, three unfading lights are outstanding: Marx, Lenin, and Mao Tse-tung who, through three grand leaps have armed us with the invincible ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which today is principally Maoism.

Nevertheless, while Marxism-Leninism has obtained an acknowledgment of its universal validity, Maoism is not completely acknowledged as the third stage. Some simply deny its condition as such, while others only accept it as “Mao Tse-tung Thought.” In essence, both positions, with the obvious differences between them, deny the general development of Marxism made by Chairman Mao Tse-tung. The denial of the “ism” character of Maoism denies its universal validity and, consequently, its condition as the third, new, and superior stage of the ideology of the international proletariat: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, that we uphold, defend, and apply.

As an INTRODUCTION, in order to better understand Maoism and the necessity to struggle for it, let us remember Lenin. He taught us that as the revolution advanced to the East it expressed specific conditions that, while they did not negate principles or laws, were new situations that Marxism could not ignore, upon the risk of putting the revolution in danger of a defeat. Notwithstanding the uproar against what is new by pedantic and bookish intellectuals, who are stuffed with liberalism and false Marxism, the only just and correct thing to do is to apply Marxism to the concrete conditions and to solve the new situations and problems that every revolution necessarily faces. In the face of the horrified and pharisaic “defenses of the ideology, the class, and of the people” that revisionists, opportunists and renegades proclaim, or the furious attacks against Marxism by brutalized academicians and hacks of the old order who are debased by the rotten bourgeois ideology and blindly defend the old society on which they are parasites. Lenin also said clearly that the revolution in the East would present new and great surprises to the greater amazement of the worshipers of following only the well-trodden paths who are incapable of seeing the new; and, as we all know, he trusted the Eastern comrades to resolve the problems that Marxism had not yet resolved.

Furthermore, we must keep well in mind that when Comrade Stalin justly and correctly stated that we had entered the stage of Leninism as the development of Marxism, there was also opposition by those who rend their garments in a supposed defense of Marxism. There were also those who said that Leninism was only applicable to the backward countries. But, in the midst of struggle, practice has consecrated Leninism as a great development of Marxism, and thus the proletarian ideology shone victoriously in the face of the world as Marxism-Leninism.

Today, Maoism faces similar situations. All new things, like Marxism, have always advanced through struggle, and similarly, Maoism will impose itself and be acknowledged.

As for the CONTEXT in which Chairman Mao Tse-tung developed and Maoism was forged, on an international level it was on the basis of imperialism, world wars, the international proletarian movement, the national liberation movement, the struggle between Marxism and revisionism, and the restoration of capitalism in the USSR. Three big historical landmarks must be emphasized in the present century: first, the October Revolution of 1917, which opened the era of the world proletarian revolution; second, the triumph of the Chinese Revolution, in 1949, which changed the correlation of forces in favor of socialism; and third, the great proletarian cultural revolution, which began in 1966 as the continuation of the revolution under the proletarian dictatorship in order to maintain the revolutionary course towards Communism. It is enough to emphasize that Chairman Mao led two of these glorious historical feats.

In China, as the center of world revolution, Maoism was concretely expressed within the most complex convergence of contradictions, and the intense and ruthless class struggle which was marked by the pretensions of the imperialist powers of tearing and dividing up China after the collapse of the Manchurian Empire (1911), the anti-imperialist movement of 1919, the revolts of the great peasant masses, the twenty-two years of armed struggle of the democratic revolution, the great contest for the building and development of socialism and the ten years of revolutionary storms for carrying forward the Cultural Revolution, as well as the sharpest two-line struggle within the Communist Party of China, especially against revisionism. All this was framed within the international situation described above. It is out of this aggregate of historical deeds that we have to extract four events of extraordinary importance: The founding of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 1921; the Autumn Harvest uprising which initiated the path from the countryside to the city, in 1925; the founding of the People’s Republic, 1949; and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR), from 1966-1976; in all of which Chairman Mao was a protagonist and the acknowledged leader of the Chinese Revolution.

We can say from Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s biography that he was born on December 26th 1893, opening his eyes to an agitated world scorched by the flames of war; son of peasants, he was seven years old when “Boxer Rebellions” began; a student at a Teachers’ Training College, he was in his eighteenth year when the empire collapsed and he enlisted himself as a soldier, later to become a great organizer of peasants and of the youth in Hunan, his native province. Founder of the Communist Party and of the Red Army of workers and peasants, he established the path of surrounding the cities from the countryside developing People’s War as the military theory of the proletariat. He was the theoretician of New Democracy and founder of the People’s Republic; a promoter of the Great Leap Forward and of the development of socialism; the leader of the struggle against the contemporary revisionism of Khrushchev and his henchmen, leader and head of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. These are landmarks of a life devoted thoroughly and solely to the revolution. The proletariat has seen three gigantic triumphs in this century: Two of them belong to Chairman Mao, and if one is glory enough, two are even more.

On the CONTENT of Maoism, of its substance, we must point out the following basic issues:

1. Theory. Marxism has three parts: Marxist philosophy, Marxist political economy, and scientific socialism. The development of all these three components gives rise to a great qualitative leap of Marxism as a whole, as a unity on a superior level, which implies a new stage. Consequently, the essential thing is to show that Chairman Mao, as can be seen in theory and practice, has generated such a great qualitative leap. Let us highlight this with the following points:

In Marxist philosophy he developed the essence of dialectics, the law of contradiction, establishing it as the only fundamental law; and besides his profound dialectical understanding of the theory of knowledge, whose center are the two leaps that make up its law (from practice to knowledge and vice versa, but with knowledge to practice being the main one). We emphasize that he masterfully applied the law of contradiction in politics; and moreover he brought philosophy to the masses of people, fulfilling the task that Marx left.

In Marxist political economy, Chairman Mao applied dialectics to analyze the relationship between the base and superstructure, and, continuing the struggle of Marxism-Leninism against the revisionist thesis of the “productive forces”, he concluded that the superstructure, consciousness, can modify the base, and that with political power the productive forces can be developed. By developing the Leninist idea that politics is the concentrated expression of economics, he established that politics must be in command, (applicable on all levels) and that political work is the life-line of economic work; which takes us to the true handling of political economy, not just a simple economic policy.

Despite its importance, an issue which is often sidestepped, especially by those who face democratic revolutions, is the Maoist thesis of bureaucratic capitalism; that is, the capitalism which is being developed in the oppressed nations by imperialism along with different degrees of underlying feudalism, or even pre-feudal stages. This is a vital problem, mainly in Asia, Africa and Latin America, since a good revolutionary leadership derives from its understanding, especially when the confiscation of bureaucratic capital forms the economic basis for carrying forward the socialist revolution as the second stage.

But the main thing is that Chairman Mao Tse-tung has developed the political economy of socialism. Of the utmost importance is his criticism of socialist construction in the Soviet Union, as well as his theses on how to develop socialism in China: Taking agriculture as the base and industry as the leading economic force, promoting industrialization guided by the relationship between heavy industry, light industry and agriculture; taking heavy industry as the center of economic construction and simultaneously paying full attention to light industry and agriculture. The Great Leap Forward and the conditions for its execution should be highlighted: One, the political line that gives it a just and correct course; two, small, medium, and large organizational forms in a greater to lesser quantity, respectively; three, a great drive, a gigantic effort of the masses of people in order to put it in motion and to take it through to success, a leap forward whose results are valued more for the new process set in motion and its historical perspective than its immediate achievements, and its linkage with agricultural collectivization and the people’s communes. Finally, we must bear well in mind his teachings on the objectivity and the subjectivity in understanding and handling the laws of socialism, that because the few decades of socialism have not permitted it to see its complete development, and therefore a better understanding of its laws and its specification, and principally the relationship that exists between revolution and the economic process, embodied in the slogan “grasp revolution and promote production”. Despite its transcendental importance, this development of Marxist political economy has received scant attention.

In scientific socialism, Chairman Mao further developed the theory of social classes analyzing them on economic, political, and ideological planes. He upheld revolutionary violence as a universal law without any exception whatsoever; revolution as a violent displacement of one class by another, thus establishing the great thesis that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”. He resolved the question of the conquest of political power in the oppressed nations through the path of surrounding the cities from the countryside, establishing its general laws. He defined and developed the theory of the class struggle within socialism in which he brilliantly demonstrated that the antagonistic struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, between the socialist road and the capitalist road, and between socialism and capitalism continues. That in socialism it was not concretely determined who would defeat whom, that it was a problem whose solution demands time, the unfolding of a process of restoration and counter-restoration, in order for the proletariat to strongly hold political power definitely through the proletarian dictatorship; and, finally and principally, the grandiose solution of historical transcendence, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution as the continuation of the socialist revolution under the proletarian dictatorship.

These basic questions, simply and plainly stated but known and undeniable, show the Chairman’s development of the integral parts of Marxism, and the evident raising of Marxism-Leninism to a new, third and superior stage: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism.

Continuing with this brief synthesis, let us look at other specific points which, although deriving from the above, should be considered even if only enumeratively, to emphasize and pay due attention to them.===

2. The New Democratic Revolution. Firstly, it is a development of the Marxist theory of the State, establishing three types of dictatorships:

1) Dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, in the old bourgeois democracies like the United States, a type in which the dictatorships of the oppressed nations such as the Latin American ones can be assimilated;

2) proletarian dictatorships, like the ones in the Soviet Union or in China before the usurpation of power by the revisionists; and

3) New Democracy, as a joint dictatorship based on the worker-peasant alliance, led by the proletariat headed up by the Communist Party, which was formed in China during its democratic revolution, and which is concretely expressed in Perú today through the People’s Committees, in the base areas and in the People’s Republic of New Democracy in formation. It is fundamental to emphasize, within this development of the theory of the state, the key differentiation between a state system as a dictatorship of a class or classes that hold political power, which is principal, and a system of government, which is understood as an organization for the exercise of political power.

On the other hand, New Democracy, one of the extraordinary developments made by Chairman Mao, masterfully materializes for us the bourgeois revolution of a new type, which only the proletariat can lead. In synthesis, it is the democratic revolution within the new era of world proletarian revolution in which we evolve. The New Democratic Revolution implies a new economy, a new politics, and a new culture, obviously overthrowing the old order and upholding the new one with arms, the only way to transform the world.

Finally, it is important to emphasize that New Democracy is a democratic revolution. Although it mainly fulfills the democratic tasks, it also complementarily advances in some socialist tasks, so that the question of two stages, democratic and socialist, which corresponds to countries like ours, is thoroughly solved by guaranteeing that once the democratic stage is concluded, it will be continued as a socialist revolution, without any intermissions or interruptions.

3. The three instruments. The problem of the construction of the instruments of the revolution presents the Party with the problem of understanding the interrelationship between the Party, the army and the united front; and to understand and correctly handle the interconnected construction of the three instruments in the midst of war or in the defense of the new State based on the power of the armed people, expressing in that way a just and correct task of leadership. Their construction is guided by the principle that a just and correct ideological line decides everything, and it is on this ideological-political basis that the organizational construction is simultaneously developed in the midst of the struggle between the proletarian line and the bourgeois line and within the storm of the class struggle, mainly in war, as the principal form of current or potential struggle.

Regarding the Party, Chairman Mao starts from the necessity of the Communist Party, a new type of party, a party of the proletariat. Today, we would say a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Party: a party whose aim is to conquer political power and to defend it, and therefore it is inextricably bound to people’s war in order to initiate it, develop it or wage it to defend itself. A party sustained by the masses of people, be it by way of people’s war which is a war of the masses, or by the united front which, being a front of classes, is based on the broad masses. The Party develops and changes itself according to the stages of the revolution and the periods that these stages may have. The driving of its development is the contradiction which materializes in its heart as the two-line struggle, the proletarian line and the bourgeois or in general non-proletarian line, which is in essence and mainly a struggle against revisionism. This leads to the decisive importance of ideology in the life of the party and to the development of rectification campaigns that serve a greater adjustment of all the systems of party organizations and the membership to the just and correct ideological and political lines, guaranteeing the predominance of the proletarian line and keeping the Party leadership in its iron grip. The Party serves the establishment of political power for the proletariat as the leading class of the New Democracy, and principally for the establishment, strengthening and development of the proletarian dictatorship, and through cultural revolutions the conquest of the great, final goal: Communism. Because of this, the Party must lead everything in an all-around way.

The revolutionary army is of a new type. It is an army for the fulfillment of the political tasks that the Party establishes in accordance with the interests of the proletariat and the people. This characteristic is concretely expressed in three tasks: To combat, to produce in order to pose no parasitical burden, and to mobilize the masses. It is an army based on the political development of the proletariat’s ideology, from Marxism-Leninism-Maoism (today), and from the general political line as well as the military one that the Party may establish. It is an army based on people and not on weapons, an army that surged from the masses with whom it has always been linked, serving them wholeheartedly, which allows it to move among the people like fish in the water. Without a people’s army the people have nothing, said Chairman Mao, at the same time he taught us the necessity of the Party’s absolute leadership over the army and his great principle: The Party commands the gun and we will never permit it to be otherwise. Besides having thoroughly established the principles and norms for the construction of a new type of army, the Chairman himself called for preventing the use of the army for the restoration of capitalism by usurping the leadership through a counterrevolutionary coup d’etat and, developing Lenin’s thesis on the people’s militia, he carried out farther than anyone the general policy of arming the people, thus opening a breach and pointing out the path towards the armed sea of masses that will lead us to the definite emancipation of the people and the proletariat.

It was Chairman Mao who for the first time developed a complete theory on the united front and established its laws. A front of social classes based on the worker-peasant alliance as a guarantee of the proletariat’s hegemony in the revolution, which is led by the proletariat represented by the Communist Party; in synthesis, a united front under the leadership of the Communist Party, a united front for the people’s war, for the revolution, for the conquest of power for the proletariat and the people. In synthesis, the united front is the grouping of the revolutionary forces against the counter-revolutionary forces in order to wage the struggle between revolution and counter-revolution mainly through the armed people’s war. The united front, obviously, is not the same in every stage of the revolution and, furthermore, it has its specifications according to the various historical periods of each stage; likewise, the united front in a concrete revolution does not equal the one on a world level, although both follow the same general laws. Apart from this, it is important to emphasize the relation between the front and the State that Chairman Mao established when the war of resistance against Japan was evolving, setting forth that the united front is a form of joint dictatorship, a question that deserves to be especially studied by those who face democratic revolutions.

4. The People’s War is the military theory of the international proletariat; in it are summarized, for the first time in a systematic and complete form, the theoretical and practical experience of the struggles, military actions, and wars waged by the proletariat, and the prolonged experience of the people’s armed struggle and especially of the incessant wars in China. It is with Chairman Mao that the proletariat attains its military theory; nevertheless, there is much confusion and misunderstanding on this issue. And much of it springs from how the People’s War in China is seen. Generally, it is considered derisively and contemptuously simply as a guerrilla war; this alone denotes a lack of understanding. Chairman Mao pointed out that guerrilla warfare achieves a strategic feature; but due to its essential fluidity, the development of guerrilla warfare is not understood as it exists, how it develops mobility, a war of movements, of positions, how it unfolds great plans of the strategic offensive and the seizure of small, mid-sized, and big cities, with millions of inhabitants, combining the attack from outside with the insurrection from within. Thus, in conclusion, the four periods of the Chinese revolution, and mainly from the agrarian war until the people’s war of liberation, considering the anti-Japanese war of resistance between both, shows the various aspects and complexities of the revolutionary war waged during more than twenty years amidst a huge population and an immense mobilization and participation of the masses. In that war there are examples of every kind; and what is principal has been extraordinarily studied and its principles, laws, strategy, tactics, rules, etc. masterfully established. It is, therefore, in this fabulous crucible and on what was established by Marxism-Leninism that Chairman Mao developed the military theory of the proletariat: The People’s War.

We must fully bear in mind that subsequently, Chairman Mao himself, aware of the existence of atomic bombs and missiles and with China already having them, sustained and developed people’s war in order to wage it under the new conditions of atomic weapons and of war against powers and super-powers. In synthesis, people’s war is the weapon of the proletariat and of the people, even to confront atomic wars.

A key and decisive question is the understanding of the universal validity of people’s war and its subsequent application taking into account the different types of revolution and the specific conditions of each revolution. To clarify this key issue it is important to consider that no insurrection like that of Petrograd, the anti-fascist resistance, or the European guerrilla movements in the Second World War have been repeated, as well as considering the armed struggles that are presently being waged in Europe. In the final analysis, the October Revolution was not only an insurrection but a revolutionary war that lasted for several years. Consequently, in the imperialist countries the revolution can only be conceived as a revolutionary war which today is simply people’s war.

Finally, today more than ever, we Communists and revolutionaries, the proletariat and the people, need to forge ourselves in: “Yes. We are adherents to the theory of the omnipotence of the revolutionary war. That it is not bad thing; it is good thing. It is Marxist”; which means adhering to the invincibility of people’s war.

5. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in a historical perspective is the most transcendental development of Marxism-Leninism made by Chairman Mao; it is the solution to the great pending problem of the continuation of the revolution under the proletarian dictatorship: “It represents a more profound and wider new stage in the development of the socialist revolution in our country.”

What was the situation that presented itself? As stated in the Decision of the Communist Party of China on the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution states: “Although overthrown, the bourgeoisie still tries to avail itself of the old ideas, culture, habits and ways of the exploiting classes in order to corrupt the masses and to conquer the minds of the people in its endeavors to restore its power. The proletariat must do exactly the opposite: It must deal merciless, frontal blows to all the challenges by the bourgeoisie in the ideological arena and change the spiritual composition of the whole society using its own new ideas, culture, habits and ways. Our present aim is to crush, through struggle, those who occupy leading posts and follow the capitalist road, to criticize and repudiate the reactionary bourgeois ‘authorities’ in the academic fields, to criticize and repudiate the ideology of the bourgeoisie and other exploiting classes, and to transform education, literature, and art and the rest of areas of the superstructure that do not correspond to the economic base of socialism, in order to facilitate the consolidation and the development of the socialist system.”

It was in these conditions that the most Earth-shaking political process and the greatest mass mobilization the world has ever seen broke out, and whose objectives were thus outlined by Chairman Mao: “The present GPCR is completely necessary and very timely to consolidate the proletarian dictatorship, to prevent the restoration of capitalism, and to build socialism.”

We also emphasize two questions:

1) The GPCR implies a landmark in the development of the proletarian dictatorship towards the proletariat’s securing political power, concretely expressed in the Revolutionary Committees; and

2) The restoration of capitalism in China after the 1976 counter-revolutionary coup is not a negation of the GPCR but is plainly part of the contention between restoration and counter-restoration, and, on the contrary, it shows us the transcendental historical importance of the GPCR in the inexorable march of mankind towards Communism.

6. World Revolution. Chairman Mao emphasizes the importance of the world revolution as a unity, on the basis that revolution is the main trend while the decomposition of imperialism is greater each day, and the role played by the masses grows more immense each year, masses that make and shall make their transforming and unstoppable strength be felt, and reiterates the great truth: Either we all reach Communism or nobody does. Within this specific perspective in the era of imperialism, the great historical moment of the “next 50 to 100 years”, and within this context the opening period of struggle against Yankee imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism, paper tigers that contend for hegemony and threaten the world with an atomic war, in the face of which, firstly we must condemn it, and secondly, we must prepare ourselves beforehand in order to oppose it with people’s war and make the revolution. On the other hand, starting from the historical importance of the oppressed nations and, furthermore, from their perspective both in the economic and political relationships that are evolving on account of the process of decomposition of imperialism, Chairman Mao stated his thesis that “three worlds delineate themselves”. All of which leads to the necessity of developing the strategy and tactics of world revolution. Regrettably, we know little or almost nothing about Chairman Mao’s writings and statements on these transcendental questions; nevertheless, the very little that is known shows the grand perspectives which he watched closely and the great outlines that we must follow in order to understand and serve the proletarian world revolution

7. Superstructure, ideology, culture, and education. These and other related issues have been subtly and deeply studied by Chairman Mao. For that reason, this is also another basic question that deserves attention.

In conclusion, the contents seen in these fundamental issues show clearly to whoever wants to see and understand that we have, therefore, a new, third, and superior stage of Marxism: Maoism; and that to be a Marxist in these days demands to be a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist and mainly Maoist.

All that has been explained in the contents leads us to two questions:

What is fundamental in Maoism? Political Power is fundamental in Maoism. Political power for the proletariat, power for the dictatorship of the proletariat, power based on an armed force led by the Communist Party. More explicitly:

1) Political power under the leadership of the proletariat in the democratic revolution;

2) Political power for the dictatorship of the proletariat in the socialist and cultural revolutions;

3) Political power based on an armed force led by the Communist Party, conquered and defended through people’s war.

And, what is Maoism? Maoism is the elevation of Marxism-Leninism to a new, third, and superior stage in the struggle for proletarian leadership of the democratic revolution, the development of the construction of socialism and the continuation of the revolution under the proletarian dictatorship as a proletarian cultural revolution; when imperialism deepens its decomposition and revolution has become the main tendency of history, amidst the most complex and largest wars seen to date and the implacable struggle against contemporary revisionism.

On the STRUGGLE AROUND MAOISM. Briefly, the struggle in China for establishing Mao Tse-tung Thought began in 1935 at the Tsunyi Meeting, when Chairman Mao assumed the leadership of the Communist Party of China. In 1945 the VII Congress agreed that the CPC was guided by Marxism-Leninism Mao Tse-tung Thought, a specification suppressed by the VIII Congress, since a rightist line prevailed in it. The IX Congress in 1969 resumed the GPCR and ratified that the CPC is guided by Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought; that was as far as it advanced.

On an international level, it acquired influence from the 1950s onwards; but it is with the GPCR that it intensely spread out and its prestige rose powerfully and Chairman Mao was acknowledged as the leader of the world revolution and originator of a new stage in Marxism-Leninism; thus, a great number of Communist Parties assumed the denomination of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought. On the world level, Maoism confronted contemporary revisionism openly unmasking it profoundly and forcefully, and likewise it did so in the CPC’s own ranks, all of which raised the Chairman’s great red banner still more: The new, third, and superior stage of the ideology of the international proletariat. At present (1988), Maoism confronts the triple attack of Soviet, Chinese and Albanian revisionism. But today, even among those who acknowledge the Chairman’s great contributions, including the development of Marxism, there are some who believe that we are still in the stage of Marxism-Leninism, and others who only accept Mao Tse-tung Thought but by no means Maoism.

In this country, obviously, the revisionists who follow the baton of their diverse masters, Gorbachev, Teng, Alia or Castro have continuously attacked Maoism; among them one must condemn, unmask, and implacably combat Del Prado’s callous revisionism and his gang, the so called “Peruvian Communist Party”; the abject deviousness of the self-proclaimed “Communist Party of Peru, Patria Roja” who, after raising themselves up as “great Maoists” became Teng’s servants, after having condemned him when he was defenestrated in 1976, as well as the anti-Maoism of the so called “Izquierda Unida” (United Left), in whose heart swarmed all the revisionist and even anti-Marxist positions passed off by false Marxists and opportunists of many kinds. We must raise Maoism as a revealing mirror for revisionists in order to combat them implacably, working for the development of the People’s War and the triumph of the democratic revolution underway, which is an unavoidable and unrenounceable task of a strategic character.

The Communist Party of Peru, through the fraction led by President Gonzalo, who propelled its reconstitution, took up Marxism-Leninism- Mao Tse-tung Thought in 1966; in 1979 the slogan “Uphold, defend, and apply Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought!”; in 1981: “Towards Maoism!”; and, in 1982, took Maoism as an integral part and superior development of the ideology of the international proletariat: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is with the People’s War that we have understood more deeply what Maoism implies and we have taken up the solemn pledge to “Uphold, defend, and apply Marxism-Leninism- Maoism, principally Maoism!” and to work relentlessly in helping to place it as leader and guide of the world revolution, the always red and unfading banner that is the guarantee of triumph for the proletariat, the oppressed nations, and peoples of the world in their inexorable, combative march of iron legions towards the golden and always brilliant goal of Communism.

Concerning Gonzalo Thought
eIYkzIm.jpg

All revolutions, in their process of development, through the struggle of the proletariat as the leading class and, above all, the struggle of the Communist Party that raises their unrenounceable class interests, give rise to a group of leaders and principally one who represents and leads it, a leader with acknowledged authority and influence. In our reality this has taken shape, on account of historical necessity and causality, in President Gonzalo, leader of the Party and of the revolution.

Moreover, and this is the basis upon which all leadership is formed, revolutions give rise to a thought that guides them, which is the result of the application of the universal truth of the ideology of the international proletariat to the concrete conditions of each revolution; a guiding thought indispensable to reach victory and to conquer political power and, moreover, to continue the revolution and to maintain the course always towards the only, great goal: Communism; a guiding thought that, arriving at a qualitative leap of decisive importance for the revolutionary process which it leads, identifies itself with the name of the one who shaped it theoretically and practically. In our situation, this phenomenon specified itself first as guiding thought, then as President Gonzalo’s guiding thought, and later, as Gonzalo Thought; because it is the President who, creatively applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to the concrete conditions of Peruvian reality, has generated it; thus endowing the Party and the revolution with an indispensable weapon which is guarantee of victory.

Gonzalo Thought has been forged through long years of intense, tenacious, and incessant struggle to uphold, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, to retake Mariátegui’s path and to develop it, to reconstitute the Party and, principally, to initiate, maintain and develop the People’s War in Perú serving the world revolution, and that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism be, in theory and practice, its sole command and guide.

It is of substantive necessity for the party to study Gonzalo Thought for a more just and correct understanding of the general political line, and mainly of the military line, aiming at deepening the understanding of the particularities of the Peruvian revolution, what is specific and particular that President Gonzalo has masterfully emphasized. In this way we serve “the great plan to develop base areas”, the development of the People’s War and the perspective of conquering political power countrywide.

We must study Gonzalo Thought, starting from the historical context that generated it; examine the ideological base which sustains it; explain its content, more substantially expressed in the general political line and in the military line which is its center; aiming at what is fundamental within it, the problem of political power, of the seizure of power in Perú, which is inextricably linked to the conquest of power by the proletariat in the whole world; and we must pay close attention to its forging in the two-line struggle.

In synthesis, these fundamental issues can be dealt with by applying the following scheme:

Historical Context
International context

In relationship to historical events:

1) the development since the Second World War onwards;

2) the powerful national liberation movement and, within it, the process and triumph of the Chinese Revolution;

3) the Cuban Revolution and its repercussion on Latin America;

4) the great struggle between Marxism and revisionism;

5) the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. But the key point is to see how, in this great class struggle on the world level, Gonzalo Thought considers that a third stage of the proletarian ideology arises: First, as Marxism-Leninism, Mao Tse-tung Thought; then Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought; and later, it is defined as Maoism, understanding its universal validity; and in this way reaching Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, as the present expression of Marxism.

National Context

1) the postwar Peruvian society and within it the political struggle, the so called National Democratic Front, the action of APRA, Odría’s coup d’etat and the struggle against his Eight Year Rule, the contest between APRA followers and Communists; and particularly, the development of bureaucratic capitalism in the 1960s and part of the 1970s and the sharp class struggle that accompanied it; “Velasquism” and its so-called revolution, the contention and collusion between the comprador bourgeoisie and the bureaucratic bourgeoisie (factions of the big bourgeoisie), and opportunism and mainly revisionism by their supporters;

2) the class struggle in the peasant movement;

3) the process of the working class movement;

4) the intellectual movement;

5) the armed struggle in the country, especially by the MIR [Movement of the Revolutionary Left] and the ELN [National Liberation Army] in 1965, as well as their antecedents in Blanco, Vallejos, and Heraud; and

6) the problem of the Party: How a Party founded on a clear Marxist-Leninist basis degenerated into a revisionist party, the need to retake Mariátegui’s path, develop it, and to reconstitute the Party, the Communist Party of Perú that Mariátegui himself founded in 1928, and how through this reconstitution a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Party was built. Here it is fundamental how Gonzalo Thought profoundly understood Peruvian society, and focused on the crucial problem of bureaucratic capitalism, and saw the need to reconstitute the Party and to conquer Political Power and defend it with the People’s War.

Ideological Basis
Without Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought cannot be conceived, because the latter is the creative application of the former to our reality. The key question on this point lies in the understanding of the historical process of the development of the proletarian ideology, of its three stages shaped in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and with Maoism as principal; and, principally, it is the application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as a universal truth to the concrete conditions of the Peruvian revolution; hence Gonzalo Thought is specifically principal for the Communist Party of Perú and the revolution it leads.

The guiding thought, having reached a qualitative leap of decisive importance for the Party and the revolution, has evolved into Gonzalo Thought, thus stamping a milestone in the Party’s life.

Contents
a. Theory. How it understands and applies the three integral parts of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism; it emphasizes the importance that Marxism gives to philosophy, the necessity of forming ourselves in it, and especially its application of the law of contradiction in the study of every problem, always aiming at defining the principal aspect and the process of things; in political economy, the concern about the relations of exploitation, and especially about bureaucratic capitalism, orienting itself towards ripening the revolution and the repercussion of the People’s War on the base, as well as paying attention to the economic relations of imperialism, looking for their political consequences; in scientific socialism it centers on the People’s War and its concrete expression in the country, since it always has the problem of political power in mind and, particularly, its shaping and development as a New State.

b. On the contents. The most substantive and developed part of Gonzalo Thought is found in the Party’s general political line; this thought directly sustains, therefore, the line and its five elements, with the point of departure being how it understands and maintains the Programme firmly on course.

c. In Gonzalo Thought we must highlight the remarkable fulfillment of the demands stated by Chairman Mao: theoretical solidity, understanding of history, and a good practical handling of politics.

What Is Fundamental
What is fundamental in Gonzalo Thought is the problem of political power; concretely, the conquest of political power in Peru, wholly and completely throughout the country, as a consequential application of the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in our revolution. But, being a Communist thought, it understands the conquest of political power in Perú as a part of the conquest of power for the proletariat on a world level; and that the conquest of power in the country, shaping itself today in the People’s Committees, base areas, and People’s Republic of New Democracy in formation within the perspective of establishing the People’s Republic of Peru, serves to establish the proletarian dictatorship in our country, because without it, it is impossible to march towards Communism. And, all of this is a function of firmly and decisively serving the setting up of people’s republics and mainly the proletarian dictatorship throughout the whole world, under the leadership of Communist Parties, with revolutionary armies of a new type, through people’s war and the development of cultural revolutions, so that Communism may illuminate all of the Earth.

Forged in the Two-Line Struggle
It is through a persistent, firm, and wise two-line struggle, defending the proletarian line and defeating the opposing lines that Gonzalo Thought has been forged. Among the most outstanding struggles that deserve to be emphasized are those waged against contemporary revisionism, represented here by Del Prado and his henchmen; those against the rightist liquidationism of Paredes and his gang; those against left liquidationism headed by the one who was called Sergio and his self-proclaimed “Bolsheviks”; and against the right opportunist line that opposed the initiation of the armed struggle. Without struggle, Gonzalo Thought could not have been developed; and his remarkable handling of the two-line struggle within the Party is a fundamental question which we must study and grasp.

To study and principally to apply Gonzalo Thought is decisive in order to better serve the Party, the development of the People’s War and the world revolution. Likewise, to learn from President Gonzalo is decisive in order to wholeheartedly serve the people.

Programme and Statutes
Programme
The Communist Party of Perú is based on and guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism and, specifically, by Gonzalo Thought as a creative application of the universal truth to the concrete conditions of the Peruvian revolution, as made by President Gonzalo, chief of our Party.

The Communist Party of Peru, organized vanguard of the Peruvian proletariat and integral part of the international Proletariat, especially upholds the following basic principles:

Contradiction as the only fundamental law of the incessant transformation of eternal matter;

The masses make history and “it is right to rebel”;

Class struggle, dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian internationalism;

The need for a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Party that firmly applies independence, autonomy and self-reliance;

To combat imperialism, revisionism, and reaction unbreakably and implacably;

To conquer and to defend power with the People’s War;

Militarization of the Party and concentric construction of the three instruments of the revolution;

Two-line struggle as the driving force of Party development;

Constant ideological transformation and to always put politics in command;

To serve to the people and the world proletarian revolution; and,

An absolute unselfishness and a just and correct style of work.

The Communist Party of Perú has Communism as its final goal; given that the current Peruvian society is oppressed and exploited by imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism, and semi-feudalism, the revolution has first a democratic stage, then a second socialist one that will later develop successive cultural revolutions. Presently with the People’s War the Party develops the democratic revolution, having as its immediate goal to seize power countrywide. Because of this we raise the following objectives:

General Programme of the Democratic Revolution
Demolition of the Peruvian State, the dictatorship of the exploiters led by the big bourgeoisie, and of the armed forces and forces of repression that sustain it and of all it's his bureaucratic apparatus.
To sweep away all imperialist oppression, mainly Yankee, and that of Soviet social-imperialism and of any power or imperialist country. In general to confiscate their monopolies, companies, banks and all forms of their property including the external debt.
To destroy bureaucratic capitalism, private as well as state owned; to confiscate all their properties, goods and economic rights to benefit of new state, as well as those belonging to imperialism.
Liquidation of semi-feudal property and everything subsisting on it, in the countryside as well as in the city.
Respect the property and rights of the national bourgeoisie, or middle bourgeoisie, in the country as well as in the city.
Fight for the setting-up of the People’s Republic of Perú, as a united front of classes based on the worker-peasant alliance led by the proletariat headed by its Communist Party; as a mold for the new democracy that carries forward a new economy, a new politics, and a new culture.
Develop the People’s War that, through a revolutionary army of a new type under the absolute control of the Party, destroys the old power a piece at a time, mainly their armed forces and other repressive forces. This serves to build the new power for the proletariat and the people.
To complete the formation of the Peruvian nation, truly unifying the country to defend it from all reactionary and imperialist aggression, safeguarding the rights of the minorities.
To serve the development of the Peruvian proletariat as part of the international working class, and the formation and strengthening of real Communist Parties and their unification in a revived international Communist movement guided by the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; all as a function of the proletariat fulfilling its great historical mission as the final class.
To defend the freedoms, rights, benefits, and conquests that the working class and the masses have achieved at the cost of their own blood, recognizing them and guaranteeing their authentic enforcement in a “Declaration of the Rights of the People”. To observe, particularly, the freedom of religious conscience, but in its widest sense, of believing as not to believe. Also to combat all arrangements harmful to the popular interest, especially any form of unpaid work or personal burden and the overwhelming taxes imposed on the masses.
Real equality for women; a better future for the youth; protection for the mothers and the children; respect and support for the elderly.
A new culture as a combat weapon to solidify the nation, that serves the popular masses and is guided by the scientific ideology of the proletariat. Special importance to education will be given.
To support the struggles of the international proletariat, of the oppressed nations, and of the peoples of the world; fighting against the superpowers, the United States and Soviet Union, imperialism in general, and international reaction and revisionism of all types, conceiving the Peruvian revolution as part of the world proletarian revolution.
To struggle tenaciously and heroically for the complete victory and of the democratic revolution nationwide and after completing this stage, at once, without pause, to begin the socialist revolution so that, together with the international proletariat, the oppressed nations and the peoples of the world, through cultural revolutions, will continue the march of humanity towards its final goal, Communism.
But considering that the democratic revolution in the country crosses a period characterized by:

deepening of the general crisis of Peruvian society, mainly of bureaucratic capitalism;
greater reactionarization of the State, today with an Aprista government, fascist and corporativist, headed by the genocidal García Pérez;
sharpening of the class struggle, with the masses accepting more and more the need for combating and resisting;
the People’s War developing vigorously and growing; and,
the people’s need for a People’s Republic built according to the principles of New Democracy.
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line
Contents

Democratic Revolution
Military Line
Construction Line
Mass Line
International Line
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line : Democratic Revolution
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 1. THE CHARACTER OF CONTEMPORARY PERUVIAN SOCIETY
2.1 Why is Peru semi-feudal?
2.2 Why is it semi-colonial?
2.3 Bureaucratic Capitalism.
3 2. TARGETS OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
4 3. TASKS OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
5 4. SOCIAL CLASSES IN THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
6 5. FUNDAMENTAL CONTRADICTIONS IN THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
7 6. STAGES OF THE REVOLUTION
8 7. HOW IS THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION BEING APPLIED TODAY?
INTRODUCTION
Upholding, defending and applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, President Gonzalo establishes that the Peruvian revolution in its historical course must first be a democratic revolution, then a socialist revolution which in turn must unfold cultural revolutions in order to reach Communism, all in an uninterrupted and specific process carried out by the application of people’s war. To reach this conclusion, his point of departure was Marx’s teaching, that Germany needed to replay the peasant wars of the XVI century, which would have channeled the democratic energy of the peasantry.

Lenin developed this point further, holding that since the bourgeoisie is a decrepit class and since the peasantry have raised the necessity of destroying feudalism, they could only fulfill a democratic revolution under the leadership of the proletariat. Later, Chairman Mao established in On New Democracy that as part of the world proletarian revolution, a transitional stage consisting of a joint dictatorship of the revolutionary classes must be formed in opposition to the bourgeois dictatorship, which can only be fulfilled under the leadership of the proletariat.

President Gonzalo takes into account the specific conditions of Peru that are characterized as follows: In the historical process of Peru there has not been a bourgeois revolution, since the bourgeoisie were incapable of leading it. Consequently, the land question and the national question are two pending problems to be solved. We are in the era of imperialism and of the world proletarian revolution, therefore, the proletariat is the class that has the task of destroying imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and semi-feudalism, not for the benefit of the bourgeoisie but rather for the proletariat, the mainly poor peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie and the middle bourgeoisie. The Peruvian proletariat has matured with a Communist Party of a new type capable of leading the revolution.

The democratic revolution of the old type is no longer appropriate, but instead a bourgeois revolution of a new type is needed; and that this type and all revolutions today can only be fulfilled through people’s war, the principal form of struggle, and by the revolutionary armed forces, the principal form of organization. Thus, he establishes the character of Peruvian society as a semi-feudal, semi-colonial one in which bureaucratic capitalism develops. He also sets the targets of the revolution, the tasks to undertake, and finally he defines the social classes and outlining the essence of the democratic revolution, its practicality today and its perspectives.

1. THE CHARACTER OF CONTEMPORARY PERUVIAN SOCIETY
Based on historical materialism, he analyzes the Peruvian process of history and shows that in the old society an agrarian order unfolded based on the ayllu, which was a communal agrarian order which was beginning to develop a form of slavery, the Incan empire erected through wars of conquest. Later in the XVI Century, the Spanish brought a decrepit feudal system and imposed it by force of arms against the resistance of the natives, and Peru became feudal and colonial; later, with independence, Spanish dominance was broken, but the feudal system was not.

The emancipators were landowners and the peasants did not achieve the conquest of the land. The XIX Century expresses an intense struggle between England and France to dominate us; and by the mid-century, the first sprouts of capitalism begin to develop on the existing feudal base. All this process in Peru is going to mean a change: The passage from feudalism to semi-feudalism and from colonialism to semi-colonialism. In characterizing contemporary Peruvian society, President Gonzalo says: “… contemporary Peru is a semi-feudal and semi-colonial society in which bureaucratic capitalism develops.”

Although Mariátegui had defined it well in the third point of the Program of the Constitution of the Party, this character is the light of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly of Maoism. President Gonzalo has demonstrated how this semi-feudal and semi-colonial character maintains and develops itself through new modalities, and in particular how bureaucratic capitalism has developed on this base throughout the entire process of contemporary society. This a problem of transcendental importance in order to understand the character of society and of the Peruvian revolution.

Bureaucratic capitalism is a fundamental thesis of Chairman Mao that it is not yet understood nor accepted by all the Marxists throughout the world, which for obvious historical reasons was not known by Mariátegui, and that President Gonzalo applies to the concrete conditions of our country. He maintains that in order to analyze the contemporary social process, one must start from three intimately linked problems:

The periods that bureaucratic capitalism is going through; the process accomplished by the proletariat in its highest expression, the Communist Party; and the road that the revolution must follow. He teaches us that since 1895 three historical moments can be differentiated in contemporary Peruvian society:

1st moment. The development of bureaucratic capitalism. The constitution of the PCP. Definition and outlining of the path of surrounding the cities from the countryside;

2nd moment. The development of bureaucratic capitalism. Reconstitution of the PCP. Establishment of the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside;

3rd moment. The general crisis of bureaucratic capitalism. The leadership of the PCP in the People’s War. Application and development of the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside.

At the same time, he proposes that contemporary Peruvian society is in a generalized crisis, a serious and incurable illness that can only be transformed through the armed struggle. The Communist Party of Peru is leading the people in this, as there is no other solution.

Why is Peru semi-feudal?
President Gonzalo states: “The decrepit semi-feudal system continues subsisting and characterizes the country from its deepest foundations to its most elaborate ideas. In essence, it persistently maintains the land question unresolved, which is the motor of the class struggle of the peasantry, especially of the poor peasants that are the immense majority.” He stresses that the land question continues subsisting because the semi-feudal relationships of exploitation allow semi-feudalism to evolve, and it is the basic problem of society that is expressed in land, servitude, and gamonalismo.

[“The term gamonalismo designates more than just a social and economic category: that of the latifundistas or large landowners. It signifies a whole phenomenon. Gamonalismo is represented not only by the gamonales but by a long hierarchy of officials, intermediaries, agents, parasites, etc. The literate Indian [sic, — Trans.] who enters the service of gamonalismo turns into an exploiter of his own race. The central factor of the phenomenon is the hegemony of the semi-feudal landed estate in the policy and mechanism of the government.” J.C Mariátegui, Seven Interpretive Essays on Peruvian Reality, p. 30. Quote added by translator.] We must see these conditions in all their aspects, economic, political, and ideological, in both the base and superstructure.

The peasantry constitutes about 60% of the population, which for centuries has worked the land but it is tied to the big property and to servitude. Hence, a great concentration of land exists in a few hands, with both associative and non-associative forms. The immense majority of the peasantry are the poor peasantry that do not have land, or if they have it they are very few, thus giving the position of the minifundio [small landowner] submitted to the voracity of the latifundio. [Large landowner–Trans.] This condition crushes the peasantry in a system of servitude that as Lenin taught presents itself in a thousand forms, but its essence is personal subordination. Thus we see forms centered around servile relationships such as unpaid work in the SAIS [agrarian societies], CAPS, peasant groups, in Cooperación Popular [Servile labor in government works during the Belaúnde regime.], PAIT [Assistance programs], PROEM [Emergency program run by the government.], etc.

Beyond this, it is known that in the countryside for every three peasants able to work only one works, and the State tries to channel the unused labor to benefit itself with unpaid labor. We can also observe (particularly in the Sierra region) an autarchic economy outside of the national economy. Reaffirming himself in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, President Gonzalo unfurls the principle that the agrarian reform consists in the destruction of the feudal landlord property; in the individual distribution of land to the peasantry under the slogan of “land to the tiller” [“tierra para quien la trabaja”], which is achieved through the People’s War and the New Power, led by the Communist Party.

This is equivalent to Lenin’s thesis that there are two roads in agriculture: The landlord’s road which is reactionary, evolves feudalism and supports the old state, and the peasant’s road which is advanced, destroys feudalism and tends towards a new state. He analyzes the character and the results of the agrarian laws passed by the old state, proving with certainty the subsistence of semi-feudalism, whose existence today is often denied. Thus, the Law of Bases of Pérez Godoy of 1962, the Law 15037 of 1964 and the Law 17716 of 1969 (essentially corporative that encourage big associative property) are characterized as being three laws of purchase/sale, executed by the bureaucratic apparatus of the state to develop bureaucratic capitalism.

He warns that the Law of Promoting Cattle Ranching of 1980 treats the land question as resolved and at the same time advocates associative property and the return of the gamonales to invigorate bureaucratic capitalism, which is also under the control of the big bankers with the direct participation of Yankee imperialism. This is the path that the fascist and corporativist Aprista government takes [referring to the government in 1988–Trans.], which is returning to the fascist and corporative “agrarian reform” of Velasco, raising cries of “revolutionizing agriculture” and thus strengthen gamonalismo, which treats the land question as resolved and centers around productivity, gives the law of communities, the law of peasant rondas in order to deepen bureaucratic capitalism and to spread it to every corner of the country, calling the masses to corporativization, aiming at the peasant communities as the base of their corporative zeal, which equally serve the creation of the micro-regions, the regions, CORDES [A development corporation] and other fascist and corporative creations.

All of this does not mean anything except new modalities of concentration of the old latifundista property, still not destroyed, and it is the old path of landowner policies followed in contemporary Peru that was brought up in the 1920s, deepened in the 1950s and especially in the 1960s, which is followed today under new conditions. This road of the landowner is expressed politically in the old state through gamonalismo; as Mariátegui says, gamonalismo does not only designate a social and economic category but an entire phenomenon represented not just by the gamonales, but which also encompasses a large hierarchy of officials, intermediaries, agents, parasites, etc., and that the central factor of the phenomenon is the hegemony of big semi-feudal property in politics and in the mechanism of the state, which should be attacked at its root.

President Gonzalo specifically emphasizes the manifestations of semi-feudalism in politics and in the mechanism of the state by conceiving that gamonalismo is the political manifestation of semi-feudalism upon which this regime of servitude is supported, in which bosses and lackeys, who change outfits according to the government in turn, represent the old state in the most remote villages of the country. Since this is an agrarian war, this is the factor which the spearhead of the democratic revolution is targeted at.

Why is it semi-colonial?
Modern Peruvian economy was born in submission to imperialism (the final phase of capitalism), which was masterfully characterized as monopolistic, parasitical and dying. Imperialism, even though it allows our political independence, as long as it serves its interest, still controls the entire economic process of Peru: our natural wealth, export products, industry, banking and finances. In brief, it sucks the blood of our people, devours the energies of a nation in formation, and most strikingly today it squeezes us and other oppressed nations with the external debt.

President Gonzalo reaffirms himself in Lenin’s thesis, later accurately developed by Chairman Mao, to define the semi-colonial character of our society. In synthesis, Lenin outlined that there are many forms of imperialist domination, but two are typical:

The colony, which is the complete domination by the imperialist country on the oppressed nation or nations, and an intermediate form;

The semi-colony, in which the oppressed nation is politically independent but economically subjugated. It is an independent republic, but one that finds itself subjected to the ideological, political, economic, and military web of imperialism no matter if it has a government of its own.

Thus, the term “neocolony” used by revisionism in the 1960s is rejected. It was based on the conception that imperialism applies a softer form of domination and which led them to derive the characterization of a “dependent country.” Therefore, applying Chairman Mao’s thesis that a period of struggle was opening against the two superpowers that contend for the repartition of the world, one must specify who is the principal enemy of the moment. He defined that the principal imperialism that dominates Peru is Yankee imperialism, but asserted that one must ward off Russian social-imperialism that penetrates the country more each day, as well as the actions of the imperialist powers that are not superpowers.

Thus, the proletariat in leading the democratic revolution will not be tied to any superpower or imperialist power and must maintain its ideological, political, and organizational independence. In conclusion, he demonstrates that Peruvian society continues to be a nation in formation, and that its semi-colonial character continues, showing itself as such in all fields and under new conditions.

Bureaucratic Capitalism.
President Gonzalo states that the understanding of this issue is key to the comprehension of Peruvian society. Following Chairman Mao’s thesis, he specifies five characteristics:

that bureaucratic capitalism is the capitalism that imperialism develops in the backward countries, which is comprised of the capital of large landowners, the big bankers, and the magnates of the big bourgeoisie;

it exploits the proletariat, the peasantry, and the petty bourgeoisie and places constraints upon the middle bourgeoisie;

it is passing through a process by which bureaucratic capitalism is combined with the power of the State and evolves into state monopoly capitalism, comprador and feudal, from which can be derived that in a first moment it unfolds as a non-state big monopoly capitalism and in a second moment, when is combined with the power of the state, it unfolds as state monopoly capitalism;

it ripens the conditions for the democratic revolution as it reaches the apex of its development;

and, confiscating bureaucratic capital is key to reach the pinnacle of the democratic revolution and it is decisive to pass over to the socialist revolution.

In applying the above, he conceives that bureaucratic capitalism is the capitalism that imperialism generates in the backward countries, which is linked to a decrepit feudalism and in submission to imperialism which is the last phase of capitalism. This system does not serve the majority of the people but rather the imperialists, the big bourgeoisie, and the landowners. Mariátegui has already pointed out that the bourgeoisie, for example upon creating banks, generates a capital owed [enfeudado] to imperialism and linked to feudalism.

President Gonzalo masterfully establishes that the capitalism that is unfolding in Peru is a bureaucratic capitalism hindered by the surviving shackles of semi-feudalism that bind it on the one hand, and on the other hand is subjugated to imperialism which does not permit it to develop the national economy; it is, then, a bureaucratic capitalism that oppresses and exploits the proletariat, the peasantry, and the petty bourgeoisie, and that constricts the middle bourgeoisie. Why? Because the capitalism that develops is a delayed process that only allows an economy to serve imperialist interests.

It is a capitalism that represents the big bourgeoisie, the landowners and the rich peasants of the old type, the classes that constitute a minority but which exploit and oppress the large majority, the masses. He analyzes the process that bureaucratic capitalism has followed in Peru, the first historical moment in which it develops from 1895 to the Second World War, in which, during the 1920s, the comprador bourgeoisie assumes control of the State, displacing the landlords but preserving their interests.

The second moment is from the Second World War to 1980, a period of its expansion, during which a branch of the big bourgeoisie evolves into the bureaucratic bourgeoisie, which began in 1939 in the first government of Prado, at the time when the participation of the State in the economic process begins. Subsequently, this participation has grown even more, and was due to the fact that the big bourgeoisie, due to a lack of capital, is not capable of deepening bureaucratic capitalism. Thus a clash between both factions of the big bourgeoisie was generated, between the bureaucratic and the comprador.

In 1968, the bureaucratic bourgeoisie takes the leadership of the state through the armed forces by way of the military coup of Velasco, which in turn generated a great growth in the state economy. The number of state-owned companies, for example, increased from 18 to 180; the state passes has become the motor of the economy led by the bureaucratic bourgeoisie, but it is during this moment that the economy enters into a deep crisis. The third moment is from 1980 onward, in which bureaucratic capitalism enters into a general crisis and its final destruction, a moment which begins with the People’s War.

Since it is a capitalism that is born critically, sick, rotten, and bound to feudalism and subjugated to imperialism, at this time it enters into a general crisis, to its final destruction, and no measure or reform can save it. It will lengthen its agony at best. On the other hand, like a beast in agony, it will defend itself by seeking to crush the revolution. If we see this process from the people’s road, in the first moment the PCP was constituted with Mariátegui in 1928, and the history of the country was split into two; in the second, the PCP was reconstituted as Party of a new type with President Gonzalo and revisionism was purged; and in the third, the PCP entered to lead the People’s War, a transcendental milestone which radically changes the history by taking the superior qualitative leap of making the conquest of power a reality by way of armed force and the People’s War.

All of this merely proves the political aspect of bureaucratic capitalism that is rarely emphasized, but which President Gonzalo considers as a key issue: bureaucratic capitalism ripens the conditions for revolution, and today as it enters into its final phase, it ripens the conditions for the development and victory of the revolution. It is also very important to see how bureaucratic capitalism is shaped by non-state monopoly capitalism and by state monopoly capitalism, that is the reason why he differentiates between the two factions of the big bourgeoisie, the bureaucratic one and the comprador, so as to avoid tailing one or the other, a problem that led our Party to 30 years of wrong tactics.

It is important to conceive it this way, since the confiscation of bureaucratic capitalism by the New Power will facilitate the completion of the democratic revolution and to advance into the socialist revolution. If only the state monopoly capitalism is targeted, the other part would remain free, the non-state monopoly capital, and the big comprador bourgeoisie would remain economically able to lift its head to snatch away the leadership of the revolution and to prevent its passage to the socialist revolution. Furthermore, President Gonzalo generalizes that bureaucratic capitalism is not a process peculiar to China or to Peru, but that it follows the late conditions in which the various imperialists subjugate the oppressed nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, at a time when these oppressed nations have not yet destroyed the vestiges of feudalism, much less developed capitalism.

In synthesis, the key issue to understand the process of contemporary Peruvian society and the character of the revolution, is this Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Though thesis on bureaucratic capitalism, which is a contribution to the world revolution that we Marxist-Leninist-Maoists have firmly assumed with Gonzalo Thought.

What type of state is sustained by this semi-feudal and semi-colonial society, upon which bureaucratic capitalism is unfolding?

Based on the analysis of contemporary Peruvian society and the masterful Maoist thesis “On New Democracy” which proposes that the many state systems in the world can be classified according to their class character into three fundamental types:

Republics under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, which also include the old democratic states and the states under the joint dictatorship of landowners and the big bourgeoisie;

republics under the dictatorship of the proletariat;

and republics under the joint dictatorship of the revolutionary classes.

President Gonzalo establishes that the character of the old reactionary state in Peru is of the first type, a joint dictatorship of landowners and the big bourgeoisie, bureaucratic bourgeoisie or comprador that in collusion and contention struggle for the leadership of the State. Since the historical trend in Peru is that the bureaucratic bourgeoisie imposes itself, this necessarily implies a very acute and long struggle, especially since today the bureaucratic bourgeoisie is in command of the old landlord-bureaucratic state. At the same time there are differences between the state system and the system of government.

They are parts of a unity of opposites; the state system is the place that classes occupy within the state and the government is the form in which power is organized. Chairman Mao taught that the main thing is to define the class character of a state. The forms of government that are introduced can be civilian or military, with elections or by decree, liberal-democratic or fascist, but they always represent the dictatorship of the reactionary classes; to not see the old state this way is to fall into the trap of identifying a dictatorship with a military regime and to think that a civilian government is not a dictatorship, thus tailing one of the factions in the big bourgeoisie behind the tale of “defending democracy” or “avoiding military coups”, positions that instead of destroying the old state support it and defend it, as is the case in Peru with the revisionists and opportunists of the United Left.

The old state is subordinated to imperialism, in our case mainly Yankee imperialism, which is propped up by its spinal column, the reactionary armed forces, and counts on a increasingly growing bureaucracy. The armed forces have the same character as the state that they support and defend. President Gonzalo tells us clearly: “It is this social system that yields their usufruct that the ruling classes and their master Yankee imperialism defends with blood and fire, through their landlord-bureaucratic state, sustained by their reactionary armed forces; constantly exercising their class dictatorship (of the big bourgeoisie and landlords), either through a de facto military government … or through governments stemming from elections and so-called constitutional ones…” and, “…this decrepit system of exploitation, destroys and halts the powerful creative forces of the people, the only forces capable of the deepest revolutionary transformation…”.

2. TARGETS OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
President Gonzalo teaches us that there are three targets of the democratic revolution: imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and semi-feudalism, with one of them being the principal target according in which the revolution crosses takes place. Today, in the period of the agrarian war, the principal target is semi-feudalism. Imperialism, mainly Yankee, because for us it is the principal imperialism that dominates and that tries to ensure its dominance more and drives home our situation as a semi-colonial country; but we must also ward off penetration by Russian social-imperialism and of the other imperialist powers.

We must use the various factions of the old state to sharpen their contradictions and isolate the principal enemy in order to defeat it. Bureaucratic capitalism is the constant obstacle of the democratic revolution that acts to maintain semi-feudalism and semi-colonialism at the service of imperialism. And semi-feudalism that subsists today with new modalities but that still constitutes the basic problem of the country.

3. TASKS OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
1st: To destroy imperialist domination, mainly Yankee imperialism in Peru’s case , while warding off the actions of the other superpower, Russian social-imperialism and of the other imperialist powers.

2nd: To destroy bureaucratic capitalism, confiscating both the big state and non-state monopoly capital.

3rd: To destroy the property of the feudal landlords, confiscating both the big associative and non-associative properties, with individual distribution of the land under the slogan “Land to the tiller” [La tierra para quien la trabaja], primarily and principally to the poor peasants.

4th: To support middle capital, which is allowed to work while imposing conditions. All of this implies the collapse the old state through the People’s War with armed revolutionary force and the leadership of the Communist Party in building a new State.

4. SOCIAL CLASSES IN THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
President Gonzalo has defined the social classes which must be united according to the conditions of the revolution: the proletariat, the peasantry (mainly the poor peasants), the petty bourgeoisie and the middle bourgeoisie. The classes we aim against are: landlords of the old and the new mold, and the big bureaucratic bourgeoisie or comprador bourgeoisie. President Gonzalo tells us: “… the peasantry is the principal motive force…. who for centuries fundamentally demand ‘Land to the tiller’, which despite their courageous struggles has yet to achieve it”; “… the proletariat… the leading class of our revolution… that in the long, arduous struggle has torn only starvation wages and has conquered only crumbs from their exploiters, only to lose them through each economic crisis that the society suffers; a proletariat that debates within a sinister iron circle…”; “a petty bourgeoisie with broad layers, which corresponds to a backward country, who sees their dreams shattered in time to the inexorable pauperization that the prevailing social order imposes to them”; and, “a petty bourgeoisie, a national bourgeoisie that is weak and lacks capital, which develops unevenly, zig-zagging and split between revolution and counter-revolution….”. “Four classes that historically make up the people and the motive forces of the revolution, but of them all it is mainly the poor peasantry who are the main driving force”.

A particular importance is attached to the scientific organization of poverty, a thesis that comes from Marx and that for us implies organizing the mainly poor peasantry and the poorest masses in the cities into a Communist Party, a People’s Guerrilla Army and a New State that is concretized through People’s Committees. A series of relationships is established. Thus, to speak of the peasant question is to speak of the land question, and to speak of the land question is to speak of the military question, and to speak of the military question is to speak of the question of power, of the New State which we will reach through the democratic revolution led by the proletariat through its Party, the Communist Party.

In the People’s War, the peasant question is the base and the military question is the guide. Furthermore, without the peasantry in arms there is no hegemony in the Front. It is, then, of great significance to understand that the peasant question is basic and it sustains all of the actions in the democratic revolution. It is important even in the socialist revolution. The proletariat is the leading class. It is the class that guarantees the Communist course of the revolution, that unites with the peasantry, it makes up the worker-peasant alliance, the basis of the Front.

The Peruvian proletariat that is concentrated largely in the capital and is proportionally greater than in China, but in terms of percentage decreases day by day, a specific situation that presents itself as we apply the democratic revolution, for which we wage the People’s War in the cities as a complement. A class that has arrived today to the formation of a Communist Party, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought party that has generated a People’s Guerrilla Army which it leads absolutely and a New State which it leads in a joint dictatorship, a Party that through almost 20 years of reconstitution and seven in leadership of the People’s War has given the people a great historical leap. It is vital to understand its leading role in the democratic revolution, since it guarantees the correct course towards Communism; and, without the leadership of the proletariat the democratic revolution would evolve into an armed action under the leadership of the bourgeoisie and would fall under the tutelage of a superpower or imperialist power.

To the above two classes are added the petty bourgeoisie, and taken together they are the solid trunk of the revolutionary Front, which is no more than a Front for the People’s War and a framework of the alliance of classes that make up the New State, the People’s Committees in the countryside and the Revolutionary Defense Movement of the People in the cities. Concerning the middle bourgeoisie, today it does not participate in the revolution but its interests are respected. It is not a target of the democratic revolution; it is a class that suffers ever-greater restrictions from the reactionaries but it is of dual character and in the course of the democratic revolution can join the side of the revolution at any moment.

If the interests of the middle bourgeoisie are not taken into account then the revolution would change character, it would no longer be democratic but socialist. In sum, the New State that we are forming in the democratic revolution will be a joint dictatorship, an alliance of four classes led by the proletariat through its Party, the Communist Party: a dictatorship of workers, peasants, the petty bourgeoisie and under certain conditions the national or middle bourgeoisie; a dictatorship that today is of three classes, since the middle bourgeoisie do not participate in the revolution, but their interest are respected. These classes make up the dictatorship of New Democracy in the state system, and a People’s Assembly as a system of government.

5. FUNDAMENTAL CONTRADICTIONS IN THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION
In the democratic revolution there are three fundamental contradictions: The contradiction between nation-imperialism, the contradiction between the people and bureaucratic capitalism, and the contradiction between the masses and feudalism. Depending on the periods of the revolution, any one of these can be the principal contradiction. As we develop an agrarian war today, if we carefully take note of the three, the principal contradiction is between the masses and feudalism. This has a process of development in the different phases of the war, thus in our case the principal contradiction of masses-feudalism has unfolded as masses-government, and later will be between the new state — old state, and its perspective is Communist Party — reactionary armed forces.

6. STAGES OF THE REVOLUTION
President Gonzalo teaches us that the democratic revolution is the indispensable first stage in the oppressed nations, which will pass through various periods according to how such contradictions are resolved. There is an unbreakable relationship and an uninterrupted road between the democratic revolution and the second stage, which is the socialist revolution, and its perspective is a series of cultural revolutions to arrive at Communism, serving the world revolution.

As such, we have a maximum program and a minimal one, the minimum being the program of the democratic revolution that is specified in each period and which implies a new politics: the joint dictatorship of four classes; a new economy: confiscation of big imperialist capital, of bureaucratic capitalism, and of the big feudal landlord property, with individual land distribution to the mainly poor peasants; a new culture: national, or rather anti-imperialist, democratic, or rather for the people, and scientific, or based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought.

The maximum program implies that we, as Communists, aim to eliminate the three inequalities between town and countryside, between intellectual and manual work, and between workers and peasants. Two programs for which we give our lives against every kind of injury, taunt and abjectness. Only the Communists can fight for the revolution to maintain its course. President Gonzalo stated: “What in essence is this democratic revolution? It is a peasant war led by the Communist Party, which intends to create a new state comprised of four classes to crush imperialism, the big bourgeoisie, and the landlords in order to fulfil its four tasks.

The democratic revolution has a principal form of struggle: The People’s War, and a principal form of organization: the armed force, which is the solution to the land question, the national question, and the question of the destruction of the landlord bureaucratic state and the reactionary armed forces, the vertebral column that sustains it, in order to fulfill the political objective of building a new state, a state of new democracy, and to make the People’s Republic of New Democracy, advancing immediately to the socialist revolution. In synthesis, the democratic revolution is concretized by a peasant war led by the Communist Party; any other modality is only a service to the landlord bureaucratic state.” In synthesis, President Gonzalo demonstrates the force of the two stages of the revolution in the oppressed nations and establishes that the world proletarian revolution has three types of revolution. As such, by making the democratic revolution, the Communist Party of Peru is serving the world revolution and President Gonzalo is contributing to the world revolution. We, with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, have assumed the line on the democratic revolution established by President Gonzalo

7. HOW IS THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION BEING APPLIED TODAY?
In over seven years of the People’s War in Peru, the justness and correctness of Gonzalo Thought is demonstrated, and we see that the Communist Party of Peru, with the leadership of President Gonzalo, is leading the poor peasantry in arms, is forming a joint dictatorship of workers, peasants, and the petty bourgeoisie under the hegemony of the proletariat, is observing the interests of the middle bourgeoisie, and is destroying thirteen centuries of the reactionary state. It is a dictatorship that marches within the People’s Committees, today clandestine, which are expressions of the New State that exercises power through People’s Assemblies, in which everyone expresses opinions, chooses, judges, or sanctions by applying true democracy.

They do not hesitate in using the dictatorship, force if necessary in order to maintain their power and to defend it from the exploitative classes or their oppressors, gamonales or lackeys; thus specifying a new politics and an advance in the seizure of Power from below. It is destroying the basis of this society, semi-feudalism, and it is introducing new social relations of production by applying a new economy, taking into account the agrarian tactic of combating the evolution of semi-feudalism by aiming at associative property and avoiding non-associative property, neutralizing the rich peasantry, winning over the middle peasantry and basing itself on the poor peasantry; and the agrarian program of “Land to the tiller” through confiscation and individual distribution through a process: with plans of razing, whose concrete objective is to destroy semi-feudal relations in order to disarticulate the productive process, directing the spearhead of the revolution at dislocating the power of the gamonales with armed actions; applying sowings and collective crop harvestings although we do not yet have power and while the EGP is not sufficiently developed, all the peasants work everyone’s land, always collectively favoring the mainly poor peasantry.

In the event of a surplus, a form of taxes is calculated and produce or seeds is distributed to the poorest and to the middle peasants. The lands of the rich peasants are not touched unless such land is needed, but conditions are imposed on them. This political policy has had highly positive results, it has benefitted the poorest, it has increased the quality of the products and above all it is defended better; the perspective of this policy is the invasion of lands and individual allotment. Also, particularly in new peasant zones, we have applied invasions of lands and individual allotment, lighting the struggle in the countryside and disturbing the plans of the old state, of each government in turn, in each specific conjuncture, organizing the armed defense.

Today, we have generalized the land invasions countrywide. Furthermore, the organization of production of an entire people is being achieved, with the exchange of produce or seeds, the collection of firewood or cochinilla [a type of plant used in making dyes — trans.], for example, communal shops, trade, and mule driving. This process serves the actions in cities, sabotages against demo-bourgeois or corporative-fascist state organizations, state or private and imperialist banks, imperialist centers of the superpowers or powers, industrial or “research” sites, businesses of bureaucratic capitalism, for example Centromin Perú; also the selective annihilation of recalcitrants and the agitprop campaigns and armed propaganda.

And on the basis of this new politics and new economy, a new culture is being erected that beats in the hearts of mainly the poor peasants; basic education is a problem that deserves our fundamental attention and is unfolding under coeducation, education and work, with a basic program for the children, adults, and for the masses in general; it is truly important. The problems of health and recreation of the masses are also of vital importance. Thus, the masses are organized, forming their mobilization, politicization, organization and armament, aiming towards the armed sea of masses, based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, under the leadership of the Party, with the experience of the People’s War and above all and principally with the new power, exercising it, conquering it, defending it and developing it, as People’s Committees, Bases of Support and advancing the People’s Republic of New Democracy.

This is the democratic revolution that the Party is specifying for Peruvian society, overthrowing imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and semi-feudalism in the country through a united People’s War, principally in the countryside and with an urban complement, and it is not the “democratic revolution” falsely proclaimed by the current fascist and corporatist Apra government that denies the character of Peruvian society, classes and the class struggle, especially the landlord-bureaucratic dictatorial character of the old state, as well as the need for violence to topple it. It is a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought democratic revolution that constitutes an ardent and growing flame serving the world proletarian revolution which is guaranteed by the masterful leadership of President Gonzalo.

DOWN WITH THE LANDLORD-BUREAUCRATIC STATE!

FOR THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF NEW DEMOCRACY!

LONG LIVE THE PERUVIAN REVOLUTION!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line : Military Line
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 I. THE PEOPLE’S WAR
2.1 1. ON THE PEOPLE’S WAR IN PERU
2.2 2. THE ROAD OF SURROUNDING THE CITIES FROM THE COUNTRYSIDE AND THE BASE OF REVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT
2.3 3. THE PROTRACTED WAR
3 II. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEOPLE’S GUERRILLA ARMY
4 III. STRATEGY AND TACTICS
4.1 1. On Strategy and Tactics.
4.2 2. The basic principle of the war.
4.3 3. The guerrilla tactics or basic tactics.
4.4 4. Campaigns of “encirclement and annihilation” and the counter- campaigns, principal form of the People’s War.
4.5 5. The strategic role of guerrilla warfare
4.6 6. The ten military principles.
4.7 7. Brilliant summary of strategy and tactics.
INTRODUCTION
Upholding, defending, and applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, President Gonzalo established the military line of the Party. In the First Expanded National Conference of November, 1979, it was agreed upon as being central to the general political line and it is now being developed through the People’s War.

President Gonzalo has persistently integrated the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism with the concrete practice of the Peruvian revolution, combating and crushing revisionism and the right opportunist line. By applying dialectical materialism to the question of war, the military line also expresses the philosophical thought of President Gonzalo and summarizes the laws of war, of revolutionary war in general, and the specific laws of the revolutionary war in Peru. The military line is vital to our ideological, political, military, economic, and cultural work and permits us to differentiate between the proletarian military line and the bourgeois military line.

The military line consists of the laws that govern the People’s War for the conquest of Power and its defense. It contains three elements:

1. People’s war, specified in our case as unified People’s War, principally in the countryside, with its complement in the city; 2. Construction of the revolutionary armed forces, applied here as the People’s Guerilla Army, which has the particularity of incorporating the militia in order to advance towards the sea of armed masses, and; 3. Strategy and tactics that are formed through the encirclement and annihilation campaigns and the counter-campaigns of encirclement and annihilation. In our case this element is specified by applying political and military plans that have a political and military strategy developed in campaigns with specific objectives.

I. THE PEOPLE’S WAR
1. ON THE PEOPLE’S WAR IN PERU
President Gonzalo, reaffirming himself on the universal law of revolutionary violence, follows the military theory of the proletariat established by Chairman Mao: The people’s war has universal validity and is applicable in all types of countries, in accordance with the conditions of each revolution. The World People’s War is the principal form of struggle that the proletariat and the oppressed peoples of the world should launch to oppose imperialist world war. The people’s war is a war of the masses and can only be accomplished by mobilizing the masses and being supported by them. He says: “The masses give us everything, from the crusts of bread that are taken from their own mouths to their precious blood which stirs jointly with that of the combatants and militants, which nourishes the road of the People’s War for the New Power.”

The masses should be organized into armed units in the People’s Guerilla Army. In the rural Base Areas all the men and women of each People’s Committee are organized militarily. In the cities, the People’s Guerrilla Army also acts and is bound more and more to the masses in the various new organizations in and for the People’s War. The Revolutionary Movement in Defense of the People is the realization of the Front in the cities. Its objective is to mobilize the masses in resistance, to serve the war, and serve the future insurrection.

He holds that in order to carry forward the People’s War we must take into account four fundamental problems:

1. The ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism that must be specified as a guiding thought, therefore we base ourselves on the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, primarily the latter; 2. The need for the Communist Party of Peru that leads the People’s War; 3. The People’s War specified as a peasant war that follows the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside; and 4. Base Areas or the New Power, the construction of the Base Areas, which is the essence of the path of surrounding the cities from the countryside.

He analyzes the historical process of our people and demonstrates that they have always struggled, that it “has been nurtured and advanced through revolutionary violence. It is through this violence, in its diverse forms and degrees, that our people have conquered their economic gains [reivindicaciones], rights, and freedoms, since nothing fell from the sky, nor was it handed out. ‘Damn the words of traitors’; everything was won in fact through revolutionary violence, in ardent battles against the reactionary violence; that is how the eight hour day was won, our lands were conquered and defended, our rights were won and tyrants were overthrown. Revolutionary violence is, therefore, the very essence of our historical process… it is easy to understand that the development and victory of the Peruvian revolution, of our democratic revolution, the emancipation of the people and the class, will be achieved solely through the greatest revolutionary war of our people, raising the masses in arms through the People’s War”.

He draws the historical lesson that these political and military realities have defined the major transformations in the country. First comes the military deed and later political change. This shows once again that war is the continuation of politics by other means. He teaches us how the masses of our people have fought against exploitation. Since the VII century, in which the Peruvian state emerged, the masses have combated oppression and exploitation. The Incan empire established its domination through wars of conquest which culminated in the battle of Yahuarpampa [Quechua for “bloodfields”–Trans.] against the Chancas Predominant cultural group in the region of Ayacucho and Apurímac.. The empire further expanded through war. This is a political and military fact.

The conquest by the Spanish crown was another political and military fact that was imposed, crushing the resistance of the indigenous people and using the infightings among the conquered. However, we should highlight among others the struggle of Manco Inca, who led a rebellion against the Spanish.

The imposition of the Vice-royalty was another political and military fact that was used to crush the conquistadors themselves. To maintain itself it had to face large peasant uprisings such as the one led by Juan Santos Atahualpa, and in 1780 the powerful movement of Túpac Amaru that raised 100 thousand men, extending from Cusco and Puno into Bolivia, putting the dominance of the Vice-royalty at serious risk, having repercussions in Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico and thus shaking up the American continent. While the movement was defeated, it had weakened and undermined the Vice-royalty, thus preparing the conditions for Emancipation. To see its class character, we should recall that Túpac Amaru was a cacique. [A cacique was a chief of the indias in the area of Cusco, appointed by the Viceroy–Trans.]

The Emancipation was another military and political fact and has three moments: First, in the XVIII Century, peasant uprisings, Túpac Amaru, for example; second, the uprisings in the cities, such as that of Francisco de Zela in Tacna and the guerrillas, especially those of Cangallo and Yauyos among many others; third, confrontations of large armies that ended with the liberating epics of San Martín and Bolivar in the battle of Ayacucho in 1824. It is important to understand that even though the Emancipation was led by the creoles [criollos], it had the merit of breaking the domination of the Spanish crown; that San Martín was a great military strategist and Bolivar proved to be both a political and military strategist. Both of them fought for the emancipation of several American countries without seeking personal gain, showing that to serve a great cause we must always put the general interest first and never the personal, and they did so without being Communists.

In the Republic the landlords remained in power but facing with fire and blood great peasant struggles, among them those of Atusparia and Uscho Pedro, or that of Llaccolla Autsparia, Uscho Pedro, and Llaccolla were leaders of rebellions in southern Peru. in Ocros. Here we have the dark chapter of the war with Chile where both countries faced each other manipulated by the interests of the English and the French that were seeking our wealth in guano and nitrates. This was a war that halted the incipient capitalist development of the country and revealed the dirty role of the dominant classes, part of which capitulated to Chile. But one must emphasize the heroic resistance of the masses against the invader in defense of the people and territorial integrity, a resistance that was especially strong in the mountainous Central and Southern regions of the of the country where guerrillas were formed; Cáceres [Andres A. Caceres organized a strong guerrilla movement against the invaders–Trans.], who was a landowner-soldier, played an important role in that circumstance.

The war with Chile was waged from 1879 to 1883, and it led to the collapse of the Peruvian economy. Shortly thereafter, in 1895 it entered the beginning of bureaucratic capitalism that initiates the development of contemporary Peruvian society. As the XIX Century passes, Peru goes from a colony to a semi-colony and from feudal to semi-feudal. Bureaucratic capitalism bound to Yankee imperialism begins to develop, thus replacing the English one. Finally, the modern proletariat emerges which changes the terms of the political struggle.

From this historical process the following lessons are drawn:

The people have always struggled, they are not peaceful and they apply revolutionary violence with the means at hand.

The peasant struggles are those which have most shaken the foundations of society, and these struggles have not triumphed because they lacked the leadership of the proletariat represented by the Communist Party.

The political and military deeds determine the major social changes.

From the position of the military line, contemporary Peru has three moments linked to the appearance of the proletariat that founds its Party to conquer Power through revolutionary violence, specifying its road, which is synthesized in the process of the military line of the Party.

The first moment. (1895 to 1945) The Communist Party of Peru is constituted and, concerning the military line, Mariátegui establishes the “Indication and outline of the road.” The heroic workers’ struggles for better wages, the eight hour day, for decent working conditions, the peasant movements for lands and the agricultural proletarian movements of the southern Sierra, and the movements to reform the university, led to a complex sharpening of the class struggle in which the Peruvian proletariat matured and in which Mariátegui founded the Communist Party of Peru, on October 7, 1928, under the banner of Marxism-Leninism.

Mariátegui pointed out and outlined fundamental ideas on revolutionary violence. He said: “There is no revolution that is moderate, balanced, calm, placid.” “Power is conquered through violence… it is preserved only through dictatorship.” He conceived the revolutionary war as being protracted in nature: “A revolution can only be fulfilled after many years. Frequently it has alternating periods of predominance of either the revolutionary forces or the forces of counter-revolution.” He established the relationship between politics and war; understanding that the revolution generates an army of a new type with its own tasks different from those of the exploiters; he also understood the nature of the peasantry and the vital participation of the working class in a leading role, that the revolution will come from the Andes, that “with the demolition of the latifundista feudalism, the urban capitalism will lack forces to resist the growing working class”; that in order to make revolution, guns, a program and doctrine are needed. He conceived the revolution as a total war in which there is a conjunction of political, social, military, economic and moral elements, and that each faction puts in tension and mobilizes all the resources that it can. He totally rejected the electoral road.

Mariátegui died in April, 1930. The Right led by Ravines is going to usurp the leadership of the Party and the questioning and denial of Mariátegui’s road occurs. They invoke insurrection in words but degenerate into electoralism. The so-called “Constitutional Congress” of the Party in 1942 sanctions the tactics of capitulation of the “National Union”, both in internal politics as well as internationally. The Party is influenced by Browderite ideas, a predecessor of contemporary revisionism, where there is a clear abandonment of revolutionary violence and an electoral tactic is promoted focussing on the “National Democratic Front”. Nevertheless, the red line in the Party struggled to defending the Marxist-Leninist positions, although it was bitterly resisted and the internal struggles were resolved through expulsions.

The second moment. (1945 to 1980) The Communist Party of Peru is reconstituted, and with respect to the military line, President Gonzalo establishes the “Definition and Basis of the Road”. This second moment has two parts: The first, in the period from 1945 to 1963, which is one of “New impulses for the development of the Party and the beginnings of the struggle against revisionism.” The second part, from 1963 to 1980, is one of the “Establishment of the general political line and reconstitution of the Party”.

In the first part of the second moment, by the mid-1950s, the struggle for reactivating the Party that had remained unfinished after Odría’s coup d’état begins. Afterwards, the Party starts the opening step in the struggle against revisionism. This process occurs in the midst of the repercussions of the Cuban revolution. At the same time, at the world level, the unfolding of the struggle between Marxism and revisionism begins. The revolutionary road is discussed, the armed struggle is discussed again and, in the IV Congress of the Party, in 1962, it is agreed that in Peru the so-called “two roads” are feasible: “The peaceful road and the violent one.” Also, “the revolution can follow the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside or from the city to the countryside.” But in spite of this talk, the Party in essence was hanging on to the old electoral strategy then taking the form of the so-called “National Liberation Front.” This was the revisionism of Khrushchev. At this time the political positions of President Gonzalo began to emerge, laying the foundations of the red line which adhered to the positions of Chairman Mao in the struggle between Marxism and revisionism.

In the second part of the second moment, from 1963 to 1980, we have the “Establishment of the general political line and reconstitution of the Party”, this task was carried forward by President Gonzalo in constituting the red fraction of the Party in an intensive struggle of more than fifteen years and through three political strategies:

From 1963 to 1969 he guided the red fraction under the political strategy of following the “Road of surrounding the cities from the countryside.” From 1969 to 1976 he led the Party with the political strategy of “Reconstitution of the Party for the People’s War.” From 1976 to 1979 there was the political strategy of “Complete the Reconstitution and Establish Bases” for the beginning of the armed struggle.

During the first strategic period following the “Road of surrounding the cities from the countryside,” the Communists of Peru are profoundly shaken by the struggle between Marxism and revisionism, and Marxist positions seep into the organization. In the 1960s there is a great peasant movement that mobilized 300 to 500 thousand peasants which fought for land but that was precluded from the armed struggle by a revisionist leadership; a great movement of labor strikes occurs in the working class, and the university struggle is developed to a higher level. All these events had repercussions on the Party and President Gonzalo forged the red fraction in Ayacucho, with clear ideas that the Party must seizing power, and that it must be based on Marxist theory.

A frontal struggle is unleashed against revisionism that had its center in the Soviet Union, and adheres firmly to the positions of the Chinese Communist Party and principally with those of Chairman Mao. He sustained that: “The countryside is in a powerful revolutionary ferment”, “we must lend special attention to the countryside and to the poor peasants”, that “our revolution will be from the countryside to the city.” In the IV National Conference of January, 1964, he met with the different bases of the Party to expel revisionism and its crusty representatives Jorge del Prado, Acosta and Juan Barrio. Our Party is going to be one of the first in breaking and expelling revisionism from its ranks.

President Gonzalo began to consolidate the Party in the Regional Committee of Ayacucho; the center of Party work was focused in the countryside; in the city he organized the poor masses in the Neighborhoods’ Federation, and reorganized the Revolutionary Student Front. But what is of transcendental importance, is that despite the opposition of the new central leadership, President Gonzalo applying a Party agreement launched the “Special Work”, which was the military work of the Regional Committees by giving them three functions: political, military, and logistical.

Afterwards, in sharp two-line struggle against the positions of the central leadership that wanted to control the military work, he combated militarism, mercenaryism and foquismo. [Refers to the “foco” theory of Che Guerara–Trans.] In these circumstances the guerrillas of the MIR [Movement of the Revolutionary Left–Trans.] develop, a position that expressed the struggle of our people from a petit-bourgeois outlook, which follows a militaristic line and ignores the Party. In spite of being out of step with the rise of the peasants, this movement showed the feasibility of the perspective of armed struggle, provided that it was led by a just and correct line under the leadership of the Party. For that reason, President Gonzalo was opposed to dissolving the Party in order to tail the MIR and the ELN [National Liberation Army–Trans.] in a supposed Front.

At the September 1967 meeting of the Expanded Political Bureau, he outlined a Strategic Plan which contained a set of measures that the Central Committee had to take for the construction of the three instruments, having as its principal task the forming of the armed forces that was agreed upon at the V National Conference of 1965. This occurs in the midst of a factional struggle where most notably the fractions of “Patria Roja” and of the Right liquidationism of Paredes contended for the leadership of the Party. Paredes intended to replay the tactic of tailing a faction of the big bourgeoisie, while those of “Patria Roja” went on to plunge into Right opportunism.

During the second political strategy of “Reconstitute the Party for the Peoples’ War,” President Gonzalo outlined the underlying revisionism within the Party and that its reconstitution on the Basis of Party Unity, upholding Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung thought, the thought of Mariátegui and the general political line was necessary. These positions were opposed by the aforementioned fractions. The mishandling of the two-line struggle by Paredes is going to lead to the break-up of the Party. President Gonzalo understood the need for the reconstitution of the Party and the need for waging an internal struggle to make it a reality by sweeping away revisionism, as evidenced by the editorials he wrote in Bandera Roja [Official journal of the PCP–Trans.] of December 1967, “Develop in Depth the Internal Struggle,” and that of April 1968, “Deepen and Intensify the Internal Struggle in Revolutionary Practice.” He worked tirelessly for the channeling of revolutionary violence in a people’s war, for the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside, thus accomplishing the principal task demanded by the Party:

The construction of the revolutionary armed forces. He proposed that the indispensable base in this undertaking was the development of revolutionary peasant work, that without good work in the peasant masses, that is, work guided by Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung thought and led by the Communist Party, there cannot be a development of the armed forces nor of the People’s War. Afterward, he proposed that the Party must not only retake the continuing validity of Mariátegui’s thought, but must also develop it.

He established the Agrarian Program of the Party in May of 1969. In 1972, the Strategic Plan of the Regional Committee of Ayacucho was established. Right liquidationism is defeated, and in the Party two fractions remain: the red fraction fundamentally in Ayacucho, led by President Gonzalo, and the “Bolshevik” fraction, acting mainly in Lima. This second one developed a left liquidationist line, a form of revisionism that isolated the Party from the masses. Their conception was that fascism could not be fought, that a correct line was sufficient. They had a military line that was opposed to the People’s War. They were crushed in 1975 and their leaders fled.

During the third political strategy to “Complete the Reconstitution and to Establish Bases” to begin the armed struggle, the problem was to finish, to consider the Reconstitution of the Party as complete, and to establish bases to begin the armed struggle. This issue was settled in the VII Plenum of April, 1977, in which all the Party worked under the slogan of “Construction serving the armed struggle”, in struggle against the seeds of a right opportunist line (ROL), which sustained that Velasco [Military regime from 1968-1972–Trans.] had made the agrarian reform, that there was a need to organize the peasants in connection with the Peasant Federation of Peru and that the People’s War needed to be waged for the “deepest claims of the masses”, forgetting about the problems of land and of power. In the cities, they developed “workerism”, focusing the class in labor unions [gremialismo] and opposed to the class playing its leading role. Once these positions were crushed, President Gonzalo launched the “National Plan of Construction” in June of 1977; dozens of cadre were sent to the countryside in the interests of the strategic needs of the People’s War and to build Regional Committees taking into account the future Bases Areas. In the VIII Plenum of July of 1978, the “Outline for the Armed Struggle” was established. In essence, this outlined outlined that the People’s War in Peru must be developed as a unified whole in both the countryside as well as in the city, with the countryside being the principal theater of armed actions, following the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside. Furthermore, it must take into account the historical social process of the country, especially the military aspect, the importance of the Sierra and principally from the Central and Southern part in our history, the importance of the Capital, and the need to pace Peru within the context of Latin America, in South America particularly, and within the international context and the world revolution. All the Party was put into a general reorganization, placing the countryside as central to develop the principal form of struggle and organization. Thus, the basis of the construction of the three instruments of the revolution was laid down.

In synthesis, the entire process of Reconstitution led us to a Party of a new type prepared to begin the People’s War and to lead it until the conquest of power countrywide. In this process the historical contingent was forged, who with the ideology of the proletariat under the leadership of President Gonzalo was prepared to assume the conquest of Power through the People’s War.

The third moment. (1980 to the present) The Party begins to lead the People’s War. Its military line is formed with the “Application and development of the Road.” This third moment has four milestones:

1. Definition; 2. Preparation; 3. Initiation; and 4. Development of the guerrilla war.

1) Definition. In essence, the Party takes up the historic and transcendental agreement of initiating the People’s War in Peru, which was agreed upon in the IX Expanded Plenum of June, 1979. This agreement was achieved in the midst of three intense struggles: The first was against the right opportunist line that was opposed to beginning the armed struggle, denying the revolutionary situation and declaring its conditions as nonexistent, and that there was a condition of “stability.” After the expulsion of this line, the Party agreed upon a new stage and a new goal. The second struggle was against a new Rightist line that believed that the armed struggle was impossible, that it was a “dream”, that there was no need of taking up that agreement because it was a matter of principle. The third struggle was with the divergences in the Left [the left line within the PCP–Trans.], one in which the details were discussed on how to develop the People’s War. It was established that the proletarian position was President Gonzalo’s and therefore was the one which should be implemented; all the Party made a commitment to be guided by the leadership of President Gonzalo.

Concerning the organization of the armed forces, it was agreed to form military cadres, specific groups for action and to undermine the reactionary forces, aiming at soldiers. In strategy and tactics, the organic system was restated.

2) Preparation. In this milestone event, the Program of the Party is sanctioned, along with the general political line of the Peruvian revolution and the Party statues. Problems related to political strategy, revolutionary violence, the People’s War and the Party, the Army and Front United are resolved. The following Decision is assumed: “Forge the First Company in Deeds! Let violence flourish towards the initiation and development of the armed struggle; we open with lead and offer our blood to write the new chapter of the history of the Party and of our people forging the First Company in deeds. Peru, December 3, 1979.”

The Party prepared the armed struggle dealing with two problems: 1) Problems of Political Strategy that give both the content and the objectives of the People’s War in perspective and in the short term, as well as the guidelines that the People’s War should have, the military plans and the construction of the three instruments and their ties with the new Power; 2) The Initiation of the armed struggle. This decisive and essential problem had merited the most special attention from President Gonzalo, who established the “Plan of Initiation” guided by the slogan “Initiate the armed struggle!” that was the gist of the principal politics that had to be developed militarily. Its contents included:

First, the political tasks that had to be fulfilled during the initiation of the armed struggle, to boycott the elections, to promote militarily the armed struggle for the land and to establish the bases for the new conquests, especially the new Power;

Second, forms of struggle: guerrilla warfare, sabotage, propaganda, armed agitation, and selective annihilation;

Third, organizational and military forms: armed detachments, with or without modern weapons;

Fourth, a chronology, date of the initiation and duration of the Plan, and simultaneous actions for specific dates.

The Preparation began with the struggle against the Rightist positions within the Party that were denying the revolutionary conditions, and they were saying that the Party was not prepared or that the masses would not lend us support. The leader of these positions deserted and they were crushed.

3) Initiation. On May 17, 1980, the People’s War in Peru began. It “was a defiant political blow of transcendental significance that, displaying rebellious red flags and hoisting hammers and sickles, proclaimed: ‘It is right to rebel’ and ‘Power grows from the barrel of a gun.’ It summoned the people, especially the poor peasantry, to stand up in arms, to light the bonfire and to shake the Andes, to write the new history in the fields and hidden features of our tumultuous geography, to tear down the rotten walls of the oppressive order, to conquer the summits, to storm the heavens with guns to open the new dawn. The beginnings were modest, almost without modern weapons. It was fought, it was advanced and it was built from the small to the large and from the weak material and initial fire came the great turbulent fire and mighty roar that grows, sowing revolution and exploding into ever more impetuous People’s War.”

This third milestone lasted from May to December of 1980, resolving the problem of how to initiate the armed struggle, of going from the times of peace to the times of war. In this context, the militarization of the Party through actions and the masterful Plan of Initiation were key. This was how the new was born: the principal form of struggle, the armed struggle and the principal form of organization, the detachments and squads. The most outstanding actions in the field were the guerrilla actions of Ayrabamba and Aysarca [localities in Ayacucho–Trans.] and, in the city, setting fire to the Municipal Building of San Martín [a district in Lima–Trans.]. The boycott of the elections by the people of Chuschi was the action that initiated the beginning of the People’s War. This plan was fulfilled, defeating the Rightist positions that were saying that the Plan was “Hoxhite” and that the actions were centered in the city. Their arguments confused appearances with reality and distorted the essence of the struggle, since reactionary propaganda gave big headlines to the sabotages in the cities and minimized the actions in the countryside. It is a characteristic of the People’s War in Peru to make the countryside the principal theater of action and the cities a necessary complement.

4) Development of the guerrilla war. It has been fulfilled through three military plans: To deploy guerrilla warfare, to Conquer Bases and to Develop Bases.

Regarding the Deployment of guerrilla warfare. This was completed by a plan that lasted from May 1981 to December 1982 and had a pilot period in January 1981. The slogan “Open guerrilla zones serving as Base Areas” implied an ideological-political leap by putting Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, guiding thought of President Gonzalo as the basis of party unity. Militarily, they opened the guerrilla war throughout the country seeking to “Capture weapons and the means for war, stir up the countryside with armed actions and go forward toward the Base Areas.” These plans were partially completed with the last one, “Go forward”, being the link with the subsequent plan. It advanced by razing the feudal relationships of production aiming against the gamonales [semi-feudal landlords–Trans.] as the spearhead and fighting against the joint police operations. A multitude of assaults on police posts and selective annihilation of gamonales were carried out, generating a great mass mobilization of peasants that volunteered themselves for the militia, giving rise to a power vacuum for the reactionaries. The People’s Committees emerged, which grew and multiplied. Their appearance defines the Base Areas.

We should emphasize actions such as the assault on the city jail of Ayacucho where the First Company acted for the first time, occupying the city and freeing tens of prisoners of war; the assaults on the police posts of Vilcashuamán, of Totos, of San José de Secce; the sabotages to the power grid and communication lines; the razings like those of Pincos, Toxama, Allpachaca, Huayllapampa among others. In the cities, there were the sabotages to bureaucratic capitalism and to imperialism, as well as support to strikes by armed actions.

Here the Rightist positions that were combated were those of personal power and fealty and the retreat from actions. Deploying the guerrilla war gave us the most important conquest: The new Power, the clandestine People’s Committees that are the backbone of the Base Areas.

In the face of the advance of the People’s War, the reactionary government of Belaúnde launched from the very beginning the persecution, repression, torture, the imprisonment and death of the militants, fighters and the masses. They have mounted independent police operations and jointly with their police forces, Civil Guards, Republican Guards, Investigative Police, along with the counterinsurgency corps known as the “sinchis”. They promulgated the D.L. [Decreed Law — Trans.] No. 046, a truly terrorist law that violates the most elementary principles of bourgeois criminal law. But the result of all their plans has been the most categorical failure, the masses rejected and resisted their aggression. The emergence of the new Power broke the reticence of the government of Belaúnde, which from the beginning minimized the problem to maintain their bogus democratic facade and strengthened the class necessities of the two exploiters, the big bourgeoisie and landlords under the protection of Yankee imperialism. Belaunde then entrusted the armed forces (Army, Navy and Air Force), the backbone of the State, to reestablish public order with the support of the police forces, imposing a state of emergency under political-military control in the regions of Ayacucho and Apurímac, from December of 1982 until today (1988).

President Gonzalo, with the development of the People’s War and the counter-revolutionary response that implied a qualitative leap, outlined the Great Plan of Conquering Bases in the Expanded Central Committee from January to March 1983 where four political tasks were defined: a general reorganization of the Party, the creation of the People’s Guerrilla Army and the Revolutionary Defense Front of the People and their consolidation as People’s Committees in the countryside and as the Revolutionary Defense Movement of the People in the cities and the Military Plan of Conquering Bases. Politically, the contradiction between the new State and old State was advancing under the slogan of “Defend, Develop and Build” the Base Areas. A sharp armed conflict developed in which the reactionaries struggled to re-establish the old Power and the revolution struggled to counter-establish the new Power. This is what we call the struggle between restoration and counter-restoration encompassing the years 1983 and 1984. Military plans were specified for the zones applying the tactics of encircling and striking the enemy’s weak point. Two successful campaigns were completed in which the new Power was tempered passing its first test of fire; the Party was forged and the People’s Guerrilla Army was developed.

The reactionary armed forces pursued the counter-revolutionary war, following the concepts of their Yankee imperialist master, theories established by their experience in counter-revolutionary war, mainly extracted from Vietnam and particularly drawn from the combat against the armed struggle in Latin America, especially in Central America. That is the basic theoretical source combined with the “anti-terrorist” experience of Israel and its counterpart in Argentina, along with the Federal Republic of Germany and its advisors in Taiwan, Spain, etc. This adds to their experience of the few months of anti-guerrilla struggle of 1965 and the more limited experience of fighting in La Convención [a province in Cusco where there was guerrilla struggle in 1965]. The operations are under the direction of the Joint Command of the armed forces that acts according to the will of the National Defense Council headed by the President, today under Alan García, who holds direct responsibility. This counter-revolutionary strategy has been defeated many times. It has been crushed and defeated completely and thoroughly by the People’s War, showing to the world again and again the superiority of the strategy of the proletariat over that of imperialism.

A summary of the specific policies that were applied by the genocidal government: masses against masses; genocide, mass graves; disappearances of entire villages. In sum, they unleashed the white terror in the countryside, especially in Ayacucho, Huancavelica and Apurímac. The result of this genocide is eight thousand seven hundred Peruvians dead. Of these, four thousand seven hundred of the murdered were the poorest and the most exploited, mainly peasants and in the neighborhoods and slums of the cities, where four thousand disappeared. This genocide has not produced the result they wanted; it did not crush the People’s War. On the contrary, “the People’s War grows stronger, developing and striking powerful blows”, evidence of what Chairman Mao taught, that repression is what arouses and feeds the revolution.

Within the Plan of Conquering Bases is the “Plan of the Great Leap” that is subject to the specific political strategy of “Two Republics are expressed, two roads, two axes” and the military strategy of “generalize the guerrilla warfare.” Four successful campaigns were carried out under the political guidelines of: “Open our political space”, “Against the general elections of 1985, disrupt and destabilize them and impede them wherever feasible”, “Against the ascension to power by the new Aprista government,” and “Undermine the fascist and corporativist Aprista assembly.” The People’s War developed in the region of Ayacucho, Huancavelica, and Apurímac and was expanded to Pasco, Huánuco and San Martín, covering an area from the department of Cajamarca, on the border with Ecuador in the Northwest, to Puno on the border with Bolivia in the Southeast of the country, striking and shaking-up the cities, especially in the capital. The People’s War fundamentally takes place in the sierra, the historical axis of Peruvian society and its most backward and poorest part, by transforming it into the grand theater of the revolutionary war. It advanced to the edge of the jungle and to the headlands of the coast. Thus, the People’s War was not conceived in a single region was developed simultaneously in several regions, although in unequal form, with the principal area that can vary as necessary. All activities were conceived within a strategically centralized and a tactically decentralized plan.

Among the most salient actions, we see the blows to the anti-guerrilla bases in the department of Ayacucho; the destruction of the counter-subversive settlements [nucleamientos] disruptions in the establishment of the local micro- regions; in Huancavelica the demolition of the electrical grid and the destruction of the highway system; the destruction of the agricultural cooperatives Cinto and Vichincha with cattle redistribution and appropriation of lands; breakthroughs in Apurímac. In the Central region, there were ambushes such as in Michivilca, sabotage to the substation of Centromín [state mining corporation–Trans.], sabotage to SAIS [state-run cooperative] Túpac Amaru. In the North, land seizures under the slogan “Seize the Land!” that mobilized 160 thousand peasants and confiscated 320 thousand hectares, mostly pastures, and 12 thousand head of livestock; sabotage to the oil pipeline “Norperuano”, and to the headquarters of the APRA in the city of Trujillo. In the South, the land seizures mobilized more than 10 thousand peasants; in Huallaga, an assault on the police post of Aucayacu, destruction of the large company Tealero, ambush of the Republican Guards; in Metropolitan Lima, sabotages against the embassy of the Russian social-imperialists, against dozens of local offices of the APRA party, against banks and factories, all leading to a state of emergency with military control in February of 1986.

Alan García Pérez continued the counter-revolutionary policy of his predecessor and sought to crush the People’s War through genocides such as those of Accomarca, Llocllapampa, Umaru and Bellavista in the countryside. In the capital of the Republic, he unleashed two genocides against the prisoners of war, the first on the 4th of October, 1985, where 30 militants and combatants were annihilated in the shining trench [refers to a prison–Trans.] of Lurigancho. That did not break the heroic resistance of the prisoners of war who, with their blood, formed the Day of the Prisoner of War. On the 19 of June, 1986, the most vile and despicable premeditated crime was unleashed to crush the People’s War and to annihilate the prisoners of war, who with a ferocious resistance inflicted the most serious political, military, and moral rout to the genocidal Aprista government. This brought out and defined their dilemma of serving the bureaucratic faction of the big bourgeoisie, in order to develop corporativist fascism, García and the Aprista party remaining forever bathed in the blood of the genocide. Thus the Day of Heroism was formed with the monumental trilogy of 250 dead in the shining trenches of combat of El Fronton, Lurigancho, and Callao.

We unmask and condemn opportunism and revisionism in its various incarnations: The pro-Russian, the pro-Chinese, the false Mariateguists, all those who have acted and continue to act as informers, tailing after the counter-revolution, denying and combating the People’s War and branding it as terrorism, repeating what Reagan and the Peruvian and world reactionaries say. They can never hope to prove their accusations and simply hurl adjectives and condemn violence “whatever the source,” and continue with their old electoral posturing with the aim of hoodwinking the people with parliamentary cretinism, sinking further each day into the embrace of the old order, their rotten parliament, their electoral farces, their constitution and their laws, living in quivering fear and reverential dread before the reactionary armed forces and the bluster of the old State. We condemn the groveling attitude and capitulation of Barrantes Lingán and others of his ilk [secuaces y compinches].

Since 1983, the political strategy of the Great Plan of Conquering Bases was completed through two campaigns of defending, developing and building Parts I and II, and of the Plan for the Great Leap with its four campaigns up to December of 1986. These plans show us the advance of the People’s War, that we are solidly linked to the masses, contrary to everything they say, since the facts are undeniable. The People’s War has conquered an area that is being extended through the Sierra, the Jungle and the Coast, marching vigorously and strong, building what is new and opening the future. The Base Areas which are the foundation of the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside have been already established.

The Great Plan of Developing Bases. This has a special role in the People’s War since the essence of the People’s War is to develop support; therefore the Great Plan of Developing Bases has to do with the construction of the new Power and its development, it has to do with the perspective that is being opened for the conquest of power countrywide. The political strategy is to develop Base Areas and the military strategy is to develop the People’s War serving the world revolution, a plan that is being fulfilled through a pilot plan.

The triumph of the revolution begets and crushes a powerful counter-revolution. We are entering decisive years in which the APRA government continues without having a strategic plan; they talk of a “new strategy” but there is none. What remains is only greater repression: Political, economic, and social laws, strengthening the military to facilitate the actions of the armed forces to unleash new genocides under new conditions, for us as well as for them. For us, the genocide under way presents itself under new circumstances. We have passed through the genocide of 1983 and 1984 that demonstrated the great popular repudiation and the strengthening of the revolution. The reaction can only apply genocide, but that will strengthen the People’s War. There might be initial withdrawals or inflections, but we will prevail by persisting in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, in our politics of the five developments, in the invincibility of the People’s War and in the support of the people who make history always under the leadership of the Communist Party.

On the concrete situations and possibilities that are presented us in the new Great Plan of Developing Bases we must be aware of:

1. Armed groups such as the MRTA and the CRP [the short-lived People’s Revolutionary Commando–Trans.] have appeared. They have been recast and they do not have a definite Marxist conception. Thus, they march to serve imperialism, social-imperialism, and the supposedly fascist dialogue to which they have already given unilateral truces. 2. APRA has already begun to unfold fascism and corporativism. It faces serious and increasing difficulties, such as its growing and sinuous collusion and contention with the comprador bourgeoisie, among other more important contradictions. 3. The class struggle sharpens and intensifies more, the masses begin to defend themselves and resist; if social explosions occur in the urban areas, they could be used by social-imperialism and the reactionaries in general, through their political representatives. 4. A coup d’etat is possible at any moment. The same García Pérez may promote a self-coup in order to preserve his political future. 5. In perspective, the reactionaries can also play with an Allende-type government, using the Aprista Barrantes or someone similar; within this possibility one must consider the sinister role of the United Left. 6. The Peruvian State has border problems that can be inflamed at any moment, as is shown by the experience of other Latin American countries. This problem must be seriously addressed. 7. The sending of Yankee troops is already a real fact and not a simple possibility. Their presence is linked to a similar presence in other countries, especially on the border and it must be seen in the context of military measures taken by Brazil. 8. The imperialist wars and their aggressions continue to increase. The World War for hegemony between the USA and the USSR continues being prepared through collusion and contention of a global dimension. Consequently, the People’s War is a peremptory necessity and the world People’s War is an inevitable perspective.

All these possibilities must be taken seriously into account to handle the People’s War with politics in command, and, particularly with an eye toward the conquest of power countrywide that may present itself and which must be taken up. For all these reasons, we must be ideologically, politically and organizationally prepared.

The First Campaign of the Pilot Plan of the Great Plan of Developing Bases has meant the largest shake-up with national and international repercussions. It is fracturing the old State more and more, which had never been shaken up this way by anyone in Peru. Now it is up to us to fulfil the historical and political necessity of “Finish by brilliantly establishing a historical milestone!” in the Second Campaign. Understand that the Pilot Plan is like the initial battle of the Great Plan of Developing Bases.

In conclusion, after close to eight years of People’s War we have completed more than forty five thousand actions that reveal their high quality; the militarized Party has been tempered; the People’s Guerrilla Army has been developed and has increased its belligerence; and we have hundreds of organizations of the new Power with the poorest masses increasingly in support of us. The People’s War has raised the class struggle of our people to its highest form and that impinges on the struggle of the masses themselves, impelling them to be incorporated by leaps and bounds into the People’s War. The “People’s War is turning the country upside down, the ‘old mole’ [el topo viejo] is rotting profoundly in the entrails of the old society. No one can stop it, the future already dwells among us, the old and rotten society is sinking irrevocably, the revolution will prevail. Long Live the People’s War!” Our task is to develop the People’s War serving the world revolution under the banners of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought.

2. THE ROAD OF SURROUNDING THE CITIES FROM THE COUNTRYSIDE AND THE BASE OF REVOLUTIONARY SUPPORT
Chairman Mao established the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside. At its heart are the Base Areas, taking into account that the powerful imperialists and their reactionary Chinese allies were entrenched in the principal cities. If the revolution refused to capitulate and wanted to persevere in the struggle it had to convert the backwards rural zones into advanced and solid Base Areas, into great military, political, economic and cultural bastions of the revolution to fight against the fierce enemy that was assaulting the rural zones using the cities, and to carry the revolution step by step to a complete victory through a protracted war.

True to this basic Maoist thesis, President Gonzalo has established the carrying forward of a unified People’s War where the countryside is the principal theater of armed actions: Since in our country we have an immense majority of peasant masses, that is where we must build the Base Areas. As Chairman Mao said: “The protracted revolutionary struggle supported in such revolutionary base areas is fundamentally a guerrilla war of the peasants led by the Chinese Communist Party. Therefore, it is wrong to ignore the necessity of using the rural zones as revolutionary base areas, to disregard the arduous work among the peasants and to neglect the guerrilla war.” Going further, President Gonzalo specifies that in the cities armed actions should be carried forward as a complement, since international experience, as well as our own, demonstrates that this is feasible. He draws lessons from, for example, what happened to the guerrillas in the Philippines which recast themselves in the countryside and left the cities quiet, especially the capital, resulting in the isolation of the guerrillas. In Brazil, the revolutionaries also carried out armed actions in the countryside and city, only they neglected to specify which was principal. In Vietnam, important armed actions were carried out in the cities. Thus, taking into account the peculiarities of the cities in Latin America, where the percentage of the proletariat and of the poor masses in the cities is high, the masses are ready to develop actions complementing those in the countryside. In the cities, however, the New Power or Base Areas are not being built, rather the Front is materialized through the Revolutionary Defense Movement of the People (MRDP) with Resistance Centers that carry out the People’s War and prepare the future insurrection, which will occur when the forces of the countryside assault the cities in combination with the insurrection from within.

The Base Areas are the strategic bases which the guerrilla forces rely on to fulfil their strategic tasks and to achieve the objective of preserving and increasing their forces as well as annihilating and throwing back the enemy. Without such strategic Bases there would not be anything from which to carry out any one of our strategic tasks to reach the war’s objective.

Chairman Mao outlines three reasons for the creation of Base Areas: To have armed forces, to defeat the enemy and to mobilize the masses. These were specified in our People’s War in 1982, when applying the Plan of Deployment the guerrilla war in its role of beating the enemy, we aimed at destroying the old feudal relations of production. Police posts were assaulted, selective annihilation of landlord power was applied, and the police forces abandoned the countryside and were regrouped in the provincial capitals. The authorities of the old Power massively resigned which created a power vacuum, while tens of thousands were mobilized. It is in these conditions that the Base Areas emerged and were specified in the clandestine People’s Committees. Therefore, it is wrong to take the Chinese experience dogmatically since if the conditions were given and principles were in effect, we would have had sufficient reason to build the Base Areas. To agree with this thesis implied a struggle against Rightism that was arguing that we had not defeated large enemy forces, when the problem was that the enemy forces had abandoned the field as a consequence of the rout of their political and military plans.

President Gonzalo has established a system of Base Areas surrounded by guerrilla zones, zones of operations and points of action taking into account the political and social conditions, the history of struggle, the geographical characteristics and the development of the Party, the Army and of the masses.

It is fundamental to support the validity of the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside and its heart, the Base Areas, because with only wandering guerrillas of insurrection the People’s Guerrilla Army would not have the Base Areas as a rearguard that sustains it and neither would the new Power be built. We are totally against foquismo.

3. THE PROTRACTED WAR
The People’s War is protracted because it derives from the correlation between the factors of the enemy and ourselves that are determined by the following four fundamental characteristics: The first is that Peru is a semi-feudal and semi-colonial society, one in which a bureaucratic capitalism unfolds. The second is that the enemy is strong; the third is that the People’s Guerrilla Army is weak; and the fourth is that the Communist Party leads the People’s War. From the first and fourth characteristics we can derive that the People’s Guerrilla Army will not grow too rapidly and will not defeat its enemy soon. These peculiarities determine the extended character of the war.

The enemy is strong and we are weak; in that fact resides the danger of our defeat. The enemy has a single advantage–the numerous contingents of its forces and the armaments they rely upon. But every other aspect constitutes their weak points. Their objective is to defend the old and rotten Power of the landlord-bureaucratic State. It has a bourgeois military line; it is a mercenary army. It does not have conscious discipline and its moral is low. It has profound contradictions between officers and soldiers, and it is discredited before the masses. Furthermore, the very base of the reactionary army are of worker and peasant origin, which can disintegrate during the course of an unjust war. Apart from this, the Peruvian armed forces have never won a war and they are expert in defeats. Furthermore, they have repeatedly counted on the support of international reaction, but we count on the support of the oppressed nations, of the peoples of the world and the international proletariat, which are the new forces.

The People’s Guerrilla Army has a single weak point, its insufficient development but the remaining aspects constitute valuable advantages: It carries forward a People’s War to create a new Power; it has a proletarian military line, led absolutely by the Communist Party; it is based on class valor and revolutionary heroism and on a conscious discipline. Its morale is high and there is a close union between officers and soldiers and it is an army composed of the people themselves, mainly poor workers and peasants.

But the objective fact is that there is a large disparity between the forces of the enemy and our forces and for us to go from weak to strong requires a period of time, one in which the defects of the enemy are exposed and our advantages are developed. Therefore, we say that our army is apparently weak but in essence it is strong and the enemy’s army is apparently strong but in essence it is weak. Thus, to go from weak to strong we must carry forward the protracted war and this has three stages: The first is the period of the strategic offensive of the enemy and the strategic defensive of our forces. The second will be the period of the strategic consolidation of the enemy and of our preparation for the counteroffensive. The third will be the period of our strategic counteroffensive and of the strategic withdrawal of the enemy.

President Gonzalo teaches us that the People’s War is protracted, long and bloody but victorious and tells us that the time of its duration will be extended or shortened within the scope of its protracted character. The time will depend on the extent that we fight within the proletarian military line, since Rightism is the principal danger that can cause serious setbacks to the war.

Today, we find ourselves in the period of the strategic offensive of the enemy and of our own strategic defensive. We must strengthen the People’s War by applying guerrilla warfare, establishing bases for the next stage, paying whatever cost is necessary but fighting to minimize it.

II. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEOPLE’S GUERRILLA ARMY
To wage the People’s War we must count on the principal form of organization, which is the People’s Guerrilla Army, since the backbone of the old State is the reactionary armed forces and to destroy the old State one must first destroy its reactionary army. The Party must count on a powerful army: “Without a peoples’ army the people have nothing,” as Chairman Mao taught us.

The construction of the Army is seen in the line of construction based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought. In synthesis, President Gonzalo has contributed in bringing the incorporation of the militia into the People’s Guerrilla Army. Its creation is a step toward the sea of armed masses and the solution of going from disorganized masses to masses who are militarily organized.

III. STRATEGY AND TACTICS
President Gonzalo emphasizes seven points on strategy and tactics of Chairman Mao specifying some of them. We must pay close attention to these in order to lead the People’s War.

1. On Strategy and Tactics.
He departs from Chairman Mao’s thesis that the task of strategy as a science is to study the laws of leading military operations that influence the situation of the war in its entirety. The task of the science of campaigns and tactics is to study the laws of leading military operations of a partial character. He makes a strategic development of how to wage the war in each zone and in the country as a whole, taking into account its ties to the international situation. He outlined for us the axes, sub-axes, directions of movement and lines of movements which permit us to maintain the strategic course of the war under any circumstances and to face all types of political and military operations that the counter-revolution launches. On this basis he established the National Military Plan that is strategically centralized and tactically decentralized, departing from the premise that all plans reflect an ideology, that they must reflect both the reality and vagaries it must express. Taking up Stalin, he links strategy with tactics and establishes the strategic-operational Plans that are the concrete way that strategy is linked to tactical operations. As a result, each Committee must elaborate its strategic-operational plans within the strategic-operational Plan common to the entire Party.

The correct disposition emanates from the just decision of the commander; all military plans must be based on the indispensable recognition and careful study of the situation of the enemy, the actual situation and the interrelationship of both. That is, we must always keep in mind “the two hills”; we must be guided by a political strategy and by a military strategy.

For the elaboration of the Plans always take into account the following general features:

1. The international class struggle between revolution and counter-revolution; ideology; the international communist movement; the RIM. 2. The class struggle in the country; the counter-revolution. 3. The development of the People’s War; its balance; laws and lessons. 4. The need for investigation. 5. The People’s War and its construction. 6. The People’s War and the masses. 7. The two-line struggle. 8. Programming and Chronology. 9. Attitude and slogans. “Rise above the difficulties and conquer greater victories!”

In almost eight years of the People’s War, we have had four plans: Plan of Initiation; Plan of Developing the People’s War; Plan of Conquering Bases; and, Plan of Developing Bases.

2. The basic principle of the war.
All the orienting principles of military operations originate with a single basic principle: do everything possible to preserve our own forces and to annihilate the enemy’s forces. All war imposes a price, sometimes it is extremely high. To preserve our own forces, we must annihilate those of the enemy; but to annihilate the enemy, we must pay a price in order to preserve the whole. President Gonzalo teaches us that one must be prepared to pay the highest cost of the war, but we should fight so that it will always be the smallest possible cost. It is a contradiction and the problem resides in attitude and good planning. It is mainly a question of leadership. He forged us in the “challenge to the death”, in “revolutionary heroism” and in “conquer laurels in death.” In war we always see the two aspects, the destructive and the constructive and the principal aspect is the second one.

3. The guerrilla tactics or basic tactics.
“When the enemy advances, we retreat; when the enemy is stalled, we harass him; when the enemy is tired, we attack him; when the enemy withdraws, we pursue him.” This basic tactic must be incorporated and applied, maneuvering around the enemy and seeking his weak point to smash it.

4. Campaigns of “encirclement and annihilation” and the counter- campaigns, principal form of the People’s War.
It is a law that the counter-revolution in seeking to crush the revolution unleashes campaigns of “encirclement and annihilation” against each unit of the People’s Guerrilla Army or against the Base Areas. The operations of the People’s Guerrilla Army adopt the form of counter-campaigns and Chairman Mao has established nine steps to crush a campaign of “encirclement and annihilation”:

1. The active defense; 2. The preparation of a counter-campaign; 3. The strategic withdrawal; 4. The strategic counteroffensive; 5. The initiation of the counteroffensive; 6. The concentration of forces; 7. The mobile war; 8. The war of rapid decision; and, 9. The war of annihilation.

President Gonzalo, applying this law to the conditions of our People’s War, has outlined the five parts of the campaign which permit us to defeat the political and military plans of the reactionaries. Each campaign has a specific political and military objective, fulfilled by the element of surprise, attacking them when we want, where we want and as we want. He also specified the five steps that must follow each military action always serving the political objective, opposing the criteria of action for action’s sake. He stresses the importance of differentiating between the essence and the appearance of the enemy’s movements. He has also established for us the four forms of struggle of the People’s War:

1. Guerrilla action with its two forms, the assault and the ambush; 2. sabotage; 3. selective annihilation; and 4. Propaganda and armed agitation, as well as its diverse methods.

5. The strategic role of guerrilla warfare
Chairman Mao raised guerrilla warfare to a strategic level. Prior to him, it was only considered as a tactical problem that did not decide the outcome of the war; but even though the guerrilla war does not decide the war’s outcome because this requires conventional warfare, it fulfils a series of strategic tasks that carry forward to the favorable outcome of the war. We conceive guerrilla war on a vast scale, generalized guerrilla warfare that must support the protracted and bloody war. From there, we apply the six strategic problems of guerrilla warfare:

1. Initiative, flexibility and planning in the realization of offensive operations within the defensive war, battles of rapid decision within the protracted war and operations in the exterior lines within the war in the interior lines. 2. Coordination with the regular warfare. 3. Creation of Base Areas. 4. Strategic defense and strategic assault in the guerrilla war. 5. Transformation of the guerrilla war into mobile warfare. 6. Relationships of command.

6. The ten military principles.
In December 1947 Chairman Mao masterfully synthesized the just and correct strategic line followed in more than 20 years of People’s War in 10 military principles. This is seen in his article: “The current situation and our tasks,” Third part. We apply these principles and it is very important to broaden their application.

7. Brilliant summary of strategy and tactics.
Chairman Mao has summarized in a brilliant way the strategy and the tactics of the People’s War in the following phrase: “You fight your way and we’ll fight ours: We fight when we can win and we retreat when we cannot.”

“In other words, you are supported by modern armament and we by the popular masses with a high level of revolutionary conscience; you fight to the fullest with your superiority, and we fight with ours. You have your combat methods and we have ours. When you want to assault us, you are not permitted to do so and cannot even find us. But when we attack you, we reach the target, we inflict accurate, sure blows and we annihilate it. When we can annihilate it, we do so with deliberate decision; when we can not annihilate it, neither do we allow ourselves to be annihilated by you. To not fight when there is a possibility of winning is opportunism. To persist in fighting when there is no possibility of winning is adventurism. Our strategic orientation and tactics are based on our will to fight. Our recognition of the need for retreating is based first of all on our recognition of the need for fighting. When we retreat, we always do so with an eye to future combat so that we may finally and thoroughly annihilate the enemy. Only by supporting ourselves in the broad popular masses can we bring about these strategies and tactics. And in applying them, we can put into full play the superiority of people’s war and confine the enemy to the passive position of being beaten, although they are superior in equipment and no matter what means they employ. We always preserve the initiative in our hands.”

From “Long Live the victory of the People’s War!”, September 1965.

The application of this principle allows us to demonstrate the invincibility of the superior strategy of the People’s War, because the proletariat as the last class in history has created its own superior form of war and no other class, including the bourgeoisie with its greatest political and military strategists, are capable of defeating it. The reactionaries dream about elaborating “superior strategies” to the People’s War, but are condemned to failure since they are against history. Our People’s War after nearly eight years blazes victoriously, demonstrating the invincibility of the People’s War.

As militants of the Communist Party of Peru, we assume completely and thoroughly the military line of the Party, established by President Gonzalo, which based on the highest creation of the international proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, has specified our military line with Gonzalo Thought, endowing us with an invincible weapon, the unified People’s War principally in the countryside together with the city as a complement. As the principal form of struggle we carry it forward, it is a bright torch before the world, proclaiming the universal validity of the forever living Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

LONG LIVE THE MILITARY LINE OF THE PARTY! THE PEOPLE’S WAR IS INVINCIBLE!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line : Construction Line
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 1. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARTY
2.1 A. CHARACTER OF THE PARTY.
2.2 B. THE MILITARIZATION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY AND CONCENTRIC CONSTRUCTION
2.3 C. THE SIX ASPECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARTY.
3 2. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEOPLE’S GUERRILLA ARMY
4 3. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW STATE.
INTRODUCTION
President Gonzalo established the PCP’s line of construction of the three instruments of the revolution by upholding and applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism.

He teaches us that Marx said that the working class creates organizations in its image and likeness, in other words, its own organization. In the XIX century, with Marx and Engels, we started off provided with a specific conception, our own doctrine, our own objective, our own goal, how to conquer Power and the means of doing it: Revolutionary violence; all that was achieved in a very hard two-line struggle. Marx established that the proletariat can only act as a class by constituting itself as a political party different and opposite to all the political parties created by the propertied classes. Therefore, since its appearance in a prolonged process the proletariat has created its own forms of organization. As a result, the Party is the highest form of organization, the army the principal form of organization and the Front is third instrument, these three instruments are to seize Power by means of revolutionary violence. He tells us that by the end of the XIX century, Engels came to the conclusion that the class did not have either the proper organic forms or the proper military forms to take Power and hold it. Yet, he never said we should abandon the revolution but the we should be working on finding a solution to these pending problems. This must be well understood since the revisionists twist it to sell their opportunism.

In the XX century Lenin understood that the revolution was ripe and created the proletarian Party of new type, molding the form of struggle: The insurrection; and the form of organization: The detachments, which were mobile forms and superior to the barricades of the previous century, which were stationary forms. Lenin set forth the need to create new, clandestine organizations, since going on to revolutionary actions meant the dissolution of the legal organizations by the police and that step was only possible if it is taken by going over the old leaders, going over the old Party, destroying it. The Party should take as example the modern army, with its own discipline and with its united will and be flexible.

With Chairman Mao Tse-Tung, the class understands the need to build the three instruments of the revolution: Party, Army and United Front in an interrelated way. That way it solves the construction of the three instruments in a backwards, semi-feudal and semi-colonial country, by way of the People’s War. Concretely, it resolves the issue of building the Party around the gun and that it is the heroic fighter who is the one leading its own construction, the Army and the Front.

President Gonzalo set forth the militarization of the Communist Parties and the concentric building of the three instruments. The militarization of the Communist Parties is the political directive with a strategic content, since it is “the set of transformations, changes and readjustments it need to lead the People’s War as the main form of struggle that will generate the new State.” Therefore, the militarization of the Communist Parties is the key for the democratic revolution, the socialist revolution and the cultural revolutions.

He defines the principle of construction: “Based on the ideological-political base, to simultaneously build the organizational forms in the amidst of the class struggle and the two-line struggle, all of these within and as a function of the armed struggle and the conquest of Power.”

In addition, the PCP links the entire process of construction with the fluidity of the People’s War, which based on Chairman Mao’s theses that “the mobility of military operations and the variability of our territory provide all works of construction with … a variable character.”

Hence, to understand the line of construction, we must start from the form of struggle and the forms of organization; from the principle of construction and construction linked to the fluidity of the People’s War which is the main form of struggle in today’s world.

1. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARTY
A. CHARACTER OF THE PARTY.
We base ourselves in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, mainly Gonzalo Thought, on the ideology of the proletariat, the highest expression of humanity, the only truthful, scientific and invincible. We struggle for the Communist Programme whose essence is to organize and lead the class struggle of the proletariat so it can conquer political Power, carry out the democratic revolution, the socialist revolution and the cultural revolution on the way to Communism, the unwavering goal which we march towards. We rely on the general political line of the revolution, based on the laws governing the class struggle for the conquest of Power, which words established by President Gonzalo. The PCP political line has five elements:

1. International line; 2. Democratic revolution; 3. Military line; 4. Line of construction of the three instruments of the revolution; and 5. Mass line.

The military line is the center of the general political line. We forge ourselves in proletarian internationalism as we conceive our revolution as part of the world proletarian revolution. And we maintain ideological, political and organizational independence supported by our own efforts and by masses.

The PCP is a Party of the new type which generated the leader of the Peruvian revolution, President Gonzalo, the greatest living Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, who leads the Party [After the “Bend in the Road” of Sept. 1992, the Central Committee leads the Party and the People’s War–Trans.] the guarantee of the triumph of the revolution and will carry us to Communism.

B. THE MILITARIZATION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY AND CONCENTRIC CONSTRUCTION
President Gonzalo established the thesis that the Communist Parties of the world should militarize themselves for three reasons:

First, because we are in the strategic offensive of the world revolution, we live during the sweeping away of imperialism and reaction from the face of Earth within the next 50 to 100 years, a time marked by violence in which all kinds of wars take place. We see how reaction militarizes itself more and more, militarizating the old States, their economy, developing wars and aggression, trafficking with the struggles of the peoples and aiming at a world war, since revolution is the main tendency in the world, the task of the Communist Parties is to raise revolution making reality the main form of struggle: The People’s War, to oppose the world counter-revolutionary war with world revolutionary war.

Second, because capitalist restoration must be confronted. When the bourgeoisie loses Power, it reintroduces itself inside the Party, uses the army and seeks a way of usurping Power, of destroying the dictatorship of the proletariat to reinstate capitalism. Therefore, the Communist Parties must militarize themselves and exercise the overall dictatorship of the three instruments, forge themselves in the People’s War and empower the armed organization of the masses, the people’s militia, so as to engulf the army. Towards this end, President Gonzalo tells us to “forge all militants as Communists, first and foremost, as fighters and as administrators”; for that reason every militant is forged in the People’s War and remains alert against any attempts of capitalist restoration.

Third, because we march towards a militarized society. By militarizing the Party, we complete a step towards the militarization of society which is the strategic perspective to guarantee the dictatorship of the proletariat. The militarized society is the sea of armed masses which Marx and Engels spoke about, that guarantees the conquest and defense of the conquered Power. We take the experience of the Chinese Revolution, of the anti-Japanese base at Yenan, which was a militarized society where everything flowed out of the barrels of guns, Party, Army, State, new politics, new economics, new culture. And that way we develop war communism.

In the First PCP National Conference (November 1979), President Gonzalo proposed the thesis of the necessity to militarize the Communist Party of Peru (PCP); then, in the early months of 1980, when the Party was getting ready to launch the People’s War, he proposed to develop the militarization of the Party by ways of actions, based on what the great Lenin said about reducing the non-military work and to center it in the military, that the times of peace were ending and we entered the times of war so that all forces should be militarized. Thus taking the Party as the axis of everything, build the Army around it and with these instruments, with the masses in People’s War, build the new State based on both. The militarization of the Party could only be carried forward through concrete actions of the class struggle, concrete military type actions; this does not mean we will carry out various types of military actions exclusively (guerrilla actions, sabotages, selective annihilation, propaganda and armed agitation) but that we must carry out mainly these forms so as to provide incentive and development to the class struggle, indoctrinating it with facts, with these types of actions as the main form of struggle in the People’s War.

The militarization of the Party has precedents in Lenin and Chairman Mao, but it is a new problem developed by President Gonzalo taking into account the new circumstance of the class struggle and we must realize that new problems will arise which will be solved through experience. This will necessarily imply a process of struggle between the old and the new in order to develop it further, with war being the highest form of resolving the contradictions, empowering the faculties people have to find solutions. It is the militarization of the Party which has enabled us to initiate and develop the People’s War; and we consider that this experience has universal validity, for that reason, it is required and necessary for the Communist Parties of the world to militarize themselves.

The concentric construction of the three instruments is the organic fulfillment of the militarization of the Party and in synthesis it is summarized in what President Gonzalo teaches: “The Party is the axis of everything, it leads the three instruments overall, its own construction, absolutely leads the army and the new State as joint dictatorship aiming towards the dictatorship of the proletariat.”

C. THE SIX ASPECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARTY.
The ideological construction. The militancy is forged on the base of Party unity with Marxism-Leninism- Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, mainly Gonzalo Thought. We say Marxism-Leninism-Maoism because it is the universal ideology of the proletariat which is the last class in history, an ideology that must be applied to the concrete conditions of each revolution and generate its guiding thought. In our case, the Peruvian revolution has generated Gonzalo Thought because President Gonzalo is the highest expression of the fusion of the universal ideology with the concrete practice of the Peruvian revolution.

a) The political construction. Militancy is forged in the Programme and Statutes; the general political line and the military line as its center, specific lines; general policy, specific policies and the Party’s military plans. Politics must always be in command and that is our strong point.

b) The organic construction. The organic construction follows the political construction and taking into account that line is not enough, the organic apparatuses must be simultaneously built taking into account the organic structure, the organic system and the Party work. In its organic structure, the Party is based on democratic centralism, mainly centralism. Two Party armed networks are established, the territorial network which covers one jurisdiction and the mobile network whose structure is deployed. The organic system is the distribution of forces in function of the principal and secondary points wherever the revolution is acting. Party work is the relationship between secret work, which is the principal, and open work; the importance of the five necessities: Democratic centralism, clandestinity, discipline, vigilance and secret work. Of the six, democratic centralism is the most important.

c) The leadership. We are fully conscious that no class in history has ever achieved the installation of its rule unless it promotes its political leaders, its vanguard representatives, capable of organizing the movement and leading it. The Peruvian proletariat in the midst of the class struggle has generated the revolutionary leadership and its highest expression: The leadership of President Gonzalo, who handles revolutionary theory and has a commanding knowledge of history and a profound understanding of the revolutionary practice; who in hard two-line struggle defeated revisionism, the right and left liquidationism, the right opportunist line and rightism. He has reconstituted the Party, leads it in the People’s War and is the greatest living Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, a great political and military strategist, a philosopher; teacher of Communists, center of Party unity. Reaction has two principles to destroy the revolution: To annihilate its leadership and to isolate the guerrilla from the masses. But in synthesis its problem is to annihilate the leadership, because it is what enables us to maintain our perspective and reach our objective. Our Party has defined that leadership is key and it is duty of all militants to constantly work to defend and preserve the leadership of the Party and very especially the leadership of President Gonzalo, our leader, against any attack inside or outside the Party and to abide his personal leadership and command by raising the slogans of “Learn From President Gonzalo” and “Embody Gonzalo Thought.”

We base ourselves in the collective leadership and the individual leadership and we keep in mind the role of the leaders and how through the People’s War, through the renewal of the leadership, the direction of the revolution fulfills and tempers itself. We maintain the principle that the leadership never dies.

We who follow Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Though, subject ourselves to President Gonzalo and embody Gonzalo Thought.

d) Two-line struggle. The Party is a contradiction where the class struggle expresses itself as the two-line struggle between the right and the left. It is the two-line struggle that propells the development of the Party, its just and correct handling requires that the left must impose itself. We fight conciliation because it nourishes the right; and the principle of criticinism and self-criticism must be practiced by all in the Party: Militants, cadres, leaders, combatatants, masses too, everybody must practice it, assuming the philosophy of the struggle and then going against the current, keeping in mind that the Central Committee is the vortex of the storm, since there the class struggle expresses itself the sharpest. The just and correct handling that President Gonzalo makes of the two-line struggle has helped maintain the unity of the Party and develop the People’s War even further. In general the main danger the Party faces is revisionism, although inside the Party it continues to develop a struggle against rightist criteria, opinions, attitudes and positions, in the midst of the people. It is necessary to organize the two-line struggle to impose the Party line, through a plan to develop it in an organized manner.

e) Mass work. We apply the principle that: “The masses make history.” The Party leads the mass struggle in function of Power, which is the principal economic and political right [reinvindication in Spanish–Trans.]; we develop the mass work in and for the People’s War basing ourselves on the basic masses, workers and peasants, mainly the poor, in the petty bourgeoisie and we neutralize or win over the middle bourgeoisie, as conditions may demand. We subject ourselves to the law of the incorporation of the masses and the only Marxist tactic of “going to the deepest and most profound masses,” educating them in revolutionary violence and in the relentless struggle against revisionism. The mass work of the Party is done through the People’s Army and the masses are mobilized, politicized, organized and armed as the new Power in the countryside and in the People’s Defense Revolutionary Movement (MRDP) in the cities.

In synthesis, it is through the forge and the leadership of President Gonzalo that we have a Marxist-Leninist- Maoist, Gonzalo Thought Party of the new type which leads the People’s War and has opened up the perspective of the conquest of Power countrywide serving the world revolution.

2. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEOPLE’S GUERRILLA ARMY
a) Character of the army. The People’s Guerrilla Army [since 1991 it has developed into the People’s Army of Liberation.–Trans.] is an army of a new type which fulfills the political tasks of the revolution established by the Party. It applies the Maoist principle: “The Party rules the gun and we will never allow the gun rule to rule the Party.” It fulfills three tasks:

To fight, which is the main task, as it corresponds to the principal form of organization.

To mobilize, which is very important and by which the mass work of the Party is fulfilled, educating the masses politically, mobilizing, organizing and arming the masses.

To produce, applying the principle of self-sufficiency, trying not to be a burden for the masses. Fundamentally it is a peasant’s army, absolutely led by the Party. President Gonzalo teaches us: “The legions of steel of the People’s Guerrilla Army sustain themselves on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, guiding thought, which is the basis of its invincibility; and are forged in the hard life, the sacrifice and the challenging of death, which elevate them to revolutionary heroism.”

b) The people’s guerrilla army. Marx set forth that the proletariat needed its own army and the thesis of the general arming of the people. Lenin created the Red Army and established the thesis of the people’s militia with the functions of the police, army and administration. Chairman Mao developed the construction of the revolutionary armed forces with the immense participation of the masses. The People’s War materializes its mass character in three great coordinations.

It was based on these Marxist-Leninist-Maoist theses and taking into account the specific situation of the People’s War in Peru that President Gonzalo proposed the forming of the People’s Guerrilla Army. Since the Preparation of the war, President Gonzalo conceived the need of building the principal form of organization to carry forward the People’s War, defeat the enemy and build the new State. On December 3, 1979 it was agreed to form the “First Company of the First Division of the Red Army,” in 1980, with the Initiation, the platoons and detachments were materialized and we proposed to transform ourselves from unorganized masses to militarily organized masses.

In 1983, we needed to take a leap forward in the construction of the revolutionary armed forces, we faced a large growth of the people’s militias, which demonstrated how the masses wanted to fight; besides, that year the reactionary armed forces had entered the fight against us. That way, in the Expanded Central Committee meeting (CCA) of March, 1983, President Gonzalo proposed the materialization of the People’s Guerrilla Army. Why an Army? Because it was a political need to confront the enemy and develop the People’s War. All the Party thus agreed, amidst the two-line struggle against the rightism opposed to incorporating the militias into the Army. Why a guerrilla? Because it applies guerrilla warfare in the milestone of “Developing guerrilla warfare”; it is not a regular army but a guerrilla army and its characteristics enable it, if needed, to develop itself as some sort of regular army. Why people’s? Because it is formed by the masses of the people, by the peasants, especially the poor ones; they serve the people, since they represent the interests of the people. A very important situation is how President Gonzalo conceived the People’s Guerrilla Army by incorporating the people’s militias, made up of three forces: Principal, local and of the base, which acts mainly in the countryside and in the city as complementary; that is a great step towards the sea of armed masses.

c) The construction of the People’s Guerrilla Army. The character of the army is based on the fighters and not on the weapons; our army is made up of peasants, mostly poor, proletarians and petty bourgeoisie; it wrests weapons away from the enemy and also uses all sorts of elementary weapons. Our slogan is, “To Conquer Weapons!” from the enemy by paying whatever cost is necessary. The formation of the People’s Army must be distinguished from its construction.

d) The ideological-political construction is the principal one, based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought. In the political and military ideas of the Party, all its political and mass work are being implemented under the Party’s leadership. The Party is organized at all levels of the army, the double command is applied: political and military, and the two-line struggle develops between the proletarian military line and the bourgeois military line. In addition the revolutionary armed requires the formation of three Departments: Political, Military and Logistical.

e) Military construction is important. Armed with the theory and practice of the People’s War, the military line and the Party’s military plans, it is organized in platoons, companies and battalions in the countryside and in special detachments and people’s militias in the cities. This construction is also based on the two-line struggle. The three main forces: principal, local and at the base level fulfill the specific role as supporting the new State. “Develop the companies, strengthen the platoons aiming at battalions!” is still a valid slogan.

f) Instruction is needed and indispensable. It aims at increasing war readiness; testing is unavoidable and the ability to command is the key to action. Instruction specializes, elevates the forms of struggle. The organization of courage has a class character and strengthens war readiness because it is fought with absolute unselfishness and fully convinced of the justness of our cause.

In synthesis, President Gonzalo created the People’s Guerrilla Army, an army of the new type, he established the line of its construction based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Though so it can fulfill the specific tasks of the revolution. It is an example before the world and serves the world revolution.

3. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW STATE.
a) CHARACTER OF THE NEW STATE. Power is the central task of the revolution and the Front is the third instrument. By applying the masterful thesis of Chairman Mao “On New Democracy,” President Gonzalo teaches us our conception of joint dictatorship which materializes the People’s Republic of New Democracy.

Starting from the link between State-Front, the Revolutionary Front for the Defense of the People is materialized which began in the People’s Committees in the countryside, and in the cities it is simply the Revolutionary Movement for the Defense of the People (MRDP). We build the new State in the countryside until finally Power extends throughout the entire country.

As a state system, it is a joint dictatorship of workers, peasants, mainly poor, and the petty bourgeoisie, that respects the interests of the middle bourgeoisie, under the leadership of the proletariat represented by the Party, which applies it functions through the People’s Assemblies.

b) THE NEW STATE AND THE FLUIDITY OF WAR. The construction of the new State follows to fluidity of the People’s War, it can expand or contract, disappear in another place to appear in other. It is fluid. As Chairman Mao teaches us: “Our democratic Republic of workers and peasants is a State, but actually it is not such in the full sense of the word … our Power is still very far from having the complete form of a State … our territory is still very small and the enemy constantly dreams about annihilating us.”

Always keep in mind the system of Support Bases, of guerrilla zones, of zones of operations and points of actions, because those constitute the environment in which the new State develops and are key to maintaining a strategic course; within this environment the People’s Guerrilla Army, under the leadership of the Party, moves as its backbone.

c) The construction of the new State. “To strengthen the People’s Committees, develop the Bases and contribute to advance the People’s Republic of New Democracy!” That is the slogan which continues to guide its construction.

We struggle for Power for the proletariat and for the people and not for personal power. We are against roving and wandering and sidestepping the Base Areas.

The new State is built amidst the People’s War and follows a process of specific development, being built in our case first in the countryside, until the cities are surrounded, to materialize it through the entire country. This is a process in which the deterioration of the old State continues and the expression of the contradiction old State-new State; which causes all the political and military plans of reaction to fail and incorporates the masses to the struggle.

At the Expanded PCP National Conference of November 1979, President Gonzalo established the relationship between Front-New State applying the theory of Chairman Mao. In the First Military School of April 1980, he told us: “… In our minds, in our hearts, in our wills go embedded the germ of the people’s Power, we carry it in ourselves … Comrades, let us not forget the people’s Power, the State of the working class; the State of workers and peasants marches in us, we carry it on the end of our rifles, it nests in our minds, it palpitates in our hands and will be with us burning in our hearts. Let us never forget that, it is the first thing we must keep in our minds. Comrades, it will be born fragile, weak because it will be new, but its destiny is to develop itself through change, through variation, through fragility, like a tender plant. Let the roots we provide from the beginning be the future of a healthy and vigorous State. All that, comrades, begins to be born out of the most modest and simple actions which we shall start tomorrow.” In 1980, the Committees of Distribution emerge, the embryo of the new State; in 1982, the first People’s Committees emerge, which would multiply towards the end of that year, forcing reaction to order their armed forces to enter the fight against the People’s War, since the reactionary Power itself was threatened. In 1983, we agreed upon the Great Plan to Conquer Bases, one of its tasks was to form the Organizing Committee of the People’s Republic of New Democracy. Starting from there, we have followed the struggle between the counter-reestablishment of the old Power by the enemy and the counter-establishment of the new Power, applying defense, development and construction.

Thus the new Power passing through the blood bath develops the People’s Committees, is tempered in hard battles against the enemy in which the blood of the masses of peasants, of the fighters and of militants is spilled.

At the Expanded Central Committee of March 1983, President Gonzalo further develops the line of construction of the Front-New State. He proposes the levels in which the new State is being organized: People’s Committees, Base Areas and People’s Republic of New Democracy. The functions of the Base Areas and of the Organizing Committee of the People’s Republic of New Democracy are that of leadership, planning and organization; and each Base must elaborate its own specific Plan.

He establishes that the People’s Committees are materializations of the new State, they are Committees of the United Front; led by Commissars who assume their State functions by commissioning, elected by the Assemblies of Representatives and subject to removal. They are, up to now, clandestine [in 1991, the open People’s Committees appeared.–Trans.], they march forward in Commissions, led by the Party applying the rule of the “three thirds”: One third of them are Communists, one third are peasants and one third are progressives, and are sustained by the Army. They apply people’s dictatorship, enforcement and security, exercising firmly and resolutely revolutionary violence so as to defend the new Power against its enemies and to protect the rights of the people.

The set of People’s Committees constitute the Base Areas and the set of Base Areas is the ring that arms the People’s Republic of New Democracy, now being formed. We have gone from Conquering Bases to Developing Bases, which is the present political strategy. We have to plant the new Power more and more for which we have to apply the five established forms, especially today when the conditions point towards the perspective of conquering Power throughout the country.

In synthesis, President Gonzalo has established the line of construction of the new State and two republics, two roads, two axes are counterpoised. We have advanced in establishing new social relations of production and the People’s Republic of New Democracy now being formed shines defiantly against the old State and opens up the perspective of conquering total Power. This example encourages the revolutionaries of the world, especially the international proletariat.

As followers of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, we assume the line of construction of the three instruments of the revolution, of the Communist Party of Peru, The highest form of organization and the first political society; of the People’s Guerrilla Army, principal form of organization; and of the Front-New State, central task of the revolution. These are the Instruments which are being built in our country in the heat of the battles of the People’s War, crossing the rivers of blood spilled by the reactionary army in which with much heroism Communists, fighters and masses give their lives to materialize the just and correct political line established by President Gonzalo, and that those who survive will carry the flag of continuing it in the service of our goal, Communism.

LONG LIVE THE MILITARIZATION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU! LONG LIVE THE PEOPLE’S GUERRILLA ARMY! LONG LIVE THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF NEW DEMOCRACY NOW BEING FORMED! FOR THE CONCENTRIC CONSTRUCTION OF THE THREE INSTRUMENT!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line : Mass Line
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 1. REAFFIRMING THE PRINCIPLE “THE MASSES MAKE HISTORY”
3 2. THE PRINCIPAL ASPECT OF MASS WORK IS POLITICAL POWER, BUT THE STRUGGLE FOR ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DEMANDS IS NECESSARY
4 3. WHAT MASSES DO WE GO TO?
5 4. PERSIST IN THE ONLY MARXIST-LENINIST TACTIC
6 5. ORGANIZING THE MASSES
INTRODUCTION
Upholding, defending and applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, President Gonzalo has established the mass line of the Communist Party of Peru (PCP). His thesis reaffirms itself in the proletarian conception that we must have in order to evaluate the problem of the masses. He outlines the following political role of the masses in the struggle for Power by way of the People’s War and the struggle for better living conditions which must serve this end.

We must principally go to the basic masses, the workers and peasants and the many fronts of struggle according to their specific demands and grievances. The only Marxist tactic is going to the deepest and most profound masses, educating them in the revolutionary violence and in the struggle against opportunism. The mass work of the Party that leads the People’s War is carried out through the people’s army. He indicates the importance of the Party generated organisms, as one of the forms of organizing the masses. They must do mass work within and for the People’s War.

1. REAFFIRMING THE PRINCIPLE “THE MASSES MAKE HISTORY”
President Gonzalo reaffirms himself in the powerful Marxist principle: “The masses make history.” This teaches us to forge our Communist conception in struggle against the bourgeois conception which is centered around the individual as the axis of history. President Gonzalo states: “The masses are the very light of the world… they are its fiber, the inexhaustable heartbeat of history… when they speak everything trembles, the old order begins to shake, the high summits bow down, the stars change their course because the masses make everything possible and are capable of anything.” Today this reaffirmation has a great importance because it is part of the proletarian conception. It upholds the mass line and is applicable to everything.

The mass line allows judgment on everything from international questions to specific policies, because it is an ideological problem. No historic fact, no transforming movement, no revolution can be made without the participation of the masses. The Party applies this principle because it has a mass character and it cannot be unlinked from them, otherwise it would be extinguished or diluted. The masses, in order to guarantee the course of their struggle must be led by the Party. The Party has masses: the militants, who as Communists must necessarily embody this principle and struggle constantly to overthrow the rotten individualism which is not a proletarian conception. It can be observed how our process of People’s War is critical to this transformation.

Furthermore, one principle of leadership is “from the masses to the masses.” This also applies to the People’s War because it is a war of the masses, which are the very source of it. It is with this Marxist conception that we make the People’s War. He particularly highlights the rebellion of the masses as the makers of history. President Gonzalo says: “Since ancient times the masses live subject to oppression and exploitation, but they have always rebelled. This is a long and inexhaustible history… Every time the masses have fought their oppressors they have always called for organizing their rebellion, their arming, their uprising, that it be led, that it be conducted. It has always been this way and it will continue to be. Even after there is another world, it will continue being this way only in another form.”

“The masses clamor to organize the rebellion. Therefore, the Party, its leaders, cadre and militants today have a peremptory obligation, a destiny: To organize the disorganized Power of the masses and this can only be done with arms in hand. We must arm the masses bit by bit, part by part, until the general arming of the people. When this goal is reached, there will be no exploitation on Earth.” Here he expresses his absolute conviction in the masses, in their historical and political necessity to rebel, to arm themselves, their demand that they be led and organized.

He calls upon the Communist Parties to complete the demand that comes from Marx and Engels who taught us that there are two powers on the Earth: The armed force of the reactionaries and the disorganized masses. President Gonzalo proposes that if we organize this power, what is only a potential will be activated, and what is a possibility will be a reality. If it is not based on the masses, everything is a house of cards. Concretely, the problem is to go from the state of disorganized masses to masses that are militarily organized.

We should organize the masses with arms in hand because they clamor to organize the rebellion. As such, we must apply the People’s War which is the principal form of struggle and organize them for the taking of Power led by the Party. This is clearly tied to the principal contradiction in the world today, the strategic offensive of the world revolution, and with the principal tendency in today’s world, revolution. As Marx indicated, the mass line also aims at forming the general arming of the people with the goal of guaranteeing the triumph of the revolution and to prevent capitalist restoration.

This is a thought of great perspectives that will carry us to Communism: Only by organizing this sea of armed masses will it be possible to defend what is conquered and develop the democratic, socialist and cultural revolutions. He refutes those who propose that the masses don’t want to make revolution or that the masses will not support the People’s War. The problem is not with the masses because they are ready to rebel, but rather it is with the Communist Parties who must assume their obligation to lead and raise them up in arms.

He differentiates from those positions that today are based on “the accumulation of forces,” which propose parsimoniously binding the masses by way of the so-called “democratic spaces” or the use of legality. Such accumulation of forces doesn’t correspond to the current moment of the international and national class struggle, it doesn’t fit in the type of democratic revolution we are developing and which will have other characteristics within the socialist revolution, since we are living in a revolutionary situation of unequal development in the world.

He is opposed to and condemns the opportunist positions of making the masses tail after the big bourgeoisie, an electoral path or for armed actions under the command of a super power or power. Thus, he upholds the great slogan of Chairman Mao: “It is right to rebel,” and conceives that the problem of the masses today is that the Communist Parties mobilize, politicize, organize and arm the masses to take Power, specifying people’s war. He specifies the necessity of the scientific organization of poverty. President Gonzalo again stresses that those most disposed to rebel, who clamor the most to organize the rebellion are the poorest masses, and we must pay particular attention to the revolutionary and scientific organization of the masses.

This is not against the class criteria, because poverty has its origin in exploitation, in the class struggle: “Misery exists linked to fabulous wealth, even the Utopians knew that both are linked: A colossal and challenging wealth next to a revealing and clamorous poverty. This is because exploitation exists.” This thesis is tied to Marx who discovered the revolutionary potential of poverty and the need to scientifically organize it for revolution. Marx taught us that the proletariat does not have property and is the creative class, the only class that will destroy property and will thus destroy itself as a class.

This thesis is tied to Lenin, who taught us that social revolution does not arise from programmes but from the fact that millions of people say we prefer to die fighting for revolution rather than live as victims of hunger. This thesis is tied to Chairman Mao, who conceived that poverty will propell the yearning for change, for action, for revolution, that it is a blank piece of paper on which the newest and most beautiful words can be written.

He takes into account the specific conditions of our society. In Peru, to speak about the masses is to speak of the peasant masses, the poor peasants; that the 1920s, 1940s and 1960s demonstrate that it is the peasant struggles that shook the very foundation of the State, but that they lack a guide: The ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought. They lack a motor: The People’s War and the just and correct leadership of the Communist Party.

The peasants’ struggles were not able to take the correct path to Power, and the blood they shed was used to fetter them and brand them to the old order. These were unforgettable bloodbaths which left extraordinary lessons. The 1980s show that a true mobilization of the armed peasant masses organized in the Communist Party and People’s Guerrilla Army, and that they are giving their precious blood for the new power that is blossoming and developing through the People’s War.

This particularity is strategic because it permits the comprehension that revolution in the world is defined on the side of the poorest, who constitute the majority and who are the most disposed to rebel. In each revolution we must go to the poorest applying the three requirements that the scientific organization of poverty demand: Ideology, people’s war and a Communist Party.

In this regard, President Gonzalo says: “Poverty is a driving force of the revolution. The poorest are the most revolutionary, poverty is the most beautiful song; … poverty is not a disgrace, it is an honor, our mountains with their masses are the source of our revolution, who with their hands led by the Communist Party will build a new world. Our guide: Ideology. Our motor: The armed struggle. Our leadership: The Communist Party.”

2. THE PRINCIPAL ASPECT OF MASS WORK IS POLITICAL POWER, BUT THE STRUGGLE FOR ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DEMANDS IS NECESSARY
Basing himself on Chaiman Mao’s thesis which generalized revolutionary violence as the universal law for the conquest of Power and which established that the principal form of struggle is the armed struggle and the principal form of organzation is the armed forces. Before the outbreak of a war all the struggles and organizations should serve to prepare it. President Gonzalo teaches us that in mass work the struggle for Power and the struggle for economic demands [luchas reivindicativa] are two sides of the same coin, with the struggle for Power being the first and foremost demand of the masses.

Organize the masses so that they can go beyond what is permitted by the existing legal order, so that they struggle to destroy the old order and not to maintain it. This is accomplished by use of the three instruments of the revolution: The Party where the few converge, the Army with more participants, and new State–Front which is the base which progressively aglutinates the masses through leaps. In the countryside this is achieved through People’s Committees and in the cities through the People’s Revolutionary Defense Movement. In this way the tradition of electoral fronts, which the revisionists and opportunists apply to channel the struggle of the peasantry and to divert the masses in the cities from not seizing Power through war, is destroyed.

To center on political Power also demands the organization of the masses in diverse new forms of struggle, because war imposes changes on the struggle and organization of the masses. As Lenin taught us, in revolutionary epochs, new organizations must be formed and go against the old leaders who seek to sell-out the revolution in order to accomodate themselves within the reactionary system. For that reason, the old forms of struggle and organization of the masses cannot be used. The struggle for Power as the principal aspect does not mean that from the beginning we are going to incorporate the masses all at once. Chairman Mao teaches us that developing Base Areas and armed forces is what generates the apogee of the revolution.

This has to do with the law of incorporation of the masses into the revolution, which was established by the Party in the Second Plenum of 1980, an incorporation that will be through progressive leaps; with more People’s War will come a greater incorporation of the masses. Thus, the People’s War is a political fact that continues to pound ideas into the heads of men through powerful actions, who will bit by bit come to understand their only true path, thereby developing their political consciousness. The People’s War summons all the revolutionaries and opens a trail as it develops. The masses are avid for politics and it is incumbent upon Communists to organize and lead them.

The masses have concrete problems everywhere and we must worry about them and attend to them. Mass work is done within the class struggle and not on its margins. If we do not do mass work, the reactionaries and revisionists will utilize it for their own ends, whether it be to develop fascism and to corporativize them or hand over their struggles to another imperialist master. These are two wills that are distinct and opposed.

The masses seek the voice of those who affirm and not those who doubt. In our Party, in the Initiation, President Gonzalo demanded that no one must ever doubt the masses, fighting those who are blind and deaf to the voice of the masses, listening to their faintest rumor and attending to their daily, concrete problems. The masses must never be fooled, they must never be forced, they must know the risks which they may face. They must be summoned to the long, bloody struggle for Power, but with this goal they will understand that it will be a necessary and victorious struggle.

Therefore the struggle for Power is principal but it cannot be separated from the struggle for economic and political demands, they are two sides of the same coin, and the latter struggle is necessary. How do we understand the struggle for economic and political demands? We are accused of not having a specific line for the economic and political struggle of the masses. The fact is that we apply it differently, in other forms, with different politics than those applied by the opportunists and revisionists, a new and different way from the traditional forms.

President Gonzalo teaches us that the struggle for economic and political demands is on side of a coin, which has the struggle for political Power on the other side. It is completely wrong to separate them, to talk only about the struggle for economic and political demands is revisionism. In specifying Marx’s thesis to our society President Gonzalo tells us: “The crisis presents us with two problems: First, how to defend what has been won, because even if in the crisis the gains are lost, more would be lost if they were not defended. This is the necessity of the struggle for demands…, an economic and political struggle…, furthermore, it forges the class and the workers in their struggle for Power. Second, how to end the crisis? It cannot be ended unless the predominant social order is ended… there is a necessity for revolutionary struggle which serving the seizure of power by the armed struggle under the leadership of the Party… one cannot be separated from the other. The relationship of both problems materializes in developing the struggle for demands as a function of political Power.”

To carry forward the struggle for demands, the union and strike are used. These are the principal form of the economic struggle of the proletariat which are developed into guerrilla warfare. That is how the class is educated in the struggle for Power and elevate it through concrete armed actions which strengthens this form of struggle, giving it a higher quality. In sum, the struggle for demands must be developed serving the conquest of Power. This is a political principle of doing mass work.

3. WHAT MASSES DO WE GO TO?
We must start from the class criteria to resolve which masses to go to. It is very important to note that the masses are organized according to the common interests of the classes they belong to. President Gonzalo teaches us that this approach is essential to combat those who pretend to separate masses from classes with tales of “unity,” and of those who betray the true interests of the masses by trafficking with their struggles.

Also because it allows us to understand that the masses are always an arena of struggle where the bourgeoisie and proletariat clash to lead them. However, only the Communist Party is capable of leading them because it is the only one that can represent them and struggle for their interests. Those who talk about “mass democracy” or who create open mass organisms as if they were a form of Power without violence are merely upholding bourgeois positions that negate the leadership of the proletariat and its dictatorship. Starting from a class criteria has to do with the character of the revolution, with the classes that make up the people who should be united under the leadership of the proletariat. In our case of the democratic revolution, the proletariat leads, the peasantry is principal, the petty bourgeoisie is a firm ally and the middle bourgeoisie has a dual character.

The basic masses which we must go to are the proletariat and the peasantry, principally the poor peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie and also the middle bourgeoisie. Keeping in mind the specific demands of the masses, we should differentiate between those sectors of the masses which suffer more oppression with the goal of organizing them so that they will struggle to achieve conquests and resolve their specific contradiction.

This refers to the mass fronts in which we must work. These are: The workers, the proletariat, the leading class of all revolutions, a class whose principal and decisive political objective is the conquest of Power through the People’s War to emancipate itself, emancipate the other classes and finally to destroy itself as a class. Its specific demands are the winning of conquests and rights like increased wages, a shorter work day and better working conditions. Towards this end, the workers’ movement, its struggles, mobilizations, marches, agitation, and strikes must be developed with armed actions.

“Worry about the fundamental problems of the class and also of the workers, their general and concrete problems which they fight for daily.” The peasants are the principal force, especially the poor peasants, who struggle for the conquest of land through armed struggle under the leadership of the Communist Party. Not seeing it this way leads to the “land seizures” [the take-over of non-arable land and others promoted by the government, revionists and the Church.–Trans.] and conforming to the old order. Further develop the peasant movement applying the “three withs”: live with, work with and struggle with them, thus forging peasants with a proletarian mentality.

Women which make up half the world and develop the feminine movement for the emancipation of women, a task which is the work of women themselves but under the leadership of the Party. We must combat the bourgeois thesis of women’s liberation. Women struggle against the constant increase in the cost of living which affects the physical integrity of the class and the people. The Party mobilizes the working, peasant and intellectual women, etc.

The intellectuals so that they may fulfill their role as revolutionary intellectuals serving the proletariat and peasantry within the People’s War. Among them are the high school students, university students and professional occupations, etc. See their specific demands, the defense of their conquests, aiming at a new national, scientific and mass culture, making them conscious that they can only achieve this with the revolution.

Mobilize the poor masses in the cities, in the shantytowns and slums against hunger and misery, so that they fight for the revolution’s programme, summon them to the People’s War so that they may seize their conquests and rights which are trampled under foot more everyday. Do not allow that they be struck with impunity and teach them how to defend themselves, so that they can resist the enemy’s aggression using all the available means at their disposal.

Apply “Combat and Resist”, which is the common slogan for the class. Mobilize the youth so that they directly participate in the front lines of the combat trenches of the People’s War. Let young workers, peasants and students develop their struggles for a new world, their right to an education, against unemployment and other ills that wracks them. Make the children active participants in the People’s War. They can carry out many tasks which will help them understand the necessity of transforming the world. They are the future and in the end they will live in the new world. Change their ideology so that they adopt the proletariat’s.

4. PERSIST IN THE ONLY MARXIST-LENINIST TACTIC
Starting from Engel’s thesis: “In a country with an old political and workers’ movement, there is always a colossal heap of garbage inherited by tradition that must be cleaned step by step”. Lenin established: “The only Marxist line in the world proletarian movement consists in explaining to the masses that the split with opportunism is inevitable and indispensible, educating them in revolution through a merciless struggle against it”.

Chairman Mao indicated that a period of struggle against imperialism and revisionism was opening, with revisionism being one of the principal sources of imperialist wars and a danger within the Party for Communists in general. President Gonzalo calls for persisting in the only Marxist tactic which implies four issues: First, sweep away the colossal heap of garbage that is revisionism and opportunism, principally electoralism.

None of these revisionists and opportunists, nor any of their variaties, can represent, much less defend, the masses. Now as before they only defend the exploiters in turn, yesterday they were merely a boxcar at the tail of the fascist and corporativist Aprista government, sinisterly dragging along the union organizations under their influence. [This practice of revisionism has continued under Fujimori.–Trans.] All these political and union organizations and their leaders do not represent the people but that crust of the labor aristocracy. The union bureaucracy and the bourgeois workers’ parties that always try to swerve the masses from their revoluionary path and are no more than part of that colossal heap of garbage which must be gradually swept away as Engels said.

Second, go to the deepest and most profound masses which constitute the majority, which in our country are the workers and principally poor peasants, the petty bourgeoisie and also keep the national bourgeoisie in mind. Of these, the most important are the workers and principally poor peasantry, and we must go mainly to them in both the countryside and city. We must propell their movement, lead it, mobilize them for Power so as to topple and overthrow the old State.

This is the principle issue of the tactic. Among the masses it is necessary to distinguish the superficial scum which is the crust that serves the bourgeoisie from the immense majority of deep and profound masses which will emerge more and more until the destruction of the decrepit state, even more so when a People’s War starts to crumble the old Peruvian state. Third, the masses must be educated in the People’s War, in its theory and practice. Thus, educating them in the peace of bayonets is to allow them to be slaughtered. The masses should no longer shed their blood with impunity only to be betrayed by their false leaders, for capitulation, rather this precious blood should serve the conquest of Power for the class and the people.

Fourth, it is necessary to struggle implacibly against revisionism and opportunism, combatting it as a dangerous cancer within and outside the Party and among the very masses themselves, or else they will not solidify their revolutionary path. This is a struggle which we have been waging since the reconstitution of the Party and which today in open People’s War is more urgent and implacable because of the increasingly treacherous way they act against us, the people and the revolution, especially if social-imperialism is operating behind them within their policy of collusion and contention with Yankee imperialism for global hegemony. This is applicable to revisionism and opportunism of all breeds no matter who their representatives are.

Regarding this President Gonzalo tells us: “Rise above this miasma, this superficial revisionism, opportunism and electoralism whic rides on the masses. The main thing is that below this the most colossal and self-impelled force agitates, upon which we operate with the most powerful instrument of the rebellion which exists on the Earth: Armed action. We are the cry that says: ‘It is right to rebel’.”

5. ORGANIZING THE MASSES
President Gonzalo starting from the ideological and political bases and along with the organizational construction, established the forms of struggle and the forms of organizing the masses. He teaches us the process in which the mass work of the Party developed. In the Constitution. [of the PCP–Trans.] He tells us that Mariátegui outlined the bases for the mass work of the Party and determined specific lines by unleashing the two-line struggle against anarchism which sidestepped the necessity of the Party and also against Apra which negated the Marxist-Leninist conception and the capacity of the class to constitute itself into a Communist Party, through its work in the Front. Once Mariátegui died in the 1930s, his line was abandoned. The work is centered around the masses, putting them at the tail of the big bourgeoisie, deviating them towards “frontism”, elections and revisionism which weighs down on the efforts of the red line to oppose them.

These erroneous tactics last more than 30 years. In the Reconstruction. President Gonzalo establishes the mass line of the Party and the organic forms. This is in a period of over 15 years of hard two-line struggle which achieve partial leaps. [Refers to successes–Trans.] In the first political strategy of the Reconstruction he develops the initiation of the mass work of the Party, all the militants in Ayacucho did peasant work including the civil construction workers, for example, also with the intellectuals and poor masses of the slums. They supported the land seizures, carried out peasant events, organized the I Regional Convention of Peasants of Ayacucho where the agrarian program was established; this was a transcendental event. He led the historic struggles of June 20, 21 and 22 in 1969 in Ayacucho and Huanta, mobilizing the masses of high school students, parents and families against Decree 006 of General Velasco which we defeated.

The PCP organized the People’s Defense Front of Ayacucho, reorganized the Revolutionary Student Front (FER), created the Popular Feminine Movement (MFP), the Center for Mariátegui’s Intellectual Work (CETIM), the Revolutionary High School Student Front (FRES) and above all the Poor Peasants Movement (MCP). Thus, new politics were developed through mass work, new forms of struggle and new organic forms came to exist. In the two-line struggle, President Gonzalo fought against revisionism which led the masses towards electoralism and against revolutionary violence to preserve the old order. He fought against Patria Roja, a form of revisionism which trafficked, like it does today, with the slogan “power grows from a barrel of a gun”, negating semi-feudalism, focussing its work around the petty-bourgeoisie, especially students and teachers.

He also defeated the right liquidationism that diluted the Party’s leadership among the masses, preaching legalism and saying everything could be done through the Peasant Confederation of Peru (CCP), that the peasants didn’t understand confiscation but they did understand expropriation, and that the fascist and corporativist measures of the Velasco government [Military dictatorship from 1968-1972–Trans.] should be deepened.

In the second political strategy of the Reconstitution, he established the Generated Organisms agreed upon in the Third Plenum of 1973:

“The actual movements as organizations generated by the proletariat in the different fronts of work. Their three characteristics:

1) Adherence to Mariátegui,

2) Mass organizations and

3) practicing democratic centralism.”

He founded the character, content and role of the Generated Organisms applying Lenin’s thesis on a clandestine Party and points of Party support in the masses, leasned from the Chinese experience on open and secret work. He specified the necessity, that in order to develop the Reconstitution of the Party, of opening the Party to the masses more, that in order to agree on a policy and carry it out effectively needed to defeat the left liquidationism that believed fascism sweeps everything away, aiming at the Party’s extinction by isolating it from the masses, and showing contempt for the peasantry and proletariat and preaching that “line is enough.”

With the defeat of the left liquidationist line the ties with the masses grew and People’s Schools were formed, schools which politicized the masses with the conception and line of the Party, which played an important role in the agitation and propaganda by linking the struggle for demands with the struggle for political Power.

They completed a systematic and planned study of base workplans, unleashing the two-line struggle and developing the mass work. The advance of the work of the Generated Organisms led to President Gonzalo proposing their development into one avalanche, under the political guide of initiating the armed struggle. This led to the forming of zonal works. The Metropolitan Coordination was established for the cities, applying Lenin’s thesis for open work, Chairman Mao’s thesis for work in the cities and that the struggle of the masses should be developed in a reasonable, advantageous and measurable way.

Their application allowed us to keep the Party clandestine, entrenched in the masses, moving in a good number of activists, distribute propaganda in a short time and facitilated agitation and mobilization under a centralized Party plan. All of this is what we called “the three little feet” for mass work in the cities: Generated Organisms, People’s Schools and the Metropolitan Coordination. For the countryside the first two forms were applied.

In the third political strategy of the Reconstitution, the Party widely developed its mass work in the zones of the Sierra, linking itself with the poor peasants primarily in the cities with the proletariat and masses in the slums and shantytowns. The generated organisms have played a good role within the culmination of the reconstitution and building bases for the armed struggle.

The specific lines were developed even further, so that the Classist Movement of Workers and Laborers (MOTC) proposed 15 basic theses for the workers’ movement; the Poor Peasant Movement (MCP) politicized the peasants with the agrarian program specified for new conditions; in the Shantytown Classist Movement (MCB) the list of denunciations and demands of the people are published; the Student Revolutionary Front (FER) develops the thesis of the Defense of the University against fascism; the Revolutionary High School Student Front (FRES) impelled the struggle of students for popular education; the Popular Feminine Movement (MFP) raised the thesis of women’s Emancipation, propelling the mobilization of working women, peasants women, shantytown dwellers and students.

Furthermore, there was participation in the United Synidicate of Peruvian Educational Workers (SUTEP) which led to its specific class line being adopted in the 1970s. The National Federation of Peruvian University Teachers (FENTUP) was also formed. All of this work entered into a wide ideological-political mobilization to initiate the People’s War. In synthesis, all the mass work of the Party in the Reconstitution was to prepare the initiation of the People’s War.

As Chairman Mao taught us, before initiating the war, everything is preparation for it, and once it has begun everything serves to develop it. President Gonzalo has applied and firmly developed this principle. In the leadership of the People’s War there was a great leap in the mass work of the Party, a qualitative leap, which shapes the principal form of struggle: The People’s War and the principal form of organization: The People’s Guerrilla Army. [which developed into the People’s Army of Liberation in 1992–Trans.] This highest task was carried out by way of the militarization of the Party, and with respect to the mass work means that all the mass work is done through the People’s Guerrilla Army, which as an army of a new type that fulls three tasks: Combat, mobilize and produce.

We conceive that the second task of the army implies mobilizing, politicizing, organizing and arming the masses, a task which is not counterposed to fighting, which is the principal task, because the principle of concentrating for combat and dispersing for mobilization is applied. In addition, the masses are educated in the war. This is a principle which governs the three forces: Principal ones, local ones and in the bases where various degrees of actions are specified.

For the mobilization of masses, the Party through the EGP carries forward the People’s Schools, forms the Generated Organisms, the support groups, a policy that applied particularly one way in the countryside, because that is where the New Power is being formed, and in another way in the cities. In the cities, the Revolutionary Defense Movement of the People was formed, aiming at the future insurrection.

In the countryside, where we have Power, Base Areas and People’s Committees, we see to it that all the masses engage in armed participation, organized in the Party, Army and Front-State. If all the masses are not organized the New Power will not be able to sustain itself for long. Amorphous masses or Power without masses organized under the leadership of the Party is not enougn. In the cities, the mass work is carried out by the Army as well, and the main thing is the struggle for Power through the People’s War, with the struggle for demands serving political Power as a necessary complement. Obviously, this happens with many armed actions with the goal of materializing the new forms of organization.

We formed the Peoples’s Revolutionary Defense Movement (MRDP), which attracts masses from the workers, peasants, shantytowns and petty bourgeoisie, neutralizing the middle bourgeoisie, aiming at the democratic forces which support the People’s War. The objective is to lead the masses towards the resistance and to the elevation of their struggles into People’s War, to hinder, undermine and perturb the old State and serve the insurrection , preparing the cities with People’s War in a complementary way. We use the double policy of developing our own forms, which is principal, and penetrate all type of organizations. We apply Combat and Resist! Regarding the Generated Organisms, in the People’s War they have expressed developement and their characteristics have changed.

They continue being mass organizations of the Party and today: They are guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; They are governed by democratic centralism, and They serve the development of the People’s War. In the countryside, the Generated Organisms are militarized; in the cities many degrees of militarization can be applied. Today, we have the following: MOTC, MCP, MCB, MFP, MJP [youth movement–Trans.], MIP. [intellectual movement–Trans.] Peru People’s Aid is also important which has upsurged in the People’s War as part of the struggle for prisoners of war and dissappeared.

For the Party’s overseas work the Peru People’s Movement (MPP) has been formed with its specific tasks. Today, after nearly eight years of People’s War the Party has made a great leap in its mass work, proving that it is just and correct to develop mass work within and for the People’s War. As a result of its application our people are learning each day that the class struggle necessarily leads to the struggle for Power. Their growing participation in the People’s War is very expressive, and even if not everyone reaches an understanding of it, they see in it the concrete hope of their emancipation.

They are developing their struggles with new forms of struggle and organization, and the class struggle in Peru has been elevated to its principal form: The People’s War. The masses are organized in People’s War and are the base and sustenance of it. They are organized in a Communist Party, into a People’s Guerrilla Army and principally in the New Power, the principal conquest of the People’s War in which the workers, peasants and petty-bourgeoisie participate, excercising political power like never before in History. These are qualitative leaps which give rise to conditions for a new chapter in mass work within and for the People’s War until the conquest of Power countrywide.

Those who uphold Marxism-Leninsm-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, assume the embodyment of the mass line of the Party and apply it giving up our lives so that the Party seizes Power throughout the country and serves the world revolution.

EMBODY THE MASS LINE OF THE PARTY!

ORGANIZE THE CLAMOR OF THE PEOPLE FOR REBELLION!

MAKE THE GREAT LEAP IN THE INCOPORATION OF THE MASSES WITHIN AND FOR THE PEOPLE’S WAR!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Bases of Discussion of General Political Line : International Line
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 1. THE NEW ERA
3 2. THE PROCESS OF THE WORLD REVOLUTION
4 3. CURRENT SITUATION AND PERSPECTIVE.
5 4. THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT AND THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT
INTRODUCTION
President Gonzalo established the international line of the Communist Party of Peru. As proletarian internationalists, he teaches us that we must begin by unfolding the Peruvian revolution through the People’s War as part of, and at the service of, the world proletarian revolution. We are marching towards our inalterable goal, Communism; taking into account that each revolution is unfolded within the zigzags of world politics.

In appraising the world situation, President Gonzalo begins with Lenin’s thesis: “The economic relationships of imperialism constitute the basis of the existing international situation. The history of the XX Century has been defined completely by this new phase of capitalism, its last and highest phase,” and that the difference between oppressed and oppressor countries is a distinctive feature of imperialism. Since we are in its final and highest phase, imperialism, in order to analyze the current situation we cannot depart from the fundamental contradiction of capitalism.

Furthermore, upholding what Chairman Mao taught us, that imperialism and all reactionaries are paper tigers and that what is truly powerful are the people, and that: “Soviet revisionists and American imperialism, being co-conspirators, have perpetrated so many crimes that the revolutionary peoples of the entire world will not let them go unpunished. The peoples of all the countries are rising up. It has begun a new historical period of struggle against American imperialism and Soviet revisionism.” He sustains that the destruction of imperialism and world reaction to be carried out by the Communist Parties, leading the proletariat and the peoples of the world, will be an incontrovertible reality. He calls upon us to fight against the two imperialist superpowers, Yankee imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism, against the imperialist powers and world reaction, in accordance with the specific conditions of each revolution to determine the principal enemy and to confront their actions.

1. THE NEW ERA
The victory of the October Revolution in 1917 marked an extraordinary milestone in world history, the end of the bourgeois revolution and the beginning of the world proletarian revolution. This new period was signaled by the intensifying violence expressing the decrepitude of the bourgeoisie in leading the revolution and the maturity of the proletariat to take, lead, and maintain the power of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The revolutions of the oppressed nations also occur within this framework.

In the midst of a complex system of wars of all types, imperialism will be sunk along with world reaction, from which socialism will emerge; consequently, revolution and counter- revolution are conscious that only through war political changes are defined. Since war has a class character, there are imperialist wars such as the First and Second World Wars that were wars of plunder for an allotment of the world; or imperialist wars of aggression against oppressed nations such as those of England in the Malvinas, Yankee imperialism in Vietnam, and social-imperialism in Afghanistan; and national liberation wars such as those which are waged in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The People’s War in Peru is led by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, for this reason, it cannot be held back by the superpowers, nor any imperialistic power because of its just character and correct ideology. It is in the vanguard, it is a reality that demonstrates to us that the Communists should focus on this principal aspect of developing people’s war as the principal form of struggle to serve the world revolution.

Facing this situation, it is only through war that the world is transformed; as outlined by Chairman Mao, we uphold the omnipotence of the revolutionary war, meaning people’s war, as the highest military theory, that of the proletariat which must be applied according to each type of country whether imperialist or oppressed. The world people’s war is an adequate response that serves to prevent the imperialist war or, if this is already happening, to transform it into people’s war. As Communists we wage war to destroy war through war in order to establish a “lasting Peace.” We are the only ones that fight for a real peace–not like Reagan and Gorbachev who wage war the more they speak of peace; they are the warmongers.

Upon analyzing the world in this era, we see that four fundamental contradictions are expressed:

1) the contradiction between capitalism and socialism, referring to the contradiction between two radically different systems, which will encompass this entire era. This contradiction will be one of the last to be resolved, and will continue after the seizure of power;

2) the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, the contradiction between two opposite classes that will persist after the taking of power, expressing itself through multiple ideological, political and economic forms until its resolution with the arrival of Communism;

3) the inter-imperialist contradictions, the contradiction between the imperialists themselves for hegemony in the world and occurring between mutual superpowers, between superpowers and the minor imperialist powers and among the minor imperialist powers themselves. This contradiction will be solved during the subsequent era of 50 to 100 years;

4) contradictions between oppressed nations and imperialism which is the struggle of the oppressed nations to destroy imperialism and reaction, whose resolution is also framed within the next 50 to 100 years. During this period, this is the principal contradiction (though any one of the four fundamental contradictions can become principal in accordance with the specific circumstances of the class struggle, temporarily, or in certain countries).

In perspective, in order to arrive at our final goal, Communism, Marxist-Leninist-Maoists must carry forward three types of revolutions:

1) democratic revolution, the bourgeois revolution of a new type led by the proletariat in the oppressed countries, which establishes the dictatorship of the proletariat, consisting also of the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie, and in certain conditions the middle bourgeoisie, under the hegemony of the proletariat;

2) socialist revolution, in the imperialist and capitalist countries, which establishes the dictatorship of the proletariat;

3) cultural revolutions, which are made to continue the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The latter is to suppress and eliminate the regeneration of capitalism and to wage armed combat against attempts at capitalist restoration, and which also serves to strengthen the dictatorship of the proletariat and to facilitate the march towards Communism.

Just as no class in the world was able to seize power all at once, but only through a process of restorations and counter-restorations, when the proletariat takes power and establishes its dictatorship, the eagerness of the bourgeoisie for restoring capitalism and to recover its power grows and opens up a historical process of struggle by the proletariat to maintain and defend its dictatorship and to combat the conspiracy of capitalist restoration. This struggle between restoration and counter-restoration is an undeniable historical law, which is replayed under the dictatorship of the proletariat. In world history, when the feudal class advanced in China, it was delayed 250 years while it crushed the restoration of slavery; when the bourgeois class in the west struggled against feudalism to crush the attempts at restoration or the restorations of feudalism, it took 300 years to be definitively established in power. And, addressing a revolution in which the proletariat is definitively established in power, the acute struggle between restoration and counter-restoration will last approximately 200 years, starting from the Paris Commune in 1871. The experiences of capitalist restoration in the USSR and in China taught us great lessons, positive as well as negative; especially emphasizing the gigantic steps forward in the formation of the new State and how the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is the solution to avert restoration.

We, who follow Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, reaffirm ourselves in revolutionary violence as the universal law to conquer power, and to do so it is crucial to substitute one class by another. The democratic revolutions are carried out with revolutionary violence. Socialist revolutions are carried out with revolutionary violence and, since they are faced with restorations, power will be recovered through revolutionary violence. We will maintain the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat with revolutionary violence through cultural revolutions and we will only reach Communism through revolutionary violence. While there is a place on the Earth in which exploitation exists, we will finish it off through revolutionary violence.

This new era arms us with a wealth of new weapons, and we Communists must strengthen ourselves ideologically, politically, and organically to assume the responsibilities that correspond to us at this time.

2. THE PROCESS OF THE WORLD REVOLUTION
There are two currents that operate in the international Communist movement: The international proletarian movement and the national liberation movement. The first leads and the second is the base.

The national liberation movement.

It takes place in the oppressed nations against imperialism and reaction. In the first decade of this century, Lenin paid close attention to the struggles in India, China, and Iran. He outlined that the socialist revolution would not be only and exclusively of the proletariat against its bourgeoisie, but also of all the colonies against their oppressors. He said there is a fusion of two forces, the international proletarian movement and the national liberation movement and, that the weight of the masses in the oppressed nations constitutes most of the population in the world and will be decisive in the world revolution. He concluded that revolution is shifting to the oppressed nations, but this fact does not negate the revolution in Europe, which was demonstrated by how a formerly socialist State such as the USSR could develop in the midst of imperialist encirclement. Developing the ideas of Marx, Lenin laid the strategic foundations of the world revolution to undermine imperialism by linking the struggle of the national liberation movement with the struggles of the international proletarian movement in order to develop the revolution. Although the slogan for Communists is “Proletarians of all countries, Unite!,” he proposed the slogan that must guide the struggle of the two forces: “Proletarians of all countries and peoples of the world, Unite!” Chairman Mao Tse-tung developed Lenin’s strategy based on the great significance the national liberation movement has for the world revolution since imperialism plunders ever more from the oppressed nations, which in turn rise-up in powerful revolutionary storms that must be led by their Communist parties. Thus, the national liberation movement is fused to the international proletarian movement and these two forces propel the development of world history. President Gonzalo teaches that the strategy that Communists must follow should be based on the thesis laid down by Lenin and developed by Chairman Mao.

The international proletarian movement

This is the theory and practice of the international proletariat. The proletariat struggles on three levels: theoretical, political, and economic. Since the proletariat appears in history as the final class, it does so in constant struggle, highlighted by the following milestones:

1848, the Communist Manifesto elaborated by Marx and Engels established the basis and the program of the proletariat.

1871, the Paris Commune where for the first time the proletariat conquers power.

1905, the dress rehearsal of the revolution.

1917, victory of the October Revolution in Russia, the class established the joint dictatorship of the proletariat and opened a new era.

1949, victory of the Chinese revolution, and the establishment of the joint dictatorship led by the proletariat which resolved the passage to the socialist revolution, and changed the correlation forces in the world.

The decade of the 1960s with the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, led by Chairman Mao Tse-tung, the revolution continued under the dictatorship of the proletariat in the acute struggle between restoration and counter-restoration.

In its struggle for its rights and demands the proletariat generates the union and the strike, which are not only meant to be instruments for economic struggle, but to forge the class “for the great battles still to come.” The strike is the principal instrument in the economic struggle and the general strike is a complement to the insurrection, but it is wrong to expound, as do Sorel, the anarchists, and others, that power is can be seized by the general strike alone. We develop the struggle for better living conditions as a function of the conquest of Power.

The proletariat generates a political apparatus. As defined by Marx, the Communist Party is totally opposite and different from the other parties seeking political power. Lenin established the characteristics of the Party of the new type, combating the undermining influences of the old revisionism that generated bourgeois workers’ parties based on the labor aristocracy, the union bureaucracy, parliamentary cretinism, all tied to the old order. Chairman Mao Tse-tung developed the construction of the Party based on the gun and outlined the construction of the three instruments. President Gonzalo established the thesis of the militarization of the Communist parties and the concentric construction of the three instruments.

The proletariat generates ideology: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism for the world revolution and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, mainly Gonzalo Thought, for the Peruvian revolution.

Marxism was based on the ideas of Marx. Marx and Engels drew ideas from the best that humanity had produced: German classical philosophy, English political economy and French socialism on which they based the ideology of the proletariat. Marxism has not taken a step in its life without struggling against wrong positions. It stood up against Proudhon and anarchism, against right-wing deviations of the supposedly creative developments of Dühring, and against the opportunist positions that emerged in the German Social Democratic Party. After the death of Engels, the old revisionism unfolds with Bernstein and Kautsky; Lenin is going to defeat them. In sum, in its first stage Marxism establishes the Marxist philosophy or dialectical materialism, Marxist political economy, and scientific socialism.

Lenin develops Marxism and brings it to a second stage, Marxism-Leninism. This stage is achieved through hard struggles fought against the old revisionism that was denying Marxist philosophy, by proposing neo-Kantism instead; that is idealism and not dialectical materialism. In political economy, they were denying the growing pauperization among the proletariat, and claimed that the proletariat was being satisfied by capitalism. They denied the fact of imperialism and surplus value. In scientific socialism, they propagated pacifism, denying the class struggle and revolutionary violence.

Revisionism means to revise Marxist principles by invoking new circumstances. Lenin said that revisionism is the advance of the bourgeois ideology in the ranks of the proletariat and that to fight effectively against imperialism one must also fight against revisionism, since they are two sides of the same coin. Lenin emphasized that revisionism seeks to divide the trade unions and the political movement of the proletariat and that it generates the split in socialism. In this effective and relentless struggle against revisionism, during World War I Lenin further proposed the need to convert the imperialist war into a revolutionary war, unmasking the old revisionists as social-patriots. Lenin pointed out that in revolutionary times one must create new organizations, since the reactionaries can destroy the legal organizations and we should develop clandestine organizations even for mass work. Based on these principles, he led the October Revolution with the Communist Party through the insurrection.

In the process of building socialism in the USSR, Stalin continued the work of Lenin. He waged a 13-year struggle against the deviations of Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev that concluded in 1937. It is untruthful to say that things were administratively resolved. We agree with the position of Chairman Mao on the legacy of comrade Stalin as being 70% positive. As Communists today we have the task of making an adequate analysis of World War II, the standing of the International Communist movement and, particularly, to study well its VII Congress and, within this, the role of Comrade Stalin, along with the actions of revisionists in France, Italy, etc.

In developing Marxism-Leninism, Chairman Mao Tse-tung raises Marxism to its highest summit, thus the theory of the proletariat evolves into Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This task is fulfilled in the midst of a tenacious and persistent struggle, crushing the right opportunist line within the Chinese Communist Party, especially the revisionist line of Liu Shao-chi and Teng Hsiao-ping; and on the international level, he led the struggle against and the defeat of the contemporary revisionism of Khrushchev. Mao forged the democratic revolution in China, the leap to the socialist revolution and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. What is fundamental in Maoism is political power, the power of the proletariat, the power of the dictatorship of the proletariat, based on a armed force led by the Party. Maoism is the application of Marxism-Leninism to the oppressed countries, of the strategic offensive of the world revolution, and of the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

We Communists have three great swords: our founder Marx, the great Lenin, and Chairman Mao Tse-tung. Our great task is to raise, defend, and to apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, and place it as the command and guide of the world revolution.

Continuing the development of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, developing the Peruvian revolution and supporting the world revolution, President Gonzalo upholds, defends and applies our undefeated and unfading ideology: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought as the base of Party unity. Fur us, what is principal is to incarnate Gonzalo Thought because it is the guarantee of victory that leads us to the democratic revolution, to the socialist revolution, to the cultural revolutions, and on through to Communism.

President Gonzalo teaches us that in the process of the world revolution to sweep away imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth there are three moments:

1st, the strategic defensive;

2nd, the strategic equilibrium; and

3rd, the strategic offensive of the world revolution.

He reaches this conclusion by applying the law of contradiction to the revolution since contradiction rules everything and all contradictions have two aspects in struggle; in this case revolution and counter-revolution. The strategic defensive of the world revolution is opposed to the offensive of the counter-revolution, begging in 1871 with the Paris Commune and ending with the Second World War. The strategic equilibrium begins after the victory of the Chinese revolution, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, and the development of the powerful national liberation movements. Afterwards, the world revolution enters the strategic offensive, this moment can be identified in history in connection with the 1980s in which we see indications such as the Iran-Iraq war, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, the beginning of the People’s War in Peru, an era circumscribed within the “next 50 to 100 years.” From there onward the contradiction between capitalism and socialism will develop and whose resolution will carry us to Communism. Our conceptions is of a long-term process with the conviction of reaching Communism even if it means passing through a series of twists and turns and the reverses that will necessarily occur. Furthermore, it is not strange that we should apply the three moments to the world revolution, since Chairman Mao applied them to the process of the protracted people’s war. As Communists, we should see not only the specific moment, but the long years to come.

3. CURRENT SITUATION AND PERSPECTIVE.
In the current situation and in perspective we have entered the strategic offensive of the world revolution, we are within the “50 to 100 years” in which imperialism will be sunk together with world reaction and we will enter the stage when the proletariat firmly takes root in power and establishes its dictatorship. From there forward the contradiction will be between socialism and capitalism on the road toward Communism. The fact that restorations have occurred in the USSR and China does not negate the strong developmental process of the international proletariat, but shows how fierce the struggle is between restoration and counter-restoration is from which the Communists draw lessons to prevent the restoration of capitalism and to definitively establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.

We reaffirm the thesis of Chairman Mao Tse-tung that a period of struggle has begun between American imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism [This was written before the collapse of the USSR–Trans.]; thus the two principal enemies are defined at the world level, for those who make democratic revolution or socialist revolution, including those who make nationalist movements, and what corresponds to them is that each revolution or movement specifies its principal enemy and seek to combat the dominance of the other superpower or of the other powers. In Peru, Yankee imperialism dominates us in collusion with the big bourgeoisie and the landowners. However, at the world level there is contention between the two superpowers for world hegemony. We fight against American imperialism, feudalism and bureaucratic capitalism, but we can not allow its substitution with the domination of social-imperialism, nor of some other power. In Afghanistan, the direct aggression is by Soviet social-imperialism that contends for hegemony with Yankee imperialism, China, as well as with other western powers, and there a struggle must be waged against social-imperialism as the principal enemy and not to permit the entry either to the domination of American imperialism nor of other powers; the problem is that the struggle is not correctly unfolded due to lack of political leadership, of a Communist Party. In synthesis, there are two superpowers that are the principal enemies with one being the principal in each case, and we do not overlook the actions of the imperialist powers.

We consider Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s thesis that three worlds are delineated just and correct and that it is connected with Lenin’s thesis on the distribution of forces in the world based on the analysis of classes and contradictions. We reject the opportunist and revisionist misrepresentation by Teng Hsiao-ping of the three worlds that follows at the tail of the U.S. or USSR in order to betray the revolution. Starting from this, President Gonzalo analyzes the current situation in which the three worlds are delineated and further demonstrated that they are a reality.

The first world is the two superpowers, the U.S. and the USSR which contend for world hegemony and which can unleash an imperialist war. They are superpowers because they are economically, politically, and militarily more powerful compared to the other powers. The U.S. has an economy centered on non-state monopoly of property; politically, it develops a bourgeois democracy with a growing restriction of rights. It is a reactionary liberalism; militarily, it is the most powerful in the west and has a longer process of development. The USSR is economically based on a state monopoly, with a politically fascist dictatorship of a bureaucratic bourgeoisie and is a top-level military power although its process of development is shorter. The U.S. seeks to maintain its dominance and also to expand it. The USSR aims more towards expansion because it is a new superpower and economically it is in her interests to dominate Europe to improve its conditions. In synthesis, they are two superpowers which do not constitute a block but have contradictions, clear mutual differences, and they move within the law of collusion and contention for the redivision of the world.

The second world are the imperialist powers which are not superpowers, but have smaller economic, political, and military power such as Japan, Germany, France, Italy, etc. which have contradictions with the superpowers because they sustain, for example, the devaluation of the dollar, military restrictions, and political impositions; these imperialist powers want to take advantage of the contention between the superpowers in order for them to emerge as new superpowers, and they also unleash wars of aggression against the oppressed nations and furthermore, acute contradictions exist among them.

The third world is composed of the oppressed nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. They are colonies or semi-colonies where feudalism has not been destroyed, and on that basis a bureaucratic capitalism unfolds, they are tied to a superpower or imperialist power. They have contradictions with imperialism, furthermore they fight against their own big bourgeoisie and landlords, both of which are at the service of and in collusion with imperialism, especially with the superpowers.

All this gives us the basis on which the Communists can establish the strategy and tactics of the world revolution. Chairman Mao Tse-tung had come to establish the strategy and tactics of the world revolution but the Chinese revisionists concealed it. Therefore, it remains for us to extract from his own ideas, especially if there are new situations in sight.

Our Party sustains the view that in the current world there are three fundamental contradictions:

1) The contradiction of the oppressed nations, on one side, against the superpowers and imperialist powers, on the other. Here the thesis of the three worlds is delineated, and we formulate it this way because the kernel of that contradiction lies with the superpowers but it is also a contradiction with the imperialist powers. This is the principal contradiction and its solution is the development and victory of new democratic revolutions.

2) The contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, which has as its solution the socialist revolution and within that perspective, the proletarian cultural revolution.

3) The inter-imperialist contradictions between the superpowers themselves, between the superpowers and the smaller imperialist powers and, finally, among the imperialist powers themselves, which leads to war for world hegemony and imperialistic wars of plunder which the proletariat must oppose with people’s war and in the long run, world people’s war.

We do not list the contradiction socialism-capitalism because it exists only at an ideological and political level, since socialism does not exist anywhere as a state; today there is no socialist system. It existed, and to say that it exists today it is to claim in essence that the USSR is socialist, which is a revisionist position.

The need to address the contradictions serves to analyze the world situation and to define its strategy and tactics within its strategic and conflicting zones. Today, the most incendiary conflicting points are: Southeast Asia where the struggle in Vietnam, Laos, and Kampuchea are a focal point in the immense strategic region of Asia, a region where great masses are concentrated. If India, for example, had a sufficiently developed Communist Party, it would serve to powerfully advance the revolution. In the Middle East, the great oil center, there is also an acute contest between the superpowers and powers bound to the issues of the Near East and to nationalist and even reactionary movements. Another area is South Africa, where there are guerrilla movements that are usurped by the superpowers to convert them into occupation forces and dominate them. Latin America is an important center of struggle, from Central America (Nicaragua and El Salvador) to the volatility of the Antilles (Haiti, etc.), and the People’s War in Peru, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought revolution that struggles for an authentic democratic revolution without submitting to any superpower or power. In Europe, where persistent anti-imperialists military actions are developing, it is necessary to study their ideology and the politics they uphold, the class which they serve, their links with the ideology of the proletariat, and their role within the world proletarian revolution, as well as their position on contemporary revisionism. These movements express the uneven development of the revolutionary situation that exists in the Old World. Any one of these points of conflict could provide the spark to an imperialist World War, a situation that may occur when the strategic superiority of one of the superpowers is defined. Therefore, it is increasingly urgent and peremptory to rely upon Communist parties based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and be forged for and in people’s war through their militarization. To strategically define the zones of secondary and principal importance in waging the world revolution, is key to establishing the role that each region and each party will play in the world revolution.

For the Communist Parties, the problem is not to center attention on the imperialist World War but to do so on the people’s war, since only from such a conflict will power led by the proletariat derive. We believe that while there is imperialism, there is a likelihood that imperialist World Wars will develop. What Chairman Mao said is certain, that either revolution will prevent war or World War will provoke revolution. In order for an imperialist world war to happen, the strategic superiority of one of the superpowers must be defined. According to the reactionary military theoreticians, this situation would unfold at the moment of the first use of atomic weapons, or the overwhelming atomic bombardment by each belligerent. This would be followed by a second moment, which would involve contingents of millions in an invasion and, subsequently, (since the objective is the division of the spoils, especially of the oppressed nations) a conventional war to occupy territories. Then it will enter into a great and ferocious massacre which will have repercussions against the imperialists and will provide great reasons for the oppressed nations, the peoples of the world and the class to rise up in people’s war. Thus, if another imperialist world war presents itself, first, we will oppose it, and second, we will not fear it as we will focus on revolution. Third, to focus on revolution means to wage the people’s war led by the proletariat through its Communist parties; and fourth, this people’s war must be specified in each type of country according to its type of revolution. Therefore, the world people’s war is the order of the day.

4. THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT AND THE REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT
The history of the International Communist Movement is a glorious process of struggle through which the Communists in the world have fought, and continue to fight, for unity in order to attain their unalterable goal: a Communist society. In this heroic struggle, three Internationals were forged.

The International Workers’ Association, or First International, was founded by Marx and Engels in 1864. In hard struggle they opposed and crushed the anarchistic positions of Bakunin and established that there is only one doctrine of the proletariat: Marxism. Lenin says that the role fulfilled by the First International was to lay down the ideological foundations of the doctrine of the proletariat. This International split, and when this was blamed on Marx and Engels, they answered that if such a division had not occurred, the International would have died in any case–killed by those who united in rejecting principles. The Second International was founded by Engels in 1889. It served to multiply organizations and parties, but with the death of Engels, the emerging old-style revisionism was confronted and crushed by Lenin. This International became bankrupt in the First World War when its leadership (Kautsky and Bernstein), instead of opposing the imperialist world war in order to transform it into revolution, supported the war of plunder and their own countries’ bourgeoisie. Thus, they turned into social-patriots. In 1919 Lenin organized the Third International, the Communist International, conceiving of it as a fighting machine to carry out the world revolution and the establishment of the proletarian dictatorship. Two problems emerged in the Communist International during the 1920s which were to have great repercussions: The problem of Germany (or rather, the revolution in an advanced country), and the problem of China (or revolution in a backward country). The situation became more acute with the emergence and victory of fascism and the question on how to conceive the United Front. Thorez and Togliatti proposed revisionist opinions, seeking to support rather than destroy the old order, while focussing solely on the anti-fascist struggle. In 1943 the International was dissolved, leaving only an Information Committee. It is an urgent task for Communists, and for our Party, to evaluate the Communist International, especially its VII Congress before World War II, and the role of Comrade Stalin.

The struggle of Communists to unite at an international level is long and complex. This was shown in the struggle against contemporary revisionism after World War II. Tito was condemned in 1948. The ideas of Browder also played a negative role. The Workers’ and Communist parties met in Moscow in 1957 and 1960 after the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in 1956, in which Khrushchev had already usurped the dictatorship of the proletariat in the USSR, and assaulted it under the pretext of combating Comrade Stalin. However, the prestige of the USSR was still very great throughout the world, and in such circumstances the meetings of 1957 and 1960 agreed on ambiguous positions, in spite of the firm, principled positions upheld by the Communist Part of China (CPC) (especially those of Chairman Mao), and the Party of Labor of Albania. The positions of Chairman Mao caused the CPSU to alter some of its positions, but the positions of contemporary revisionism were systematized in 1961, when the CPSU held its twenty-second Congress.

Chairman Mao, leading the CPC, summarized the essence of the new revisionism systematized in the “three peacefuls” and the “two alls.” With “peaceful coexistence,” Khrushchev had twisted the old thesis of Lenin that distinguished between relationships among states to those within states to propose that the general line of the international Communist movement is “peaceful coexistence.” For Khrushchev, the problem was to prevent war, because according to him, atomic weapons did not distinguish between exploiters and exploited and men had to fraternize in order to prevent the annihilation of humanity. “Peaceful transition” proposes that revolution no longer required revolutionary violence but that one social system could be transformed into another through the “peaceful route”: through elections or parliamentarism. The concept of “peaceful emulation” expressed the idea that to destroy the imperialist system, the socialist system had to emulate it in order to demonstrate to the imperialists that the socialist system is superior, and thus encourage the imperialists to become socialists. The “state of the whole people” was the revisionist thesis with which Khrushchev intended to deny the class character of the state. It was specifically aimed against the dictatorship of the proletariat. The “party of the whole people” was another monstrosity which denied the class character of the Party as the party of the proletariat. Khrushchev maintained that the Twenty-second Congress of the CPSU was the new program of the Communists, and thus the Communist Manifesto was substituted by the bourgeois slogans of “liberty,” “equality,” and “fraternity”. The Manifesto is the program of the Communists, and its negation generated and sharpened the struggle between Marxism and revisionism.

On June 14, 1963, the “Proposal on the General Line of the International Communist Movement” (also known as “the Chinese letter”) was published. Then the “Nine Commentaries,” in which Chairman Mao and the CPC brilliantly criticized and crushed modern revisionism in all aspects, were circulated.

We understand that Chairman Mao and the CPC felt that because the political and ideological base–which had to be Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought–had not yet been defined it was inconvenient to form a new Communist International in such circumstances. This was mainly due to the fact that the Party of Labor of Albania, led by Enver Hoxha, did not accept Mao Tse-tung Thought and advocated an International based only on Marxism-Leninism, disregarding the new developments. In essence, Hoxha was opposed to Mao Tse-tung Thought.

The growing influence of Chairman Mao in the world unfolded with the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. The CPC focused on very urgent problems, such as recovering power in the People’s Republic of China from the usurpation of the revisionists Liu Shaochi and Teng Hsiao-ping, and on the method to continue the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. Chairman Mao became the great teacher of the proletariat and the leader of the world revolution, in the class struggle at home and in the struggle against revisionism on the international level. His thought developed into the third stage of Marxism. In that era, Communists referred to this development as “Mao Tse-tung Thought.” The Communist Party of Peru (PCP) adopted Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought as the basis of party unity at the Sixth National Conference in January 1969. This was achieved as a result of the struggle of President Gonzalo and the Red Fraction of the Party that had been adhering to Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought since 1966. President Gonzalo upheld the positions of Chairman Mao as early as 1962, and on the basis of that viewpoint, went on to forge the Red Fraction of the PCP. The authentic Communists were waiting for the CPC to define Maoism as the third stage of Marxism, but with the death of Chairman Mao in September 1976, the Chinese revisionists pulled off a counter-revolutionary coup aimed at Chairman Mao and his thought. Thereafter, the unity of the Marxists encountered serious and complex problems, but the Communist Party of Peru remained firm and unshakable in the defense of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought, immediately denouncing the counter-revolutionary coup and the revisionist usurpation in China. It was at that time that the Broadened Political Bureau of the PCP in October 1976 declared, “To be a Marxist is to adhere to Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought.”

With the death of Chairman Mao and the revisionist usurpation in China by Teng and his gang, the Communists were left scattered in the world without a center or base for world revolution; the counter-revolutionaries brandished their claws to negate Chairman Mao and the validity of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought, unleashing the triple revisionist assault of Teng Hsiao-ping (Chinese revisionism), Hoxha (Albanian revisionism), and Brezhnev (Russian revisionism). In the face of this situation, in 1979, at the PCP’s First National Conference, President Gonzalo called upon the whole party to defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought against the revisionist triple assault. The Party’s principled positions remained firm and unalterable. In 1980, the PCP launched the People’s War based on Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought. And it is with the application and development of the People’s War that the PCP has advanced further in the comprehension of Maoism as the third stage of Marxism. Hence, at the Second National Conference held in May 1982 the Party agreed that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism was the third stage of Marxism. The PCP was the only party in the world in the vanguard of the defense of Maoism, assuming the task of struggling for the unity of the Marxist-Leninist-Maoists of the world so that this ideology be the command and guide of the world and Peruvian revolutions.

The application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism must be specific to each revolution, so that it does not become a mechanical formula. For this reason, the Peruvian Revolution has generated President Gonzalo and Gonzalo Thought, which is the main principle in the basis of Party unity. Each revolution must specify its guiding thought, without which there can be no application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, nor any revolutionary development.

In the Fall of 1980, 13 Communist parties and organizations signed a statement, “To the Marxist-Leninists, Workers, and the Oppressed of All Countries,” calling upon Communists to unite around Marxist-Leninist struggle and to uphold Chairman Mao, but without representing Maoism as a new stage with universal validity. The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (RCP-USA) principally led this effort. In 1983 the RCP-USA contacted the PCP and invited it to sign the 1980 statement. The PCP opposed such a statement since Mao Tse-tung Thought was not considered therein; furthermore, we were already basing ourselves on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. In March 1984, the Second Conference of these organizations was held and the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) was founded which approved a joint declaration, referring to uniting around Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought.

Our position on the participation of the PCP in RIM is condensed in a letter written to the Committee of RIM dated October 1986: “We wish to reiterate two questions about this issue. First, from the beginning of our ties, the origin of our differences was the substantive and decisive question of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the only, true and new stage in the development of proletarian ideology, of universal validity, having Maoism as the key issue. Therefore, our objection to the choice of ‘Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought.’ Nevertheless, we have thought and still think that the resolution of this matter, which for us is indispensable as a point of departure, is complex, demands time, and especially revolutionary development.”

“Second, in signing the Declaration produced by the Second Conference which founded the RIM, we did so with observations and even clear differences, which were briefly explained. We reiterated these issues in meetings, reports, and communications which clearly indicate differences on the principle contradiction, the revolutionary situation of unequal development, on world war, and on some criteria on the role of the Movement, and other more important issues, such as the universal validity of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and in particular the general validity of People’s War (the expression of proletarian military theory that our class has developed completely with Chairman Mao Tse-tung), and our insistence in always raising the great slogan, “Proletarians of all countries, unite!” Nevertheless, we thought and continue to think that the Declaration constituted and continues to constitute a relative basis of unity, whose development and improvement will be demanded by the advance of our Movement, as facts are clearly demonstrating already.”

“Presently, the Declaration is repudiated by some as opportunist. Others assert that it is useless to resolve the burning problems that the revolution demands, and therefore, we should move on to a new declaration. The PCP believes that the RIM faces problems on various levels:

On the ideological level, it needs to advance towards the understanding of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This advance is principal, and even political development hinges upon it.

On the political level, it needs to advance in defining the fundamental contradictions, and the principal global contradiction, the question of the Third World War, and that revolution is the main tendency, and in the event that imperialist war becomes a reality, we must transform it into people’s war.

In regards to this construction, what political lines we must follow to achieve the establishment of the International that we need, which must continue the glorious International Communist Movement.

Concerning mass work, our point of departure are the slogans “The masses make history,” “It’s right to rebel,” and “The colossal garbage heap…” [of revisionism and opportunism that must be swept away–Trans.] The purpose of mass work is to begin and develop people’s war.

In regards to leadership, it is a key issue, which requires time for its formation, development, and credibility.

In regards to two-line struggle, it is not being handled as it should be [in RIM–Trans.].

These are problems of development, but if they are not addressed justly and correctly, they can cause disarticulation, and such negative possibilities necessarily cause us concern. We believe that the Committee of the RIM aims to impose the denomination of “Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought,” trying to frame us within the Declaration, and thus resolve the problems of leadership of the Committee, which leads us to believe in the existence of hegemonic tendencies.”

Taking the above situation into account, the Fourth National Conference of the PCP (October 1986) reaffirmed our intention to constitute a fraction within the International Communist Movement in order to place Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, as the command and guide of the world revolution. We call to: “Uphold, Defend, and Apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Principally Maoism!” since only through this can the international proletariat, through its Communist Parties, lead the conquest of power and emancipate the oppressed so they can emancipate themselves as a class.

We are for the reconstitution of the Communist International, and we regard the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement as a step in that direction. It will serve this purpose as long as it upholds and follows a just and correct ideological and political line.

The struggle to make Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, the command and guide of world revolution will be long, complex and difficult, but in the end, the Marxist-Leninist-Maoists of the world will succeed. Marxism has not taken a step forward in its life without struggle.

GLORY TO THE INTERNATIONAL PROLETARIAT!

LONG LIVE THE WORLD PROLETARIAN REVOLUTION!

UPHOLD, DEFEND AND APPLY MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM, GONZALO THOUGHT, MAINLY GONZALO THOUGHT!
——————————

——————————
1988 - Interview with Chairman Gonzalo
Contents
1 Objectives
2 I. Ideological Questions
3 II. On the Party
4 III. People's War
5 IV. On the National Political Situation
6 V. International Politics
7 Other Points
Objectives
EL DIARIO: Chairman Gonzalo, what prompted you, after a lengthy silence, to do this interview? And why did you choose El Diario?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Let us start by saying that the Communist Party of Peru, which has been leading the people's war for more than eight years now, has expressed itself publicly in a number of different documents. We have always considered the pronouncements of the Party itself to be much more important, because that way it is crystal clear that it is the PCP that has dared to initiate the people's war, lead it, and carry it forward.

The reason we are taking this occasion to speak in a personal interview like this one, which is the first time we have had the pleasure to do so, and specifically with you, has to do with the Party Congress. Our Party has accomplished a long-awaited historic task with the convening of its Congress. For decades we struggled hard to bring this about, but it's only the people's war that has given us the conditions to actually accomplish it. That's why we say that the First Congress is the offspring of two great parents: the Party and the people's war. As the official documents state, this Congress marks a milestone, a victory, in which our Party has been able to sum up the long road traveled, and has established the three basic elements of Party unity: its ideology, which is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; the programme; and the general political line. Furthermore, this Congress has established a solid basis for advancing towards the prospective seizure of Power. The Congress, then, is a great victory, and it is one of the main reasons for giving this interview. Other reasons have to do with the profound crisis that our country is going through, and the ever-growing and more powerful development of the class struggle of the masses, and with the international situation and how revolution is the main trend in the world.

As to why we are doing this interview with El Diario, there is a very simple reason. El Diario is a trench of combat and today it is the only tribune that really serves the people. We believe that though it would have been possible to be interviewed by others, including foreigners, it is better, and more in accord with our principles, to be interviewed by a paper like El Diario, which is really struggling every day under difficult conditions to serve the people and the revolution. That is the reason.

EL DIARIO: Chairman Gonzalo. have you weighed the possible implications of conducting this interview? Let me ask you--don't you run some risk talking publicly at this time?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Being communists, we fear nothing. Moreover, our Party has steeled us to challenge death itself, and to carry our life on our fingertips so that we may give it whenever the revolution demands it. We believe that this interview has overriding importance: it serves our Party, serves the revolution, serves our people and our class, and also--why not say it--serves the international proletariat, the peoples of the world, the world revolution. Whatever risk then, is nothing--especially, I repeat, steeled as we are by the Party.

I. Ideological Questions
EL DIARIO: Chairman, let's talk about one of the ideological foundations of the PCP, Maoism. Why do you consider Maoism the third stage of Marxism?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: This point is crucial, and of enormous consequence. For us, Marxism is a process of development, and this great process has given us a new, third, and higher stage. Why do we say that we are in a new, third, and higher stage, Maoism? We say this because in examining the three integral parts of Marxism, it is clearly evident that Chairman Mao Zedong has developed each one of these three parts. Let's enumerate them: in Marxist philosophy no one can deny his great contribution to the development of dialectics, focusing on the law of contradiction, establishing that it is the only fundamental law. On political economy, it will suffice to highlight two things. The first, of immediate and concrete importance for us, is bureaucrat capitalism, and second, the development of the political economy of socialism, since in synthesis we can say that it is Mao who really established and developed the political economy of socialism. With regard to scientific socialism, it is enough to point to people's war, since it is with Chairman Mao Zedong that the international proletariat has attained a fully developed military theory, giving us then the military theory of our class, the proletariat, applicable everywhere. We believe that these three questions demonstrate a development of universal character. Looked at in this way what we have is a new stage--and we call it the third one, because Marxism has two preceding stages, that of Marx and that of Lenin, which is why we speak of Marxism-Leninism. A higher stage, because with Maoism the ideology of the worldwide proletariat attains its highest development up to now, its loftiest peak, but with the understanding that Marxism is--if you'll excuse the reiteration--a dialectical unity that develops through great leaps, and that these great leaps are what give rise to stages. So for us, what exists in the world today is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and principally Maoism. We think that to be Marxists today, to be Communists, necessarily demands that we be Marxist-Leninist-Maoists and principally Maoists. Otherwise, we couldn't be genuine communists.

I would like to emphasize a situation that is rarely taken into account and definitely deserves to be studied closely today. I am referring to Mao Zedong's development of Lenin's great thesis on imperialism. This is of great importance today, and in the historical stage that is presently unfolding. Again simply listing his contributions, we could point out the following: he discovered a law of imperialism when he said that imperialism makes trouble and fails, makes trouble again and fails again, until its final doom. He also specified a period in the process of development of imperialism, which he called "the next 50 to 100 years," years, as he said, unparalleled on earth, during which, as we understand it, we will sweep imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth. He also pointed to something that today more than ever can't be ignored. He said that "a period of struggle between U.S. imperialism and Soviet social imperialism has begun." In addition, we all know of his great strategic thesis that "imperialism and all reactionaries are paper tigers." This is a thesis of enormous importance and we must keep in mind that Chairman Mao applied this thesis to U.S. imperialism and Soviet social imperialism, both of which we have no reason to be afraid of. But also, we must keep in mind how he saw the development of war, following exactly what Lenin had stated about the era of wars that had opened up in the world. The Chairman has taught us that a country, a nation, a people, no matter how small, can defeat the most powerful exploiter and dominator on Earth if they dare to take up arms. Moreover, he has taught us how to understand the process of war and how never to fall for nuclear blackmail. I believe that these are some questions that we must keep in mind in order to understand how Chairman Mao Zedong developed Lenin's great thesis on imperialism. And why do I insist on this? Because we understand that just as Lenin's contributions are based on the great work of Marx, Chairman Mao Zedong's developments are based on the great work of Marx and Lenin on Marxism-Leninism. We would never be able to understand Maoism without understanding Marxism-Leninism.

We believe that these things are of great importance today, and for us it has been decisive to understand Maoism in theory and practice as a third, new, and higher stage.

EL DIARIO: Chairman Gonzalo, do you believe that if José Carlos Mariátegui were alive he would uphold the theories and contributions of Chairman Mao?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: In synthesis, Mariátegui was a Marxist-Leninist. Beyond that, in Mariátegui, the founder of the Party, we find theses similar to those that Chairman Mao has made universal. Thus, as I see it, today Mariátegui would be a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. This is not speculation, it is simply the product of understanding the life and work of José Carlos Mariátegui.

EL DIARIO: Moving on to another question, what is the ideology of the proletariat and what role does it play in the social processes of the world today? What do the classics, Marx, Lenin andMao, mean to the PCP?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Today, tomorrow, and in these stormy decades in which we live, we can see the enormous and overriding importance that proletarian ideology has. First, although I'm emphasizing something that is well known, it is the theory and practice of the final class in history. The ideology of the proletariat is the product of the struggle of the international proletariat. It also comprehends the study and understanding of the whole historical process of class struggle that went on before the proletariat, of the struggle of the peasantry in particular, the great heroic struggles they have waged--it represents the highest level of study and understanding that science has produced. In sum, the ideology of the proletariat, the great creation of Marx, is the highest world outlook that has ever been or ever will be seen on Earth. It is the world outlook, the scientific ideology that for the first time provided mankind, our class principally, and the people, with a theoretical and practical instrument for transforming the world. And we have seen how everything that he predicted has come about. Marxism has been developing, it has become Marxism-Leninism, and today Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. And we see how this ideology is the only one capable of transforming the world, making revolution, and leading us to the inevitable goal of communism. It is of enormous importance.

I would like to emphasize something: it is ideology, but it is scientific. Nevertheless, we must understand very well that we cannot make any concessions to the stand of the bourgeoisie which wants to reduce the ideology of the proletariat to a simple method. To do so is to debase it and deny it. Please excuse my insistence, but as Chairman Mao said, "it isn't enough to say it once, but a hundred times, it isn't enough to say it to a few, but to many." Basing myself on this I say that the ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and today principally Maoism, is the only all-powerful ideology because it is true, and historical facts show that. It is the product aside from what has already been said, of the extraordinary work of extraordinary historical figures like Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Chairman Mao Zedong, to point out the most outstanding. But among them we give special emphasis to three: Marx, Lenin, and Chairman Mao Zedong as the three banners that are embodied, once again, in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and principally Maoism. And what, precisely, is our task today? It is to raise up the banner of our ideology, defend, and apply it, and to struggle energetically so that it will lead and guide the world revolution. Without proletarian ideology, there is no revolution. Without proletarian ideology, there is no hope for our class and the people. Without proletarian ideology, there is no communism.

EL DIARIO: Speaking of ideology, why Gonzalo Thought?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Marxism has always taught us that the problem lies in the application of universal truth. Chairman Mao Zedong was extremely insistent on this point, that if Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is not applied to concrete reality, it is not possible to lead a revolution, not possible to transform the old order, destroy it, or create a new one. It is the application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to the Peruvian revolution that has produced Gonzalo Thought. Gonzalo Thought has been forged in the class struggle of our people, mainly the proletariat, in the incessant struggles of the peasantry, and in the larger framework of the world revolution, in the midst of these earthshaking battles, applying as faithfully as possible the universal truths to the concrete conditions of our country. Previously we called it the Guiding Thought. And if today the Party, through its Congress, has sanctioned the term Gonzalo Thought, it's because a leap has been made in the Guiding Thought through the development of the people's war. In sum, Gonzalo Thought is none other than the application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to our concrete reality. This means that it is principal specifically for our Party, for the people's war and for the revolution in our country, and I want to emphasize that. But for us, looking at our ideology in universal terms, I emphasize once again, it is Maoism that is principal.

EL DIARIO: What role is revisionism playing, and how does the PCP struggle against it?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: First, we should remember that every advance of Marxism has been made amidst fierce struggle. And in this process of development of Marxism, old-style revisionism emerged and met its downfall in World War I. But since then, we communists have confronted a new revisionism, modern revisionism, that began to develop with Khrushchev and his lackeys, and which is now unleashing a new offensive against Marxism. Its principal centers are the Soviet Union and China.

Revisionism arose as a complete negation of Marxism. Modern revisionism, likewise, is always aiming to substitute bourgeois philosophy for Marxist philosophy, going against political economy, particularly denying the growing impoverishment and the inevitability of the downfall of imperialism. Revisionism strives to falsify and twist scientific socialism in order to oppose the class struggle and revolution, peddling parliamentary cretinism and pacifism. All these positions have been expounded by the revisionists, who have aimed for and continue to aim for the restoration of capitalism, the undermining and blocking of the world revolution, and to denigrate the conquering spirit of our class. But here I feel it is necessary to spell out some points to make this concrete: revisionism behaves like any imperialism. For example, the Soviet Union, Soviet social imperialism, preaches and practices parliamentary cretinism. It mounts and conducts armed actions for the purpose of gaining world hegemony. It carries out aggression, pits one people against another, sets masses against masses, and divides our class and the people. In a thousand and one ways Soviet revisionism fights against everything that is truly Marxist and everything that serves the revolution. We are an example of how they do this. The social-imperialists of the USSR have developed a perverse worldwide plan to become a hegemonic superpower using all the means at their disposal. This includes setting up phony parties, communist in name only, "bourgeois workers parties" to use Engels' words. And this is how Chinese revisionism and all revisionists act, differing only with regard to their particular circumstances, according to who pulls their strings.

Therefore, for us, the task is to fight revisionism and fight it relentlessly. We must keep in mind the lesson that we can't fight imperialism without combating revisionism. And our Congress has declared that we must wage a relentless and uncompromising struggle against imperialism, revisionism and reaction worldwide.

How should we carry out this struggle? In all spheres: the ideological, the economic, and the political--we must fight them in each one of these classic spheres. For if we should fail to carry out the struggle against revisionism, we wouldn't be communists. A communist has the obligation to combat revisionism, untiringly, and implacably.

And we have fought against revisionism. We've fought against it since it first came on the scene. We were fortunate in this country to have been able to contribute by expelling them from the Party in 1964, a fact they always try to hide. I want to make it very clear that the vast majority of the Communist Party united behind the banner of struggle against revisionism which Mao Zedong had unfurled, and they took aim at and struck blows against revisionism in the ranks of the Communist Party of that time until they expelled Del Prado and his gang. From that time up to the present we've continued fighting revisionism, not only here, but beyond our borders as well. We oppose it internationally, we oppose the Soviet social imperialism of Gorbachev, the Chinese revisionism of the perverse Deng Xiaoping the Albanian revisionism of Ramiz Alia, follower of the revisionist Hoxha, just as we oppose all revisionists, whether they follow the line of the social-imperialists, the Chinese or Albanian revisionists, or anyone else.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, who is the main exponent of revisionism in Peru itself?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The so-called Peruvian Communist Party, the one that publishes, or published, Unity, the fifth column of Soviet revisionism, headed by the crusty revisionist Jorge Del Prado, who some consider to be a "time-honored revolutionary." Secondly there is Patria Roja, an agent of Chinese revisionism whose party hacks worship Deng.

EL DIARIO: Do you think that the influence of revisionism among the Peruvian masses creates an adverse situation for the revolution?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: If we keep in mind what Lenin taught us and what Chairman Mao in turn emphasized and continued to develop, we see that revisionism is an agent of the bourgeoisie in the ranks of the proletariat, and so it provokes splits. It divides the communist movement and Communist Parties, it divides the trade union movement, and it breaks up and divides the people's movement.

Revisionism obviously is a cancer, a cancer that has to be ruthlessly eliminated. Otherwise we won't be able to advance the revolution. Remembering what Lenin said, in a concise way, we must forge ahead on two questions, the question of revolutionary violence, and the relentless struggle against opportunism, against revisionism.

I believe that in our country, in considering the situation of the masses, we must see not only this question, but what Engels called the "colossal pile of rubbish." He taught us that when a movement lasts for decades, like the movement of the proletariat, and even more so the movement of the people, in our country, a great deal of rubbish piles up that needs to be swept away bit by bit. Our view is that this is something that has to be considered as well.

How much can it influence the masses? Among the masses, what revisionism does is serve the cause of capitulation to internal reaction, concretely to the big bourgeoisie and the landlords, to the landlord-bureaucrat capitalist dictatorship which is the Peruvian State of today. Internationally, it capitulates to imperialism and serves social-imperialist hegemony or the desires for the same among certain powers evolving in that direction, like China. We believe that as the revolution and the people's war develop, as the class struggle sharpens, the people and the proletariat heighten their understanding more and more. And at the same time, as they are forced to witness the betrayal of the revisionists and opportunists of all kinds on a daily basis, and as they see even more of this in the future, the proletariat and the people will have to carry out their mission of sweeping the revisionists out of all the corners as best they can. Unfortunately, as Engels has taught us, they can't be eliminated all at once, as they are part of the "colossal pile of rubbish."

EL DIARIO: Do you believe that revisionism is being decisively defeated in this country?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: To reiterate what the founders of Marxism have taught, to the extent that revisionism acts in concert with the reactionary State, the masses will come to understand its despicable role. As they see its actions, to the extent the people as a whole and the class see how they act, it's inevitable that they will more and more come to understand the pernicious role of the revisionists, as traffickers, sellouts of the workers, opportunists and traitors. The revisionists are heading for their demise and have been for some time now, not only because of the people's war, but rather this process began when revisionism was expelled from the ranks of the Party, because at that point another batch of serious communists began to come forward, and later became those who today, under the guidance of the Communist Party of Peru, are leading the people's war. And we think that the masses, with the class instincts of which Mariátegui spoke, will increasingly come to understand this, as they have already begun to do.

Revisionism has already lost out, it's only a matter of time. The problem is already defined, the rubbish has begun to be swept away, burned away; as I said, it's only a matter of time. The process of their demise began years ago. And if we go back further, to the beginnings, the ball game was lost when they became revisionists, when they abandoned their principles--at that point. What remained to be seen was how the class struggle would develop, and how a Party like ours would be capable of carrying out its role, and how the masses would sustain it, support it and carry it forward, how they would come to see that it is their Party, that it defends their interests. And it is the masses themselves who will settle accounts, giving a just punishment to those who for decades have sold out and who continue to sell out the proletariat's basic interests, and they will also condemn and sanction those traitors who try to do so or begin to do so.

EL DIARIO: What is your opinion of the New Evangelism put forward by the Pope?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Marx taught us that "religion is the opiate of the people." This is a Marxist thesis which is completely valid today, and in the future. Marx also held that religion is a social phenomenon that is the product of exploitation and it will be eliminated as exploitation is swept away and a new society emerges. These are principles that we can't ignore, and that we must always keep in mind. Related to the previous point, it must be remembered that the people are religious, something which never has and never will prevent them from struggling for their basic class interests, and in this way serving the revolution, and in particular the people's war. I want to make it absolutely clear that we respect this religiousness as a question of freedom of religious beliefs, as recognized by the programme which was approved by our Congress.

So the question you asked really has to do, in our view, with the ecclesiastic hierarchy, with the Papacy, that old theocracy that had succeeded in developing as a powerful instrument in Roman times. Later, adapting itself to the conditions of feudalism, it gained a vast power, even greater than before. But it always tried to rein in the struggle of the people, and defended the interests of the oppressors and exploiters, acting as an ideological shield for the reactionaries, changing and adapting itself as new situations emerged.

We can see this clearly if we think about the relation between the Church and the bourgeois revolution, the old bourgeois revolution, I'm referring to the French Revolution, for example. The Church fiercely defended feudalism, and later, through a lot of struggle and after the defeat of feudalism--let me repeat, through great struggle it adapted itself to the bourgeois order and became once again an instrument at the service of the new exploiters and oppressors. In the present situation, what we see is a historical process which is unstoppable. The era of the world proletarian revolution, the new era begun in 1917, presents the problem for the proletariat of how to lead revolutions to change the old decadent order and create a genuinely new society, communism. In the face of this, how has the Church responded? As in previous times, it seeks to survive, and this is the basis of the Vatican II Council, where the Church sought to develop conditions that would permit it, first, to defend the old order as it has always done, and then, adjust and adapt itself in order to serve new exploiters, to continue to survive. This is what it seeks, this is the essence of Vatican II.

The question of the "new evangelism" refers explicitly to how ecclesiastical authority, the Pope in particular, sees the role of Latin America, where, as they themselves say and the current Pope said in 1984, half the world's Catholics live. They are, consequently, trying to use the five hundredth anniversary of the discovery of America to push forward a so-called movement of "new evangelism." In sum, this is what they hope for: since evangelism officially began in 1494 following the discovery of America, with this new centennial they want to develop a "new evangelism" in defense of their bastion, this half of the "parish," half of the bastion that sustains them in power. This is their goal. In this way, the hierarchy and the Papacy aim to defend their position in America and serve U.S. imperialism, the dominant imperialist power in Latin America.

But we have to understand this plan in the context of a campaign and a worldwide plan, linked to its relations with the Soviet Union on the occasion of the millennium of its Christianization, the ties with Chinese revisionism, the actions of the Church in Poland, the Ukraine, etc. It is a worldwide plan and the "new evangelism" operates within it. As always they are attempting to defend the existing social order, to be its ideological shield, because the ideology of reaction, of imperialism, has become decrepit. In the future they will again seek to adapt in order to survive. But the prospects will be different, not like things were before. Marx's law will assert itself: religion will wither away as exploitation and oppression are destroyed and eliminated. And since the Papacy serves the exploiting classes and what will follow is not an exploiting class, the Papacy will not be able to survive, and religion itself will wither away. In the meantime the freedom of religious belief has to be recognized until mankind advancing through new objective conditions, comes to possess a clear, scientific and world-transforming consciousness. We must therefore, analyze the "new evangelism" in the context of this plan of the Church to survive under new conditions, a transformation that they know must come.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, according to what you've said, could we conclude, or would you say that the frequent visits of the Pope to our country have some relation to the people's war and the support the Pope is giving to the García Pérez regime?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I believe that is right, that's the way it is In general, his visits to Latin America have to do with the importance of Latin America. And his visits to Peru have to do with how he called on us to lay down our arms while blessing the weapons of genocide as he did various times during his two visits to Peru.

EL DIARIO: Now, Chairman, what will be the attitude of the PCP towards the religious theocracy when this Party assumes State Power?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Marxism has taught us to separate Church and State, this is the first thing we will do. Secondly, I want to repeat, we respect the freedom of religious belief of the people--applying fully the principle of freedom to believe, as well as not to believe, to be an atheist. That is how we will handle it.

II. On the Party
EL DIARIO: And moving to another subject of great importance in this interview, the Party. What are the most important lessons to be drawn from the PCP's development?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: On the development of the Party and its lessons, we can understand its history by dividing it into three parts which correspond to the three periods of contemporary Peruvian society. The first period, the first part, is the Founding of the Party, in which we were fortunate to have José Carlos Mariátegui, a thoroughgoing Marxist-Leninist. But, inevitably, Mariátegui was opposed, negated, his line was abandoned and the constitutional congress that he left as a pending task was never held. The so-called Constitutional Congress that was held approved, as we know, the so-called line of "national unity," which was totally opposed to Mariátegui's theories. In this way the Party fell headlong into opportunism, suffering from the influence of Browderism, which Del Prado was linked up with, and later, modern revisionism. This whole process takes us to the second period, that of the Reconstitution of the Party. This is, in sum, a struggle against revisionism. It is a period that we can clearly see beginning to unfold with a certain intensity in the beginning of the '60s. This process leads the members of the Party to unite against the revisionist leadership and, as I have said before, to expel them in the IVth Conference of January 1964. The process of reconstitution continues to unfold in the Party until 1978-1979, when it ends and a third period begins, the period of Leading the People's War, which is the one we are living in now.

What lessons can we draw from this? The first lesson is the importance of the basis of Party unity, and its relation to the two-line struggle. Without this basis and its three elements (1. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, 2.The Programme and 3.The General Political Line), there would be no basis for building the Party ideologically and politically. But without two-line struggle there would be no basis for Party unity. Without a firm and thorough two-line struggle in the Party, there is no way to firmly grasp the ideology, nor establish the programme, nor the general political line, much less defend, apply and develop them. For us the two-line struggle is fundamental, and that has to do with our view of the Party as a contradiction, in accordance with the universal law of contradiction. A second lesson is the importance of people's war. A Communist Party's central task is the seizure of Power for the proletariat and the people. Once constituted, and basing itself on the concrete conditions, the Party must strive to carry out the seizure of Power, which it can only do through people's war. The third important lesson is the need to forge leadership. Leadership is key, and it does not develop spontaneously but must be forged over a long period of intense and arduous struggle, particularly in order to provide leadership for a people's war. A fourth lesson we can sum up is the need to prepare the ground for the seizure of Power. Just as the people's war is necessary to seize Power, it is necessary to prepare the ground for the seizure of Power. What do we mean by this? We must create organizational forms superior to those of the reactionaries. We believe that these are important lessons. A final one is proletarian internationalism, always developing the struggle as part of the international proletariat, always viewing the revolution as part of the world revolution, developing the people's war, as our Party's slogan says, in the service of the world revolution. Why? Because in the final analysis a Communist Party has an irreplaceable final goal: communism. And, as has been established, onto that stage all must enter, or no one will. We believe that these are the most crucial lessons that we should sum up.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, what is the significance of José Carlos Mariátegui for the PCP?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: For the PCP, Mariátegui is its founder. He built the Party on a clear Marxist-Leninist basis. Consequently, he provided it with a clear ideological stand. For him, Marxism-Leninism was the Marxism of his era, of his time. He provided the Party with a general political line. Mariátegui, the greatest Marxist that America has produced until now, left us his greatest work, the formation of the Communist Party of Peru. We understand very well what his loss meant for the Party, but we should be clear on the fact that he gave his very life to fulfill this great work. What we mean is that founding the Party took up his whole life. So he didn't have time to consolidate and develop the Party. Just think about it, he died less than two years after its founding. A Party needs time to consolidate, to develop, in order to carry out its historic task.

We would like to point something out. As early as 1966 we stated that Mariátegui's road must never be abandoned, and that the task was to reclaim that road and develop it further. I want to emphasize, develop it further. Why? Because on a world level Marxism had already entered a new stage that is today Maoism. In our own country, bureaucrat capitalism in particular had developed right alongside the inexhaustible struggle of the proletariat and the Peruvian people, who have never ceased to struggle. For that reason, we set out to reclaim Mariátegui's road and develop it further. We have made the contribution of rediscovering Mariátegui and his validity with regard to the general laws which are the same and only need to be applied in the new national and international context, as I've explained. This has been our contribution.

A lot could be said, but it is more worthwhile I believe to emphasize a few things. In 1975, "Retomar a Mariátegui y reconstituir su Partido" ["Reclaim Mariátegui and Rebuild his Party"--TRANS.] was published. In this brief document we showed, in opposition to many who today call themselves Mariáteguists, that Mariátegui was "guilty as charged," an avowed Marxist-Leninist as he himself correctly said. We have stated the five elements that constitute his general political line. We showed that theories similar to those of Chairman Mao are found in Mariátegui. Here it's enough to point to questions regarding the united front or the important question of violence. Mariátegui said, "Power is seized through violence and is defended with dictatorship," "today revolution is the bloody process through which things are born," and throughout the years of his glorious life he persistently upheld the role of revolutionary violence and class dictatorship. He also said that no matter how big a majority you might have in parliament, it could only serve to dissolve a cabinet, but never to do away with the bourgeois class. What is absolutely clear, and must be emphasized because it is key to his thought, is that Mariátegui was antirevisionist.

We have, in sum, struggled to reclaim and develop the road of Mariátegui. But allow me to say something more. It would be good to ask some of those who now call themselves Mariáteguists what they used to think of Mariátegui--they rejected him, clearly and concretely. I am referring to those of today's PUM, yes, to those who come from the so-called "New Left," who proclaimed Mariátegui outdated, a thing of the past, essentially that's all there was to their argument. But even more importantly, these and others, are they really Mariáteguists? Let's take Barrantes Lingán. How can he be a Mariáteguist if he is the complete negation of the clear Marxist-Leninist theories that Mariátegui, in his time, firmly and decisively upheld? Mariátegui was never a parliamentarian, he proposed using elections for the purpose of propaganda and agitation. It was revisionists like Acosta who, in 1945, held that this view was outdated and that the task was to win seats in parliament. And this is what the phony Mariáteguists, out and out unrepentant parliamentary cretinists, do today.

In sum, this is how we view Mariátegui: he is the founder of the Party, his role is etched in history so that no one will ever be able to deny it and his work will not perish. But it was necessary to continue on his road, to develop it further. The only logical way to carry through on the teachings of a Marxist-Leninist founder like Mariátegui, whose thinking, I repeat, contained theories similar to Chairman Mao's, is to be Marxist-Leninist-Maoists as we, the members of the Communist Party of Peru, are. We think the founder is himself a great example and we are extremely proud that he was the one who founded our Party.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, what was José Carlos Mariátegui's influence on the development of the class consciousness of the Peruvian workers?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Mariátegui accomplished a great deal in the midst of intense struggle, and excuse me if in answering your question I get into some other things as well. He was already a Marxist before going to Europe. This is the first thing we would like to insist on, because it is always said that he became a Marxist there. The fact that he developed there is another thing. Obviously, the European experience was extremely important to him. Mariátegui waged a very important struggle in the ideological sphere, a struggle on behalf of what he called socialism. This is the term he used, as he explained, because here term had not been debased as it had been in Europe. But what he upheld and propagated was Marxism-Leninism.

He waged a political struggle of great importance in order to form the Party. And this has to do with the debate between Mariátegui and Haya de la Torre, which today is being bandied about and cynically and shamelessly distorted. The essence of this question is very dear: Mariátegui proposed the formation of a Communist Party, a Party of the proletariat, while Haya de la Torre proposed the formation of a front similar to the Kuomintang, claiming that the proletariat in Peru was too tiny and immature to be able to give rise to a Communist Party. This was nothing but sophistry, and it is important to keep that in mind. But furthermore, the APRA party, when it was founded in Peru, was similar to Chiang Kai-shek's Kuomintang, that is, the executioner of the Chinese Revolution who carried out the counterrevolutionary coup in 1927. This is something we should always bear in mind. Why do I emphasize this problem? Because now they are talking about an Haya-Mariáteguism, even an Haya-Leninism. Ridiculous! Mariátegui indeed was a Marxist-Leninist, Haya was never a Marxist or a Leninist. Never! He always opposed Lenin's theories. It's necessary to emphasize this because we can't let them get away with shameless distortions like these which, in the final analysis, are nothing but a mess, a hodge-podge thrown together in order to promote an alliance between the present day APRA and the United Left [Izquierda Unida (IU)-TRANS.]. This is really the bottom line. The rest, cheap hoaxes.

Well, but to answer your question. Mariátegui did all this linked to the masses, to the proletariat, to the peasantry. He was theoretically and practically involved in the formation of the CGTP [Confederación General de Trabajadores del Perú--TRANS.], which is the product mainly of his work. But the CGTP that he founded in the latter part of the twenties is not the present-day CGTP, which is the complete negation of what Mariátegui had established. He also developed work with the peasantry. The peasant question was a central one for him. He saw it as the agrarian question, and essentially the Indian question as he explained so well. Likewise he worked with the intellectuals, as well as with women and the youth. Mariátegui developed his work in connection with the masses, showing them the way, establishing concrete forms of organization and acting decisively to further develop the organization of the proletariat and the people of Peru.

EL DIARIO: Continuing on the same theme, why does the PCP give so much importance to the fraction that reconstituted the Party?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: This is an important subject that is not well known outside the ranks of the Party. Let's begin with this: Lenin set forward the concept of the fraction, conceiving of it as a group of like-minded persons solidly united in action around principles in their purest form, and that a fraction must openly state its political positions in order to carry out the struggle and develop the Party. It is this Leninist conception that we adopted to build the fraction in our Party. The fraction began to form in the early '60s and its formation was related to the worldwide struggle between Marxism and revisionism which was obviously reflected in our country. The fraction began to pose the problem of how to develop the revolution in Peru, and found these issues dealt with in Chairman Mao Zedong's works which had by then begun to arrive in our country. What issues did we focus on? We put forward that the revolution in Peru needed a Party with a solid ideological and political foundation, that the peasantry was the main force in our society while the proletariat was the leading class, and that the road we must follow was from the countryside to the city. This is how we unfolded things. The fraction contributed to the struggle against Del Prado's revisionism and we were part of all those who united to sweep the Del Prado clique from the ranks of the Party and expel them.

The fraction continued to evolve within a framework in which there were several fractions in the Parry, a fraction headed by Paredes and two others that didn't act openly, but went against the Leninist criteria for a fraction, and acted instead as a party within a party. I'm referring to Patria Roja, with its so-called "Ching-kang group," and the self-proclaimed "Bolshevik group." And then there was our fraction centered in the Ayacucho region. The fraction concentrated its efforts--the line having already been set in the Vth Conference of 1965--on raising for consideration the question of the three instruments of the revolution. This gave rise to a poorly led internal struggle. Because it lacked sufficient cohesion, the Party exploded. Thus, first Patria Roja left the Party, expelled for following a right opportunist line, negating Chairman Mao, negating Mariátegui, negating the existence of a revolutionary situation in Peru. Three fractions remained.

Later at the VIth Conference held in 1969, we agreed on the basis of Party unity and on the reconstitution of the Party, two issues that the fraction had raised; just as in 1967 it had raised fundamental questions in an expanded meeting of the political commission of that time. Paredes and his group weren't in agreement with the reconstitution of the Party, nor with the basis of Party unity, and mounted a plan to destroy the Party since they could not control it. This was their sinister plan. A sharp struggle was waged against this right liquidationism, leaving two fractions, ours and the self-proclaimed "Bolshevik group" which was developing as left liquidationist. They held for example that there was stability in society and therefore a revolutionary situation did not exist. They said that fascism would wipe us out, that mass work wasn't possible, that we should concentrate on training cadre through study groups, etc.

As a result of this struggle the fraction had to assume the task of reconstituting the Party by itself. Lenin said that there comes a time when it's necessary for a genuinely revolutionary fraction to rebuild the Party. This is the task that the fraction assumed. Here one might ask, why did the fraction shoulder the task of reconstituting the Party? Why didn't it found another Party as was the fashion, and still is today? The first reason is because the Party was founded in 1928 on a clear Marxist-Leninist basis, and so it had a great deal of experience, experience drawn from both positive and negative lessons. What's more, Lenin said that when one is in a Party that is deviating, moving off course, or falling headlong into opportunism, one has the duty to strive to put it back on the right course. Not to do so is a political crime. So the importance of the fraction is that it carried out this role, contributing to the reconstitution of the Party, beginning with laying the ideological and political foundation. We based ourselves on Maoism, which at that time was called Mao Zedong Thought, and on the establishment of a general political line. The fraction has the great distinction of having reconstituted the Party, and once that was done, the instrument then existed: the "heroic combatant;" the Communist Party of a new type, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist; the organized political vanguard--and not a"political-military organization" as it is often incorrectly put, but the Party required to launch the struggle to seize Power with arms in hand through people's War.

EL DIARIO: How has the Party changed through the people's war?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: First, and most important, the work leading up to the people's war helped us to come to understand Maoism as a new, third, and higher stage of Marxism. It has helped us develop the militarization of the Party and its concentric construction. Through the people's war, a People's Guerrilla Army has been forged. It was formed not long ago, in 1983.

The People's Guerrilla Army is important. It is the principal form of organization corresponding to the people's war which is the principal form of struggle. The People's Guerrilla Army which we have founded and which is developing vigorously, is being built based on Chairman Mao Zedong's theories, and on a very important thesis of Lenin's concerning the people's militia. Lenin, concerned that the army could be usurped and used to bring about a restoration, held that a people's militia should assume the functions of the army, police and administration. This is an important thesis and the fact that Lenin was not able to put it into practice due to historical circumstances does not make it any less important and valid. It is so important that Chairman Mao himself paid a lot of attention to the task of developing a people's militia. So our army has these features and it was formed by taking those experiences into account. But, at the same time, it has its own specific features. We have a structure composed of three forces: a main force, a local force and a base force. We have no independent militia, because it exists in the ranks of the Army itself, which was formed according to this criteria. It was the above-mentioned principles which guided us, but we also think it's correct to say that the People's Guerrilla Army could not have been built in any other way given our concrete conditions. This army, all the same, has been able to act in every situation and can be readjusted and reorganized as necessary in the future.

Another thing that has come out of the people's war, its main achievement, is the New Power. We see the question of the New Power as being linked to the question of the united front, basing ourselves on what Chairman Mao said in his work "On New Democracy." We've also kept in mind the long and putrid experience with frontism in Peru where they've bastardized and continue to bastardize the united front, yesterday with the so-called "National Liberation Front" and today mainly with the self-proclaimed United Left and other monstrosities in formation like the much cackled-about "Socialist Convergence." In other words. we always take into account the principles and concrete conditions of our reality. That is why we don't understand why they call us dogmatists. In the final analysis, paper will put up with whatever is written on it. This has led us to form the Revolutionary Front for the Defense of the People [Frente Revolucionario de Defensa del Pueblo (FRDP)--TRANS.]. Here is another point. We were the ones who formed the first front for the defense of the people in Ayacucho. Patria Roja appropriated this heroic example, but deformed it in creating their "FEDIP." Even the name is wrong. If this is a front for defense of the people, why doesn't it defend the interests of the people? We build the Revolutionary Front for the Defense of the People only in the countryside, and in the form of the People's Committees it becomes the basis of Power. And those People's Committees in an area form a Base Area, and all the Base Areas together we call the New Democratic People's Republic in formation. In the cities we have established the Revolutionary Movement for the Defense of the People which also serves to wage the people's war in the city, gather forces, undermine the reactionary order and develop the city, gather forces, undermine the reactionary order and develop the unity of class forces in preparation for the future insurrection.

Other changes have to do with the forging of cadre. Obviously war forges in a different way. It steels people, permits us to imbue ourselves more deeply with our ideology, and forge iron-like cadre who dare to challenge death, to snatch the laurels of victory from the clutches of death. Another change in the Party that we could point to, but on a different plane, has to do with the world revolution. The people's war has enabled the Party to demonstrate clearly how, by grasping Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, we can develop a people's war without being subordinate to any power, beit a superpower or any other power--how it's possible to rely on our own strength to carry forward people's war. All this has given the Party prestige on an international level that it never had before, and this is not vanity, far from it, it's just a simple fact, and it has also allowed us to serve the development of the world revolution as never before. In this way the Party, through the people's war, is fulfilling its role as the Communist Party of Peru.

EL DIARIO: How do the workers and peasants participate in the People's Guerrilla Army?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The peasantry, especially the poor peasants, are the main participants, as fighters and commanders at different levels in the People's Guerrilla Army. The workers participate in the same ways, although the percentage of workers at this time is insufficient.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, where has the New Power developed most? In the countryside or in the city?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We are developing the New Power only in the countryside. In the cities it will be developed in the final stage of the revolution. It is a question of the process of people's war. I think that when we analyze people's war we'll be able to deal with this point a little more.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, moving on a bit, the documents of the Communist Party establish you as the Leader of the Party and the revolution. What does this imply, and how is it different from the revisionist theory of the cult of the personality?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Here we must remember how Lenin saw the relationship between the masses, classes, the Party and leaders. We believe that the revolution, the Party, our class, generate leaders, a group of leaders. It has been like this in every revolution. If we think, for instance, about the October Revolution, we have Lenin, Stalin, Sverdlov and a few others, a small group. Similarly, in the Chinese revolution there's also a small group of leaders: Chairman Mao Zedong, and his comrades Kang Sheng, Chiang Ching, Chang Chun-chiao, among others. All revolutions are that way, including our own. We could not be an exception. Here it's not true that there is an exception to every rule because what we're talking about here is the operation of certain laws. All such processes have leaders, but they also have a leader who stands out above the rest or who leads the rest, in accordance with the conditions. Not all leaders can be viewed in exactly the same way. Marx is Marx, Lenin is Lenin, Chairman Mao is Chairman Mao. Each is unique, and no one is going to be just like them.

In our Party, revolution, and people's war, the proletariat, by a combination of necessity and historical chance, has brought forth a group of leaders. In Engels' view, it is necessity that generates leaders, and a top leader, but just who that is is determined by chance, by a set of specific conditions that come together at a particular place and time. In this way, in our case too, a Great Leadership [Jefatura] has been generated. This was first acknowledged in the Party at the Expanded National Conference of 1979. But this question involves another basic question that can't be overlooked and needs to be emphasized: there is no Great Leadership [Jefatura] that does not base itself on a body of thought, no matter what its level of development may be. The reason that a certain person has come to speak as the Leader of the Party and the revolution, as the resolutions state, has to do with necessity and historical chance and, obviously, with Gonzalo Thought. None of us knows what the revolution and the Party will call on us to do, and when a specific task arises the only thing to do is assume the responsibility.

We have been acting in accordance with Lenin's view, which is correct. The cult of personality is a revisionist formulation. Lenin had warned us of the problem of negating leadership just as he emphasized the need for our class, the Party and the revolution to promote our own leaders, and more than that, top leaders, and a Great Leadership [Jefatura]. There's a difference here that is worth emphasizing. A leader is someone who occupies a certain position, whereas a top leader and Great Leadership [Jefatura], as we understand it, represent the acknowledgment of Party and revolutionary authority acquired and proven in the course of arduous struggle--those who in theory and practice have shown they are capable of leading and guiding us toward victory and the attainment of the ideals of our class.

Khrushchev raised the issue of the cult of personality to oppose comrade Stalin. But as we allknow, this was a pretext for attacking the dictatorship of the proletariat. Today, Gorbachev again raises the issue of the cult of personality, as did the Chinese revisionists Liu Shao-chi and Deng Xiaoping. It is therefore a revisionist thesis that in essence takes aim against the proletarian dictatorship and the Great Leadership [Jefatura] and Great Leaders of the revolutionary process in order to cut off its head. In our case it aims specifically at robbing the people's war of its leadership. We do not yet have a dictatorship of the proletariat, but we do have a New Power that is developing in accordance with the norms of new democracy, the joint dictatorship of the workers, peasants and progressives. In our case they seek to rob this process of leadership, and the reactionaries and those who serve them know very well why they do this, because it is not easy to generate Great Leaders and Great Leadership. And a people's war, like the one in this country, needs Great Leaders and a Great Leadership, someone who represents the revolution and heads it, and a group capable of leading it uncompromisingly. In sum, the cult of the personality is a sinister revisionist formulation which has nothing to do with our concept of revolutionary leaders, which conforms with Leninism.

EL DLARIO: What significance does the convening of the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru have for you and your party?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Coming back to this we would like to mention some points. We would like to reiterate that it is a landmark victory. It is the fulfillment of an obligation set forth by the founder himself. We have held the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru. What does this imply? We reaffirm that none of the four congresses that took place up until 1962--during a period in which we were developing within the existing Party--none of these was a Marxist congress. None of them adhered strictly to the outlook of the proletariat. This Congress of ours, to underline what I have just said, was a Marxist Congress, but taking place at this moment in history it was a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Congress. And because Maoism is the third, new and highest stage, it is, in the final analysis, the principal of the three. But there is also Gonzalo Thought, because the Congress was based on this thought which has crystallized in the process of applying the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to our concrete conditions. For all these reasons it was a "Marxist Congress, a Congress of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought."

This Congress has allowed us to make a summation of our whole process of development and to draw positive and negative lessons. This Congress has allowed us to affirm the basis of Party unity made up of its three elements: (1) the ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, (2) the Programme, and (3) the General Political Line and at its center, the military line. Another achievement of the Congress is that it has laid a solid foundation for the prospective seizure of Power, I reiterate, prospective.

Being in the midst of people's war is what has enabled us to carry out the Congress. And we say this because as far back as 1967 we proposed holding a fifth congress, and in 1976 we proposed a congress of reconstitution. For a number of years we made attempts, but we were not able to pull it together. Why? This speaks to what has happened in many parties that are preparing to take up arms, to enter into armed struggle. They become entangled in big and explosive internal struggles that lead to divisions and end up short-circuiting the development of the struggle to seize Power by force of arms. This led us to postpone the congress in I978 and to wait until we were in the midst of people's war to hold it. We simply reasoned that once we were at war, who would be able to oppose the people's war? A congress and Party with guns in hand, waging a powerful people's war, how would anyone be able to oppose developing the people's war? At that point they wouldn't be able to do us any real harm.

The Congress has pushed forward our development in other aspects. It has made us see and understand the process of people's war more deeply, and in particular, the need to prepare for the seizure of Power. The Congress has also brought about a leap in the struggle, and this is good. It is necessary to say it clearly, although some may want to misinterpret it, but, in short, we are not bothered anymore by misinterpretations or by alien and non-revolutionary elements. The Congress clarified thatwith respect to the two-line struggle in the Party, revisionism is the main danger.

This deserves a little explanation. At this time there is no right opportunist line in the Party, only isolated rightist attitudes, ideas, approaches and even some isolated rightist positions. But precisely by delving into this question the Congress concluded that targeting revisionism as the main danger is the best way the Party can ward off and prevent the emergence of a right opportunist line, which would be a revisionist line.

Chairman Mao emphasized that we must always be concerned about revisionism because it is the main danger facing the world revolution. So we also take into consideration the situation outside our ranks, since any rightist tendency in the Party, expressed in attitudes, ideas, approaches, and positions of a rightist nature, has to do with ideological processes, with the repercussions of the class struggle, and the campaigns of the reactionary State, with the actions of revisionism itself in our country, with the counterrevolutionary activities of imperialism, especially the contention between the two superpowers, and the sinister role of revisionism on a world scale. So the Party prepares us and we raise our guard. And thus by waging a firm and farsighted two-line struggle among the people--because I repeat, there is no right opportunist line--we can avoid the emergence of a revisionist line. What we've said may be misinterpreted, but it's necessary to say things plainly and teach the people. The Congress has armed us and demands that we: look out for revisionism! and combat it relentlessly! wherever it should present itself, beginning with preventing and combating whatever form it might take within the Party itself. And in this way we will also be better armed to fight revisionism outside our ranks and on a world scale. This is one of the most important points of the Congress.

The Congress has given us great unanimity. Yes, unanimity. We adhere closely to what Lenin demanded, that a Party, in order to face complex and difficult situations like those we face daily--and will face even more in the decisive moments that are unfolding and will unfold--has to have unanimity. We must carry out struggle in order to have a clear and defined line, a common understanding, in order to have iron-like unity and to strike powerful blows. So the Congress has also given us unanimity, but attained, I insist, through two-line struggle. This is how we do things. Why is this so? I repeat again, the Party is a contradiction and every contradiction consists of two aspects in struggle. This is the way it is and no one can escape this.

So today our Party is more united than ever, and more united because of the lofty tasks that must be undertaken with firmness and determination. On another level, the Congress obviously selected a Central Committee, and since it is the First Congress, we have the First Central Committee. The Congress has given us all these things and, finally, as we well know, since this is the highest level of a Party, what has been sanctioned there has been ratified at the highest organizational level. Today, all this makes us stronger, more united, more determined, more resolute. But there is something that is worth emphasizing again. The Congress is the offspring of the Party and of the war. Without the people's war this historic task, which had been pending for nearly 60 years since the Party's founding in 1928, would not have been accomplished. But what is important is that the Congress strengthens the development of the people's war. It returns to the people's war a hundredfold what the people's war contributed to the realization of the Congress. The people's war is stronger now and will gain even greater force, much more than before.

For all these reasons, the Congress is for us, the members of the Communist Party of Peru, an immortal milestone of victory, and we are certain that it will be imprinted in the history of our Party forever. We expect the Congress to lead to great things in the service of the proletariat of Peru, the Peruvian people, the international proletariat, the oppressed nations, and the people of the world.

EL DIARIO: Some people say that the convening of the First Congress of the PCP dealt a big blow to the reactionary forces because it took place under conditions of an intense people's war. What do you have to say?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: It seems to us that this is an accurate assessment and it shows that there is a class and a people in this country who understand what we are doing, what the Party is doing. For us this is an important expression of recognition which compels us to strive harder in order to be worthy of such confidence, such hope.

EL DIARIO: Was it necessary to carry out a struggle to purify the Party before the Congress was held?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: No. In our case the all-out struggle took place at the IXth Plenum in I979 in order to initiate the people's war. There we waged a fierce struggle against a right opportunist line that opposed the initiation of the people's war. It was there that expulsions and purification of the Party took place. But as is well established, such purging strengthens a Party, and so it was in our case. The proof is that we initiated the people's war and have been carrying it out for eight years. At the Congress, there wasn't this kind of struggle to purify the Party.

EL DIARIO: Many people wonder where the strength and determination of the PCP cadre come from. Does it have to do with solid ideological training? What is this process like?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The strength of the Party members is based on ideological and political training. It is fortified through embracing the ideology of the proletariat, and its specific application, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; the programme; and the general political line and its central element, the military line. The strength of the cadre develops on this basis. One thing that we concerned ourselves with a great deal in initiating people's war was the cadre. The preparation for people's war raised the question for us of how to steel the cadre, and we imposed high demands on ourselves to break with the old society, absolute and complete dedication to the revolution, and to give our lives. This is well expressed when one recalls the 1980 Plenary of the Central Committee and the military school. At the end of those events all the cadre made a commitment, we all took responsibility for being the initiators of the people's war. It was a solemn promise that later everyone in the Party made.

How does this process take place? It starts with how each of the future cadre is forged in the class struggle before joining the Party. Each one participates in the class struggle, advances, and begins to work more closely with us until the time comes when that person on their own makes the big decision of asking to join the Party. The Party analyzes the person's situation, their strengths and weaknesses--because we all have them--and if worthy, accepts them into the Party. Once in the Party, systematic ideological training begins. It is in the Party that we transform ourselves into communists. It is the Party that makes us into communists. A characteristic of the situation in recent years is that the cadre have been steeled in war. Moreover, those who join become part of a Party that is leading a war, and therefore they do so first and foremost to develop as communists, as fighters in the People's Guerrilla Army, or administrators, in some cases, in levels of the New State that we are organizing.

So the people's war is another element of great importance that contributes to forging the cadre. In sum, while we take ideology and politics as our starting point, it is the war itself that forges the cadre. On that fiery forge we are molded in accordance with the Party. And in this way we all advance and make a contribution. Nevertheless, there is always a contradiction between the revolutionary line that is principal in our thinking and the opposing line. Both lines exist, since no one is a hundred percent communist. In our minds a struggle between two lines is waged, and this struggle is also key in forging the cadre, aiming always at keeping the revolutionary line principal. This is what we strive for.

This is how our cadre are being forged, and the facts show the degree of revolutionary heroism that they are capable of, just like other sons and daughters of the people.

EL DIARIO: Do you think that one of the highest expressions of the heroism of the PCP cadre took place in the prisons on June 19, 1986?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: This was a high expression of it, yes. But we believe that the highest expression of revolutionary heroism, a raging torrent of heroism, occurred when we confronted the genocide of 1983 and 1984, as we battled the armed forces that had just entered the fray. This has beenthe most massive genocide so far. And it brought forward, as a principal and vital aspect, great examples of the people's fighting spirit. Beyond this, it was a mass expression of heroism, of devotion, of sacrificing their lives--and not only on the part of the communists, but also the peasants, workers, intellectuals, the sons and daughters of the people. This was the greatest demonstration of mass revolutionary heroism to date, and the experience that has steeled us the most.

Then why do we honor June 19 as the "Day of Heroism"? The 19th is a day that shows our people and the world what steadfast communists and consistent revolutionaries are capable of, because it was not only communists who died. The majority were revolutionaries. It has emerged as a symbol because there is a specific date, while the general genocide lasted for two years and involved many scattered events. The 19th was a single event, an example whose enormous impact shook Peru and the world. For this reason we honor June 19 as the "Day of Heroism."

EL DIARIO: Chairman, how does the PCP sustain the huge Party apparatus, including the People's Guerrilla Army?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I think this deserves a detailed explanation. Concerning the Party, Chairman Mao teaches us, as did Marx, Lenin and all the great Marxists, that the Party is not a mass party, though the Party has a mass character. It has a mass character in the sense that while being a select organization--a selection of the best, of the proven, of those, as Stalin said, who have what it takes--being numerically small in proportion to the broad masses, the Party defends the interests of the proletariat, and takes responsibility for the class interests of the proletariat in taking responsibility for its emancipation, which can only come with communism. But since other classes that make up the people also participate in the revolution, the Party defends their interests as well, in accordance with the fact that the proletariat can only emancipate itself by emancipating all the oppressed. There is no other way it can emancipate itself.

Because of this, the Party has a mass character, but it isn't a mass party. The mass party, of which so much is said today, is nothing but an expression, once again, of rotten revisionist positions. Such parties are parties of followers, of officials, organizational machines. Our Party is a Party of fighters, of leaders, an instrument of war like the one Lenin himself would demand. I believe we can understand this more deeply if we remember how many Bolsheviks there were when the October Revolution triumphed: 80 thousand in a country of 150 million inhabitants.

The Party is a system of organizations and obviously has its necessities. The formation of an army that is numerically much larger, more vast, also has its necessities. Marxism, and especially Chairman Mao, has taught us how to resolve this problem, too. The CPC, based on Chairman Mao Zedong's teachings, concluded that giving economic aid to parties was corrosive, and that it was a revisionist policy, because a Party must be self-reliant. This is what we have followed: self-reliance. Self-reliance has to do with economic necessities, but mainly, as we understand it, it has to do with ideological and political orientation. With that as our starting point we can see how to deal with the economic necessities which are always present--it would be an error to say they don't exist.

Basing ourselves on these criteria we have resolved the problem and we will continue to resolve it by relying on the masses. It is the masses of our people, the proletariat, our class--because this is our class--to which we owe our existence and which we serve; our peasantry, mainly the poor peasants; the intellectuals; the petty bourgeoisie; the advanced; the revolutionaries, those who want a radical transformation, in a word, revolution--that's who sustains the Party. It is mainly the peasantry and the proletariat who sustain it. And taking it further, the poor peasants especially are the ones who go without to give us food from their tables, who share their blanket with us, and make a little place for us in their hut. They are the ones who sustain us, support us and even give us their own blood, as does the proletariat, as do the intellectuals. This is how we are developing. This is what we base ourselves on.

This problem brings us to the following questions. Since we start from this basis it allows us to be independent, to be under no one's command. Because in the international communist movement it became the habit to obey commands. Khrushchev was a champion at issuing commands, as is Gorbachev today, or that sinister character Deng. Independence, because each Communist Party must decide for itself since it is responsible for its own revolution, not in order to separate it from the world revolution, but precisely in order to serve it. This allows us to make our own decisions, to decide for ourselves. Chairman Mao said it like this: we were given a lot of advice, some good, some bad. We accepted the good and rejected the bad. But if we had accepted some erroneous principle, the responsibility would not have belonged to those who gave the advice, but to us. Why? Because we make our own decisions. That comes with independence, and it leads to self-sufficiency, to self-reliance.

Does this mean that we don't recognize proletarian internationalism? No, on the contrary, we are fervent and consistent practitioners of proletarian internationalism. And we are confident that we have the support of the international proletariat, the oppressed nations, the peoples of the world, the parties or organizations that remain loyal to Marxism whatever their degree of development, and we recognize that the first thing that they give us, their primary support, is their own struggle. The propaganda or celebrations that they carry out are a form of support that is creating favorable public opinion and this is an expression of proletarian internationalism. Proletarian internationalism also underlies the advice they give us and the opinions they express. But, I insist, we are the ones who must decide whether we accept these or not. If they are correct, we welcome them, obviously, because between Parties we have the obligation to help each other, especially in such difficult and complex times.

Then, to reiterate, all the struggles waged by the proletariat, the oppressed nations, the peoples of the world, the parties and organizations steadfast and loyal to Marxism--all that struggle is the primary concrete form of proletarian internationalist help. Nevertheless, the greatest assistance we have is undying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the ideology of the international proletariat, which has been generated by the working class through long decades and thousands of struggles all over the world. This is the greatest assistance we receive because it is the light, without which our eyes would see nothing. But with this light our eyes can see and our hands can act. This is how we see this problem, and this is how we advance.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, perhaps the answer to this question is obvious, but we would like to know your opinion of the revisionist parties that are financed by international foundations, and the big imperialist powers, and by social-imperialism.

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: They have betrayed the world revolution, betray revolution in every country, and betray our class and the people, because to serve superpowers or imperialist powers, to serve revisionism, especially social-imperialism, to dance to their tune, to be pawns in their game of world domination is to betray the revolution.

III. People's War
EL DIARIO: Chairman, let's talk about the people's war now. What does violence mean to you, Chairman Gonzalo?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: With regard to violence we start from the principle established by Chairman Mao Tsetung: violence, that is, the need for revolutionary violence, is a universal law with no exception. Revolutionary violence is what allows us to resolve fundamental contradictions by means of an army, through people's war. Why do we start from Chairman Mao's thesis? Because we believe Mao reaffirmed Marxism on this question, establishing that there are no exceptions whatsoever to this law. What Marx held, that violence is the midwife of history, continues to be a totally valid and monumental contribution. Lenin expounded upon violence and spoke about Engels' panegyric praise of revolutionary violence, but it was the Chairman who told us that it was a universal law, without any exception. That's why we take his thesis as our starting point. This is an essential question of Marxism, because without revolutionary violence one class cannot replace another, an old order cannot be overthrown to create a new one--today a new order led by the proletariat through Communist Parties.

The problem of revolutionary violence is an issue that is more and more being put on the table for discussion, and therefore we communists and revolutionaries must reaffirm our principles. The problem of revolutionary violence is how to actually carry it out with people's war. The way we see this question is that when Chairman Mao Tsetung established the theory of people's war and put it into practice, he provided the proletariat with its military line, with a military theory and practice that is universally valid and therefore applicable everywhere in accordance with the concrete conditions.

We see the problem of war this way: war has two aspects, destructive and constructive. Construction is the principal aspect. Not to see it this way undermines the revolution--weakens it. On the other hand, from the moment the people take up arms to overthrow the old order, from that moment, the reaction seeks to crush, destroy and annihilate the struggle, and it uses all the means at its disposal, including genocide. We have seen this in our country; we are seeing it now, and will continue to see it even more until the outmoded Peruvian State is demolished.

As for the so-called dirty war, I would like to simply point out that they claim that the reactionary armed forces learned this dirty war from us. This accusation clearly expresses a lack of understanding of revolution, and of what a people's war is. The reaction, through its armed forces and other repressive forces, seeks to carry out their objective of sweeping us away, of eliminating us. Why? Because we want to do the same to them--sweep them away and eliminate them as a class. Mariátegui said that only by destroying, demolishing the old order could a new social order be brought into being. In the final analysis, we judge these problems in light of the basic principle of war established by Chairman Mao: the principle of annihilating the enemy's forces and preserving one's own forces. We know very well that the reaction has used, is using, and will continue to use genocide. On this we are absolutely clear. And consequently this raises the problem of the price we have to pay: in order to annihilate the enemy and to preserve, and even more to develop our own forces, we have to pay a price in war, a price in blood, the need to sacrifice a part for the triumph of the people's war.

As for terrorism, they claim we're terrorists. I would like to give the following answer so that everyone can think about it: has it or has it not been Yankee imperialism and particularly Reagan who has branded all revolutionary movements as terrorists, yes or no? This is how they attempt to discredit and isolate us in order to crush us. That is their dream. And it's not only Yankee imperialism and the other imperialist powers that combat so-called terrorism. So does social-imperialism and revisionism, and today Gorbachev himself proposes to unite with the struggle against terrorism. And it isn't by chance that at the VIIIth Congress of the Party of Labor of Albania Ramiz Alia dedicated himself to combatting it.

But it will be very useful for all of us to remember what Lenin wrote : "Long live the pioneers of the people’s revolutionary army! It is no longer a plot against some detested individual, no act of vengeance or desperation, no mere “intimidation”—no, it was a well thought-out and prepared commencement of operations by a contingent of the revolutionary army, planned with due regard for the correlation of forces." "Fortunately, the time has passed when revolution was “made” by individual revolutionary terrorists, because the people were not revolutionary. The bomb has ceased to be the weapon of the solitary “bomb thrower”, and is becoming an essential weapon of the people."

Lenin taught us that the times had changed, that the bomb had become a weapon of combat for our class, for the people, that what we're talking about is no longer a conspiracy, an isolated individual act, but the actions of a Party, with a plan, with a system, with an army. So, where is the imputed terrorism? It's pure slander.

Finally, we always have to remember that, especially in present-day war, it is precisely the reactionaries who use terrorism as one of their means of struggle, and it is, as has been proven repeatedly, one of the forms used on a daily basis by the armed forces of the Peruvian State. Considering all this, we can conclude that those whose reasoning is colored by desperation because the earth is trembling beneath their feet wish to charge us with terrorism in order to hide the people's war. But this people's war is so earthshaking that they themselves admit that it is of national dimensions and that it has become the principal problem facing the Peruvian State. What terrorism could do that? None. And moreover, they can no longer deny that a Communist Party is leading the people's war. And at this time some of them are beginning to reconsider; we shouldn't be too hasty in writing anyone off. There are those who could come forward. Others, like Del Prado, never.

EL DIARIO: What are some of the particularities of the people's war in Peru, and how does it differ from other struggles in the world, in Latin America, and from the Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru (MRTA)?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: That's a good question. I thank you for asking it, because it gives us a chance to look at the Party's so-called "dogmatism" a bit more. There are even those who say that we incorrectly try to apply Chairman Mao in an era where he is no longer applicable. In short, they babble on so much that we feel perfectly justified asking whether they have any idea what they are talking about. This includes the much-decorated senator who is a specialist in violence.

People's war is universally applicable, in accordance with the character of the revolution and adapted to the specific conditions of each country. Otherwise, it cannot be carried out. In our case, the particularities are very dear. It is a struggle that is waged in the countryside and in the city, as was established as far back as I968 in the plan for the people's war. Here we have a difference, a particularity: it is waged in the countryside and the city. This, we believe, has to do with our own specific conditions. Latin America, for instance, has cities which are proportionately larger than those on other continents. It is a reality of Latin America that can't be ignored. Just look at the capital of Peru, for example, which has a high percentage of the country's population. So, for us, the city could not be left aside, and the war had to be developed there as well. But the struggle in the countryside is principal, the struggle in the city a necessary complement. This is one particularity, there's another.

In the beginning of the people's war we confronted the police. That was the reality because only in December 1982 did the armed forces enter the war. This is not to say that they had not been used in a support role before then. They had, in addition to their studying the process of our development. It is a particularity because we created a power vacuum in the countryside and we had to establish the New Power without having defeated large armed forces--because they hadn't come into the war. And when they did, when they came in, it was because we had established People's Power. That was the concrete political situation in the country. If we had applied the letter and not the spirit of Mao we would not have established the New Power and we would have been sitting, waiting for the armed forces to come in. We would have gotten bogged down. Another particularity was the structure of the army which I've already talked about.

All these are particularities. We have already spoken to the countryside and city, to how to carry out the war, to the army, to how the New Power arose; and the militarization of the Party itself is another particularity. These are specific things that correspond to our reality, to the application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, of Chairman Mao's theory on people's war, to the conditions in our country. Does this make us different from other struggles? Yes.

Why do we differ from others? Because we carry out people's war this makes us different from other struggles in Latin America. In Cuba, people's war was not carried out, but they also had their own particularities which they have intentionally forgotten. Before, they said Cuba was an exceptional case--Guevara said this--the fact that U.S. imperialism didn't take part. Later they forgot this. Aside from this, there was no Communist Party there to give leadership. These are questions of Cubanism and its five characteristics: an insufficient class differentiation which demanded that saviors save the oppressed; socialist revolution or a caricature of revolution; united front but without the national bourgeoisie; no need for Base Areas; and as noted, no need for a Party. What we are seeing in Latin America today is just the development of these same positions, only more and more at the service of social-imperialism and its contention with Yankee imperialism for world hegemony. We can see this clearly in Central America. The MRTA, the little that we know of it, falls into the same category.

Finally, another issue that makes us different--and forgive me if I'm insistent--concerns independence, self-reliance, and making our own decisions. Because others do not have these characteristics they are used as pawns, while we are not. And one far-reaching difference: we take Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as our guide, others do not. In sum, the greatest difference, the fundamental difference, is in the point of departure; ours is the ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, applied to the specific conditions of our country, and I insist here again, that this is with clear particularities which show the falsehood of the so-called dogmatism they accuse us of--which they do at the behest of their masters.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, would you say then that the MRTA is playing a counterrevolutionary role in this country?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The MRTA has positions that should make one think. For example, the truce they granted to APRA until, as they said, APRA attacked the people. But we all know that the same day that García Pérez assumed the presidency, he repressed the masses in the very capital of the republic. In October 1985 there was genocide at Lurigancho prison. Were the people being attacked or not? And how long did they wait to put an end to their truce? These are things one must ask oneself.

EL DIARIO: Since you consider the Base Areas to be so important, could you tell us how they are being built? What do you think about insurrection and how are you preparing the cities?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The Base Area is the essence of people's war. Without it, people's war cannot develop. I have already talked about the specific circumstances that we confronted in the second half of 1982. We were developing the final stage of the campaign to unfold guerrilla warfare, aimed at destroying the semi-feudal relations of exploitation. We took aim against gamonalismo, which is the basis of state power, and will be, until we sweep it away. We continued to strike blows and we dealt the police devastating and humiliating defeats. You don't have to take my word on this. Journalists from Expreso, for example, have said this, and I think it's safe to say that their judgment was not colored by revolutionary sympathies. Thus having generated a power vacuum in the countryside, the problem was posed to us, what is to be done? And we decided to create People's Committees, that is, a joint dictatorship, a New Power. We set out to make them clandestine, because the armed forces would have to enter the battle shortly, this we knew. Those People's Committees have multiplied a hundredfold. Those that are in a given locality form a Base Area, and all these Base Areas taken together constitute the New Democratic People's Republic in formation. This is how the committees and Base Areas came into being and how the New Democratic People's Republic is being formed.

When the armed forces did come in we had to wage an arduous struggle. They fought to re-establish the old order, and we fought to counter this re-establishment in order to again set up the New Power.

An extremely bloody and absolutely merciless genocide took place. We fought fiercely. In 1984, the reaction, and in particular the armed forces, believed they had defeated us. Here I'm referring to documents that they are very familiar with, because they are theirs, in which it was even said that we were no longer a danger, but that MRTA was the danger. But what was the outcome? The People's Committees and the Base Areas multiplied, and later that led us to continue the development of Base Areas. That is what we are doing today.

As for insurrection, I believe this is an extremely important question. The developing revolutionary situation in a country like ours allowed us to initiate the people's war, having already reconstituted the Party and established a clear ideology. The actual development of the Base Areas, the development of the People's Guerrilla Army and of the people's war, are giving impetus to the furtherunfolding of the revolutionary situation.

Thus, keeping in mind what Chairman Mao has said, all of this is leading to what he called a high tide of struggle, or what Lenin termed a revolutionary crisis. When we reach that point the insurrection takes place. This is the theory of people's war, and this is what we are taking up, and the basis upon which we are developing. Therefore, because the process of our people's war must bring us to a high tide, we must prepare the insurrection that in synthesis comes down to the seizure of the cities. We are thinking about and preparing for this insurrection because it is a necessity. Without it we can not win country-wide victory.

What does the problem of the cities pose for us? We have developed our work in the cities and in the countryside for many years. This work has undergone a shift and a change with the people's war, it is true. Our situation now leads us to consider how we are going to prepare the city, or the cities, to generalize it. This has to do with developing our mass work, but within and for the people's war. We have done this, and we continue to do it. The point is that we have begun to develop it more. We think that our activity in the cities is indispensable and it must be pushed forward more and more, because that is where the proletariat is concentrated and we cannot leave it in the hands of revisionism or opportunism.

The barriadas are in the cities, the shantytowns with their vast masses. Since 1976 we've had guidelines for work in the cities. Take barrios and barriadas as the foundation and the proletariat as the leading force. This is our policy and we will continue to apply it, now, under conditions of people's war.

What masses do we direct our work at? This you can see. From what's already been said, it's clear that the vast masses of the barrios and barriadas are a belt of steel that is going to encircle the enemy and hold back the reactionary forces.

We have to win over the working class more and more until they and the people acknowledge our leadership. We fully understand that it will take time and repeated experience in order for our class to see, understand, and reaffirm that this is their vanguard--for the people to see that they have a center that leads them. They have that right, given how much the masses have been swindled! The proletariat, the masses of the barriadas, the petty bourgeoisie, the intellectuals--how many hopes frustrated! We must understand that they have the right to demand it, clearly they have it, and we have the responsibility to work to make them see, to show them, that we really are their vanguard and that they should acknowledge us as such.

We differentiate between being a vanguard and being an acknowledged vanguard. Our class has that right and no one can deny it to them. The people have that right and no one can deny it to them. That's what we think. We don't think that the proletariat and the people are going to acknowledge us overnight as their vanguard and only center, which is what we have to be in order to carry out the revolution as it must be carried out. So we have to persevere and develop different forms as an integral part of our mass work, different forms so that the masses learn from the people's war itself, so that they learn the value of weapons, the importance of the gun. Chairman Mao says that the peasantry must learn the importance of the gun, this is a fact. So we do our work in this way. We create new forms and in this way we unfold our mass work within and for the people's war.

This is related to something else, to the Revolutionary Movement for the Defense of the People (MRDP), whose very key is the Center of Resistance. We say this very frankly. These are other organizational forms, other forms of struggle which correspond to a people's war. They cannot be the usual ones, they cannot be, they have a different character; this is the concrete reality. Consequently, we develop the Party, the People's Guerrilla Army, and the Revolutionary Movement for the Defense of the People, as well as organizations created for the various areas of work.

We need to spur on the masses' fighting spirit so that the potential of the masses and our class can be realized. Let's look at something. Today we have huge price increases. Why is there no popular protest? Who is holding the masses back? Lenin said protest makes the reaction tremble; when our class marches in the streets the reaction trembles. This is what we want to apply, what Marxism-Leninism-Maoism teaches us. Our class is born and develops in struggle, and so do the people. What we need to do is synthesize the masses', the people's own experience, to help them establish their own organizational forms, forms of struggle, taking into their own hands ever more developed and expanding forms of struggle in the cities. This is the way they will be trained.

What do we think? It is clear that the center of things is in the countryside, but for the insurrection the center changes, the center goes over to the city, and that even means that, just as in the beginning we moved fighters and communists from the cities to the countryside, later we must move them from the countryside to the city. This is the way it will be and this is how we shift our weight in preparation for the insurrection. We have to be looking for the conditions that permit the actions of the People's Guerrilla Army to converge with insurrectionary actions in the cities, in one city or in several. This is what we need.

The insurrection aims at capturing the cities in order for the people's war to win country-wide victory. But we have to try to preserve the means of production, which the reaction will want to destroy, and protect revolutionary prisoners of war or known revolutionaries, who they will want to annihilate, as well as to hunt down our enemies, to put them where they can't do any harm. This is what we've been taught about insurrection. And this is what an insurrection is. Lenin taught us how to build towards an insurrection and Chairman Mao taught us the role of insurrection in people's war. This is how we see insurrection and how we are preparing for it. This is the road we must follow and are following.

We must be very clear on one thing. Insurrection is not a simple, spontaneous explosion. No, that would be dangerous. Nevertheless, this could happen, and that's why we must and do concern ourselves with insurrection, starting right now. We think there are those who might want to use the people's war for their own benefit. Some time ago, in a session of Central Committee, we analyzed the possibilities. And one of them is that the revisionists or others may provoke "insurrections," either to abort the process of development or to gain positions and serve their social-imperialist master--or whatever power directs them, since many centers could want to use us this way.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, what would the Party do in those circumstances?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: In those circumstances, we would do what Lenin did: tell the masses that this is not the moment, but if the masses launch an insurrection, fight alongside them, so that together we can make an orderly retreat and so that they suffer as little as possible. And if we die with them, our blood will be merged with theirs to a greater extent. This is what Lenin taught us in the famous struggles of July 1917. Because we cannot just tell the masses they are wrong and let events make them understand. No, we can't do that. The masses are the masses, our class is our class, and if they are not heading in the right direction, and the conditions make them desperate and push them into situations, or even if there are those who push them on purpose, we have to be with them so that alongside them we can help them see the unfavorable situation, and fighting alongside them, help them retreat in the best way possible. And then they will see that we are with them through thick and thin. This is the best way for them to understand and be convinced that we are their Party. This is what we would do.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, another question. When you speak of the forms of struggle in the city, what role do you ascribe to the unions?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The same one Marx ascribed to them in "The Past, Present and Future of the Trade Unions." A hundred years ago, Marx said that the trade unions began as simple associations for the economic defense of the workers. That is their past. Their present is to become more organized and to develop politically. And their future is to serve the seizure of Power. This Marx has already told us. So then, what is the problem? How to combine the two struggles. The economic struggle is, as Marx said himself, a guerrilla war--the struggle that our class, the proletariat, and the people develop for wages, hours, working conditions and other rights. When a strike is launched, it is a guerrilla war in which people not only fight around concrete economic or political questions, if it is of general interest, but also prepare for great moments to come. And this is its fundamental historic essence. So the question for us is how to relate the economic struggle to the seizure of Power. This is what we call developing our mass work within and for the people's war.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, you spoke of the revolutionary crisis. Do you believe it's on the horizon in the short term?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The issue is the triumph of the people's war and this has to do, mainly, with how much more and how much better we fight. And the insurrection, as I've already said, is the knock-out punch we must prepare to deliver, and we're seriously preparing to deliver it. We have to anticipate the possibility that others may wish to use it to their advantage. But the main problem is the timing of the insurrection, determining the opportune moment.

EL DIARIO: Why did the Communist Party of Peru initiate the people's war in 1980? What is the military and historical explanation for this? What social, economic and political analysis did the PCP carry out in order to launch the war?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We studied the country, particularly from World War II on, and we saw that in its process of development Peruvian society was entering a complex situation. The government's own analysis showed that critical questions would present themselves in the '80s. In Peru it can be seen that there is a crisis every 10 years in the second half of the decade and each crisis is worse than the one before. We also analyzed bureaucrat capitalism, which makes conditions more ripe for revolution. In 1980, the government was to change hands through elections, which meant that the new government would need a year and a half to two years to fully put in place the operations of its State. So we concluded that bureaucrat capitalism had ripened the conditions for revolution, and that the difficult decade of the '80s approached--with crisis, an elected government, etc. All this provided a very favorable conjuncture for initiating the people's war and refuted the position that armed struggle, or in our case people's war, cannot be initiated when there's a new government events have demonstrated the incorrectness of that position. Such was our evaluation, and such was the situation as the new government took over, that is, the military, having left the government after ruling for 12 years, could not easily take up the struggle against us right away, nor could they immediately take the helm of state again because they were worn down and had become discredited. These were the concrete facts, the reality.

Prior to that time, we had already put forward that participation in the Constituent Assembly was incorrect, that the only thing to do was to boycott it, because to participate in the Constituent Assembly was simply to serve the restructuring of the Peruvian State and to produce a constitution like the one we have. All this was foreseeable, there was nothing that could not be foreseen in this case. Therefore, we had planned for some time to lay the basis to initiate the people's war, to make our move before the new government took office, which is what we did. We began the armed struggle on May 17, the day before the elections.

We thought that under these conditions we could initiate our actions and even unfold them broadly and advance to the greatest extent possible--and that is exactly what we did. We were also thinking that in the second part of the decade there would have to be a more serious crisis than the previous one and therefore, better conditions for advancing. The initiation of the people's war was planned based on these considerations. But it's been said that we didn't think, but only acted dogmatically. In what way? Some people preach about dogma while swallowing anything they're told.

For these reasons we chose that moment, and the correctness of our decision has been borne out by events. It was obvious that Belaúnde--and this is something we discussed openly--would fear a coup d'etat and therefore would restrain the armed forces. Was that difficult to foresee? No, because of the experience he had in 1968. These things could be calculated, and we've been taught to evaluate,analyze and weigh things--that's how we've been taught. The Chairman was very exacting with regard to these problems, especially in regard to preparation. We believe that events have confirmed our analysis. For two years the armed forces could not come in. Was that the case or not? Now they are saying that they burned the intelligence information that they had. In short, the new government had problems setting up its administration and the facts have shown that. Then came the crisis. The military has entered the battle with ever larger contingents and in fighting them for a number of years we are more powerful, we continue to flourish and develop. These were the reasons for initiating the people's war in 1980, and the facts show that we were not wrong, at least not in the broad outlines, which is where one must not be wrong.

EL DIARIO: Taking into account that there are two strategies in conflict in this war, could you explain the process of development of your military plans, advances and what problems you've had?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Our starting point is this: each class has its own specific form of war, and therefore its own strategy. The proletariat has developed its strategy, people's war, and it is a superior strategy. The bourgeoisie can never have a strategy superior to this. Moreover, there will never be a strategy more developed than that of the proletariat. It is a question of studying military processes in the world. Each class has always brought forth its own form of waging war, and its own strategy. And always, the superior strategy has defeated the inferior strategy, and the new class always has the superior strategy and that's what people's war is. There is evidence to prove this. There are military analysts who put it like this: communists, when they have applied their principles, have never lost a war; they have only lost wars when they have not applied their principles.

Therefore, our starting point was that we have a superior strategy, a universally proven theory. Our problem was how to wield it to make our revolution. Therein lies the problem--and the possibility of making errors. The first thing that we established was the need to avoid a mechanical application of people's war, because Chairman Mao Tsetung warned us that a mechanical application leads to opportunism and defeat. In 1980, which is when we decided to begin the people's war, we decided in the Party Central Committee to pay strict attention to developing a concrete application, not a dogmatic or a mechanical one. This is how we formulated it. This was our starting point. Well, here we can point out the first problem that we had. The first problem that we had was an antagonistic struggle against a right opportunist line that opposed starting the people's war. This is the first problem that we had. We settled this question fundamentally in the IXth Plenum, and the remnants were swept away completely in the February 1980 Plenum. That was the first problem we had, and from there we had the struggle to purify the Party that we talked about before. And we had to struggle fiercely to weed out elements from the Central Committee itself. That's the way it is, but that is how we strengthened ourselves and were able to enter the process of initiating the people's war. We already had a plan for waging war in the countryside and the city.

The first plan that we proposed was the Plan to Initiate. The Political Bureau was asked to determine how to develop armed actions, and it was this body that presented the plan, based on detachments as the military form. This plan was brought to its conclusion in I980, but it is important to note that two weeks after initiating the armed struggle there was a meeting of the expanded Political Bureau in order to analyze how it had gone, and it concluded that a new thing had been born, and this was the people's war, armed actions, detachments. Then we developed the Plan to Unfold. This was a longer plan, comprising two years, but it was accomplished through several campaigns. It was at the end of this plan that the new forms of Power crystallized and the People's Committees arose.

At the end of 1982, the armed forces came in. The CC had anticipated this for more than a year. It had studied the involvement of the armed forces, and concluded that it would increase until the army had substituted for the police, who would then assume a secondary role. This is how it has been, and given the situation it could not have been otherwise. We had prepared ourselves, but nevertheless, we had a second problem. The introduction of the armed forces had its consequences. They came inapplying a policy of genocide from the beginning. They formed armed groups, called mesnadas, forcing the masses to join and putting them in front, using them as shields. This must be said clearly: here we see not only the policy of using masses against masses, an old reactionary policy already seen by Marx, but also a cowardly use of the masses, putting the masses in front of them. The armed forces have nothing to boast about--with good reason we have called them experts at defeat, and skilled at attacking the unarmed masses. These are the armed forces of Peru. Faced with this we convened an expanded session of the CC. It was a large meeting and it lasted a long time. It was one of the longest sessions we've ever had. That's when we established the Plan to Conquer Base Areas, and the People's Guerrilla Army was created to respond to a force that was obviously of a higher level than the police. It was there that we also raised, among other things, the problem of Front-State.

Thus arose the second problem, the problem of confronting the genocide, the genocide of 1983 and 1984. It is in the Party documents. It's not necessary to go into it a lot, but we do want to stress the fact that it was a vicious and merciless genocide. They thought that with this genocide "they would wipe us off the map." How real this was is shown by the fact that, by the end of 1984, they began to circulate among their officers documents concerning our annihilation. The struggle was intense, hard, those were complex and difficult times.

In the face of reactionary military actions and the use of mesnadas, we responded with a devastating action: Lucanamarca. Neither they nor we have forgotten it, to be sure, because they got an answer that they didn't imagine possible. More than 80 were annihilated, that is the truth. And we say openly that there were excesses, as was analyzed in 1983. But everything in life has two aspects. Our task was to deal a devastating blow in order to put them in check, to make them understand that it was not going to be so easy. On some occasions, like that one, it was the Central Leadership itself that planned the action and gave instructions. That's how it was. In that case, the principal thing is that we dealt them a devastating blow, and we checked them and they understood that they were dealing with a different kind of people's fighters, that we weren't the same as those they had fought before. This is what they understood. The excesses are the negative aspect. Understanding war, and basing ourselves on what Lenin said, taking Clausewitz into account, in war, the masses engaged in combat can go too far and express all their hatred, the deep feelings of class hatred, repudiation and condemnation that they have--that was the root of it. This has been explained by Lenin very clearly. Excesses can be committed. The problem is to go to a certain point and not beyond it, because if you go past that point you go off course. It's like an angle; it can be opened up to a certain point and no further. If we were to give the masses a lot of restrictions, requirements and prohibitions, it would mean that deep down we didn't want the waters to overflow. And what we needed was for the waters to overflow, to let the flood rage, because we know that when a river floods its banks it causes devastation, but then it returns to its riverbed. I repeat, this was explained clearly by Lenin, and this is how we understand those excesses. But, I insist, the main point was to make them understand that we were a hard nut to crack, and that we were ready for anything, anything.

Marx taught us: one does not play at insurrection, one does not play at revolution. But when one raises the banner of insurrection, when one takes up arms, there's no taking down the banner, it must be held high and never lowered until victory. This is what he taught us, no matter how much it costs us! Marx has armed us then, as Lenin has, and, principally Chairman Mao Tsetung taught us about the price we have to pay--what it means to annihilate in order to preserve, what it means to hold high the banner, come what may. And we say that in this way, with this determination, we overcame the sinister, vile, cowardly and vicious genocide. And we say this because someone--he who calls himself president--makes insinuations about barbarism, without blushing, when he is an aspiring Attila the Hun playing with other people's blood.

Have we gone through difficult times? Yes. But what has reality shown us? That if we persist, keep politics in command, follow our political strategy, follow our military strategy, if we have a clearand defined plan, then we will advance, and we are capable of facing any bloodbath. (We began to prepare for the bloodbath in 1981 because it had to come. Thus we were already prepared ideologically, that is principal.) All this brought about an increase in our forces, they multiplied. This was the result. It turned out as the Chairman had said: the reaction is dreaming when it tries to drown the revolution in blood. They should know they are nourishing it, and this is an inexorable law. So this reaffirms for us that we have to be more and more dedicated, firm, and resolute in our principles, and always have unwavering faith in the masses.

Thus we came out of it strengthened, with a larger Army, more People's Committees and Base Areas, and a larger Party, exactly the opposite of what they had imagined. We have already talked, I believe, of the bloody dreams of the reaction. They are nothing but that, bloody dreams that, in the final analysis, end up being nightmares. But I insist: by persisting in our principles and fighting with the support of the masses, mainly the poor peasants, we've been able to confront this situation. It is here that the heroism of which I have already spoken, the heroism of the masses, has been expressed.

Subsequently, we developed a new plan, the Plan to Develop the Base Areas which we are unfolding now. What can we say about it' Looking at another aspect, I believe that we must keep a lesson in mind: all plans are approved, applied and summed up in the midst of two-line struggle. And that struggle is more intense when a new plan has to be approved. That's the reality, it's a lesson that we keep very much in mind. It has been very instructive for us and taught us a lot. That's the way it is. In the end, people's war generates an extremely high degree of unity, but amid intense struggle. Yes, because in spite of the problems, the complex and difficult situations we face, in spite of external influences, the ideological dynamic is that those who are engaged in people's war have given their lives over to the revolution. A communist has his life dedicated to communism although he will not see it, because really we aren't going to see it, at least I am not going to see it. But that is not the problem. Not seeing the goal for which we struggle only leads us to reflect, to take hold of the great examples that Marxism has given us. In Marx's time he knew that he would not see the triumph of the revolution, and where did that lead him? To redoubling his efforts to advance the revolution. Those are lessons we've drawn, and we've been guided by those tremendous examples. Let me insist once again, this is not to imply any comparison, it is only to fix on the pole star, to set the course, as a guide.

Well, if we think about the armed struggle and people's war, we can say that the initiation allowed us to develop the guerrilla war, because in this period we went over from detachments to platoons, and in this way we extended guerrilla warfare. The Plan to Unfold gave us the People's Committees, the Plan to Conquer Base Areas gave us the Base Areas and a broad zone of operations. We should remember that we conceived of the highlands as the backbone for developing the war and conquering Power throughout the country. Yes, the Sierra of our country--and we've covered an area that goes from one border to another, from Ecuador to Bolivia and Chile. But we've also developed work in the "eyebrow" of the jungle, in the mountainous areas leading down to the coast and in the cities as well. Today we can say that we have hundreds of People's Committees and numerous Base Areas. Of course there is a principal one, and each zone has its principal one as well.

Finally, we could say of the plans that we've learned how to direct the war with a single strategic plan, applying the principle of centralized strategy and decentralized tactics. We direct the war by means of a single plan with different parts, through campaigns, with strategic-operative plans, tactical plans and concrete plans for each action. But the key to all this is the single strategic plan which allows us to direct the war in a unified way, and that is key in leading a people's war. I think that is what I have to say about it.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, in these eight years of people's war what has the anti-subversive strategy accomplished, and what are its present problems?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: It is a question that I would prefer to answer in this way: thereactionaries themselves say they've failed and continue failing; they know this very well. To use a lawyers' saying, "When someone confesses, no more proof is needed."

EL DIARIO: When do you think the conditions will exist for the People's Guerrilla Army to develop conventional war, defend territorial positions and openly confront the armed forces? Is this kind of struggle in the PCP's plans?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We've pondered those problems, discussed them and established Party policy. We dealt with this in 1981, we've also done so on other occasions. We've started from how Chairman Mao Tsetung conceived of people's war, starting from contradictions. There are two aspects in contention. One is weak and the other is temporarily strong. There needs to transpire a period of strategic defensive, a second one of strategic equilibrium, and a third one of strategic offensive. We are still developing within the strategic defensive. And in these conditions, guerrilla war continues to be our principal form, a generalized guerrilla war, waged broadly, both in the countryside and the city, with the countryside being principal and the city complementary. And we are fighting in almost the entire country. This is in regard to the period we are in.

We are beginning to develop mobile warfare, as conceived of by Chairman Mao, and will develop it further in accordance with the fact that the reaction will necessarily have to wage a more developed counterinsurgency war. But even as this happens we will have to continue waging guerrilla war as principal, and mobile warfare as complementary, and within that, some specific kinds of positional warfare as talked about in "On Protracted War," We think that an intensification of the peoples's war must also produce an escalation of the counterinsurgency war, and this is going to be based on genocide. Looking ahead, this is going to lead to the stage of strategic equilibrium, with the understanding, of course, that we persist in a correct ideological and political line and therefore maintain a correct military line, which we have to do. So strategic equilibrium will result from our persisting in all this, coupled with the sinister plans that they are preparing, that will lead to genocide--which they want to impose upon the Peruvian people because they feel powerless. But the people cannot follow them because the people cannot go against their own class interests. This will lead to strategic equilibrium, let me repeat, with the understanding that we maintain the correct course in ideology, politics, in military and all related matters. It's at that point that we'll have to address the problem of how to develop people's war to take the cities and prepare the part that corresponds to the strategic offensive. That's all we can say for now.

EL DIARIO: To strengthen the war, as you said, is it going to be necessary to strengthen the weaponry of the People's Guerrilla Army? How do you intend to resolve this?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Yes, this is one aspect. Allow me to take a question of principle as my starting point. We are accustomed to and persist in taking our principles as our starting point. In this way, guided by our principles, we can solve our concrete problems. Chairman Mao Tsetung has told us that the main thing is mankind. Weapons are useful. So our task is to aim especially at people, at strengthening them ideologically and politically, at building the army ideologically and politically in this case, as well as building it militarily. This is our point of departure.

With regard to weapons, the Chairman says that the enemy has them and so the problem is to seize them from him, and this is principal. Modern weapons are necessary, but their performance depends on the ideology of the man who wields them. Lenin taught us that. We can assert that we are carrying out ambushes and the armed forces know very well how this is developing and the powerful blows they've been dealt. I'd only like to mention the one related to Cayara, the ambush of Erusco. Twenty-five soldiers were annihilated. Only one survived and he was wounded. That is why they responded with vicious genocide. The facts are not as they've portrayed them. The truth is that they moved large forces and were not able to hunt us down. And let's be clear also that we seized their arms. They know this very well. And we didn't blow up just one car, but two, because a whole kilometer of the road was mined and they had no way to escape. What was shown on television and in thenewspapers by he who calls himself president, and those who've gone to Cayara from this so-called "Commission" are, as they say "castles in the air," "drawings in the water." So it has been some time since the growing transfer of arms from them to us began. And they are obligated to bring them to us, it is their obligation to bring them to where we are. And we have to recognize that they've begun to do so. Why do we put things this way? Because we've forced them to spread out, to open different fronts, and have made them sit and wait passively. They're like an elephant stuck in the mud, and therefore easier to attack. This is something the army and the armed forces in general must seriously think about.

What I am talking about is none other than the application of what Chairman Mao Tsetung taught us when he said that Chiang Kai-shek, by the end of the war, deserved a medal because he acted as a good quartermaster, a good arms supplier. So that has already started, and the armed forces know it very well. And the plan they are cooking up, all their scheming, the great offensive they want to carry out, is all welcomed. It will not hinder the transfer of arms, and they will fail because they will not succeed in getting the Peruvian people to go against their own interests. And they are the blackest, most rotten of reactionaries, led today by this fascist, corporativist, Aprista government headed by a vile and miserable mass murderer. History has shown that the Peruvian people do not follow fascism, and will not allow themselves to be corporativized. That has already been established and this is not just an issue in Peru today, but has been one for decades. So the enemy's weapons, which we seize from them, are our principal source.

Furthermore, humble dynamite will continue playing an important role, and mines are weapons of the people. As for us, our principle is to look for the simplest weapons that everyone from among the masses can wield, because our war is a war of the masses. Otherwise, it would not be a people's war, and ours is. This leads to a second question, the manufacturing of weapons. We are striving to advance in the manufacture of arms, which the other side also knows very well by now. Direct notice of this was given to the Presidential Palace, launched with mortars made by our own hands, by the hands of the people. They don't say so, but we know.

The other common way is to buy them, because there are three ways. The main one is to seize them from the enemy, the second one is to manufacture them, and the third one is to buy them. The last one is a problem because of the high cost of weapons, and we are carrying out the most economical people's war on earth. It's that way because we have very few resources and those that we do have are those that the masses provide us with. To reiterate one more time, how is the problem solved? Lenin said that large quantities of arms must be seized, at whatever cost. And I have already talked about what Chairman Mao taught us. This is what we are putting into practice.

EL DIARIO: Can you foresee that the triumph and advance of the revolution that you are leading will provoke a U.S. military invasion? What would the PCP do in that case?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Although Yankee imperialism is already intervening, on this question I would concretely say the following. The United States can mobilize our neighboring countries. We should not forget, I insist, that there are even pending territorial claims and border disputes, even though they are silent on this; and we all know the role that Brazil has been assigned. They could intervene directly, with their own troops; they already have people training here.

Some time ago we decided in the Central Committee that whatever enemy comes to trample on this land, we will confront him and defeat him. In those circumstances the contradiction would change, the oppressed nation-imperialist contradiction would become principal, and that would give us an even broader basis on which to unite our people.

EL DIARIO: Reactionaries, revisionists and opportunists of the IU all say that you are isolated from the masses. What can you say about that?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I believe that from everything we are saying it can be seen that there is support from the masses. To those who say such things, to the revisionists and opportunists, we would ask: how can they explain the existence of a movement that has developed a people's war foreight years without international aid if it doesn't have the support of the masses?

EL DIARIO: For eight years, the groups and parties of the right, the revisionists, the opportunists, and all the reactionaries have said and even screamed that the PCP is a "demented," "messianic," "blood-thirsty," "Pol Pot-ian," "dogmatic," "sectarian," "narco-terrorist" organization. The Partido Unificado Mariateguista (PUM) adds that you have trapped the peasantry in the middle, between two fires, that you are militarists. Recently, Villanueva has said you are "genocidal terrorists" and other things. What do you have to say about these charges? What's behind them?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: To me they represent lies and the inability to understand people's war, and I understand that, the enemies of the revolution will never be able to understand people's war. With respect to the charge that the peasantry is caught between two fires, this is an elaborate invention because it is precisely the peasantry that makes up the vast majority of the People's Guerrilla Army. What must be understood is that the Peruvian State, with its armed forces and repressive apparatus, wants to drown the revolution in blood. This is our understanding, and we would recommend that these gentlemen study a little about warfare in general, revolutionary war, and mainly about people's war and Maoism. Although I doubt that they would understand it, because to do so requires a certain class stand.

With regard to what Mr. Villanueva says about "genocidal terrorists," it seems to me an obscene travesty and parody to want to apply to us a term like genocidal, which fits them like a glove. Before our country and the world it is perfectly clear who is committing genocide. It is they, it is the APRA government which is leading this reactionary State, it is the reactionary armed forces, the forces of repression--they are the vile mass murderers. Distortions will never change the facts. History has already been written, tomorrow it will be confirmed. Besides, how long will Villanueva last? What will his future be like? It would be better if he thought about that.

EL DIARIO: What changes do you think have taken place in Peruvian politics, in the economic base of society and among the masses as a result of eight years of people's war?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The first change is the development of a people s war that is advancing irrepressibly; which means that, for the first time, the democratic revolution is really being carried out in our country. This has changed all the terms of Peruvian politics. Hence, the reaction itself, their accomplices, beginning with the revisionists and their supporters on duty, whoever they may be, have concluded that the first and main problem facing the Peruvian State is the people's war. Thus, we are changing the world in this country. Out of this comes the most important and principal thing we've accomplished, the emergence and development of a New Power which marches forward and will end up extending itself throughout the country.

In the economic base, under the New Power we are establishing new relations of production. A concrete example of this is how we apply the land policy, utilizing collective work, and the organization of social life according to a new reality, with a joint dictatorship where for the first time workers, peasants and progressives rule--understanding this to mean those who want to transform this country by the only means possible--people's war.

As for them, the reactionaries, without mentioning the economic drain of fighting the people's war, we are destroying bureaucrat capitalism, and for some time we've been undermining the gamonal basis for the semifeudal relations that sustain this whole structure, while at the same time strong blows against imperialism.

For the masses of our people, these heroic masses, principally for the proletariat, the leading class that we will always recognize; for the first time they are taking Power and they have begun to taste the honey on their lips. They will not stop there. They will want it all, and they will get it.

EL DIARIO: How do you see the present situation, and the perspectives for the People's War In Peru? What destiny awaits the Peruvian people if the revolution that you've been leading for morethan eight years doesn't triumph in the short run? Do you believe that this government or another one can find a way out of this crisis? In the document "Bases for Discussion," the PCP indicated that we are entering decisive years in which APRA continues to be without a strategic plan. Could it be that we are on the threshold of the victory of the revolution, and of the seizure of state Power by the PCP?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The Peruvian people are increasingly mobilizing themselves, and the class struggle is sharpening. This is directly linked to the people's war, which is nothing but the continuation of the class struggle with arms in hand. What destiny awaits the Peruvian people? I believe that the heroic destiny of destroying the old state and the glorious destiny of beginning to build a new society will be a monumental effort. These will be times of sacrifice and difficulties, but the people will emerge victorious. In the end it should be enough to reflect on this: without the people's war, would 60,000 children under one year of age stop dying, as is the case in Peru today? No. Therefore, the people will continue making every effort and will go through difficulties, but each day more consciously, they will pay the necessary price, knowing that they will win.

A way out? We believe that they have no way out. Our understanding of the process of contemporary Peruvian society is that starting in 1980 bureaucrat capitalism has entered into its destruction, and as a result the whole system is falling apart, and they have no way out. And if we look at it, there's a serious crisis, but also the two decades have come together back to back, the decade of the '80s and the decade of the '90s, both of them critical. They have no way out at all.

In regard to the decisive years, we understand by decisive years a more powerful storm between people's war and counterrevolutionary war, and we believe, once again, that from this will emerge the stage of strategic equilibrium.

As for time, Chairman Mao said the more and better we fight, the less time will be needed. For our part, it is our obligation to do this. We are doing it and we will do it; on the other hand, we have extraordinary objective conditions. The conditions of general crisis which the decrepit system of Peruvian society has entered into reveals to us that things can accelerate in these decisive years, and in fact these decisive years will powerfully accelerate the conditions and develop the revolutionary situation.

What are our tasks today? In sum, more people s war, more New Power, more Army, more involvement of the masses, and this is how we believe our victory will come.

EL DIARIO: Finally, could you lay out your position with regard to worldwide people's war? In the case of a world war between the superpowers, what would be the results for humanity?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Could there be a world war? Yes, there could be. The conditions for this will exist as long as we do not eliminate their roots. The superpowers are obviously preparing for war and making big plans. But we believe that communists and revolutionaries, the masses, the people, those who can no longer accept so much injustice in the world, must not focus our attention on war between the superpowers because our liberation cannot come from that--because it would be a war of plunder, for a redivision of the world. World war among the big powers is for hegemony, nothing else What can we expect from them? Huge massacres, large-scale genocide, hundreds of thousands of deaths. But certainly the immense majority of humanity will survive. We cannot accept the sinister ideas of today that worship atomic weapons and all the sophisticated weaponry they brandish. Nor can we allow them to use them as blackmail to paralyze us. Many times in the world the reactionaries have talked about decisive and definitive weapons and the disappearance of humanity. But it has always been to restrain and stifle people, to maintain their old domination. That's why we believe that we must focus our attention, our efforts, our passion, our will, on developing people's war--because from that will certainly come the emancipation of the people and the proletariat, the definitive and true emancipation. We think that a worldwide people's war is the answer to an imperialist world war. We think that the task is to prepare for it, and we conceive of it as follows: those who are already waging people's war should develop it more; those who have not initiated it should start developing it; and through thisprocess we will demolish imperialist domination, the domination of reaction. And we will wipe them off the face of the earth.

We don't conceive of a worldwide people's war as an action that will take place simultaneously on a certain day and at a certain hour. We conceive of it as unfolding in the future, and related to the 50 to 100 years that Chairman Mao Tsetung predicted. We see it as great waves of people's war, until finally all of them converge like the legions of steel of a great worldwide red army, as Lenin himself said. This is how we see it. We think this is the only road to follow. The problem, I insist, is that there is a risk of world war and it would be a huge massacre, from which could only come misery, injustice, pain and death, and more reasons to put an end to them. The only solution, therefore, is people's war, which, conceived of in waves, will lead to a worldwide people's war and the coming together of the legions of steel of the international proletariat, of the people, who in the end will carry out our historic mission. We have the great fortune to live in these decades in which imperialism and reaction will be swept away, because what Chairman Mao foresaw will be attained. If we do not see it ourselves, others who follow us will, because the legions are increasing more and more.

What is the problem? What is the key? To place Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in command. And with Maoism principally, take up people's war, which is universally applicable, taking into account the character of each revolution and the specific conditions of each country.

IV. On the National Political Situation
EL DIARIO: Chairman, what is the PCP's analysis of the Peruvian state and where it is headed?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We have an understanding of the workings of contemporary Peruvian society, by which we mean the society which came into being in I895. We believe that the process we are living through began then and that there have been three stages. The first stage laid the basis for the development of bureaucrat capitalism; the second stage, which deepened the development of bureaucrat capitalism, began after World War II, because the first stage lasted until then. This deeper development of bureaucrat capitalism ripened the conditions for revolution. With the beginning of the people's war in I980, we entered the third stage, of the general crisis of bureaucrat capitalism. The destruction of contemporary Peruvian society has begun because it has become historically outmoded. Therefore what we are witnessing is its end and the only correct course is to battle, to fight, and to struggle to bury it.

EL DIARIO: Why do you consider the thesis of bureaucrat capitalism to be fundamental?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We consider this thesis of Chairman Mao Tsetung to be key, because without understanding it and wielding it, it is not possible to carry out a democratic revolution, much less conceive of its uninterrupted continuation into the socialist revolution. It is really very wrong for this thesis of Chairman Mao's to be disregarded. Plainly, they jumble his analysis all up by talking to us about the development of capitalism in backward countries or dependent capitalism, which leads to nothing but changing the character of the revolution. We believe that it is by taking Chairman Mao as our starting point that we are going to really understand Peruvian society and those societies that they call backward.

We understand that bureaucrat capitalism began to emerge in Peru in 1895 through the three stages that I previously outlined. We conceive of it this way: capitalism developed on top of a semi-feudal base, and under imperialist domination. It is a capitalism born late born tied to feudalism and subordinated to imperialist domination. These are the conditions that produce what Chairman Mao Tsetung has called bureaucrat capitalism. So, bureaucrat capitalism develops bound to big monopoly capital which controls the economy of the country. This capital is made up, as Chairman Mao said, of the big capital of the large landowners, the comprador bourgeoisie, and the big bankers. Thus bureaucrat capitalism emerges, bound, I repeat, to feudalism, subordinated to imperialism, and it ismonopolistic. We must keep this in mind, it is monopolistic. At a certain point in its development this capitalism is combined with state power and uses the economic means of the State, uses the State as an economic lever and this process gives rise to another faction of the big bourgeoisie, the bureaucrat bourgeoisie. This gives rise to a further development of bureaucrat capitalism which was already monopolistic and becomes, in turn, state-owned. But this whole process gives rise to conditions which ripen the revolution. This is another important concept, politically speaking, that the Chairman laid out about bureaucrat capitalism.

If we understand bureaucrat capitalism, we can understand very well how Peru has semi-feudal conditions, bureaucrat capitalism, and imperialist, mainly Yankee, domination. This is what we must understand, and what allows us to understand and lead the democratic revolution.

Now, what other importance does bureaucrat capitalism have? The Chairman says that the democratic revolution realizes some socialist advances which, he says, were already expressing themselves, for example, in the mutual aid teams in the Base Areas of the countryside. To move from the democratic to the socialist revolution it is key, from an economic point of view, to confiscate all bureaucrat capital, which will permit the New State to control the economy, to direct it and, in this way, serve the development of the socialist revolution. We understand that this strategic concept is of great importance and, I reiterate, it is unfortunately being disregarded, and as long as it is disregarded, it will not be possible to correctly understand what a democratic revolution is under the present circumstances in which we struggle.

It is erroneous to think that bureaucrat capitalism is the capitalism that the State develops with the economic means of production that it directly controls. This is erroneous, and it does not conform to Chairman Mao's thesis. Just think of it like this: if bureaucrat capital were only state-owned capitalism, and you confiscated this state-owned capital, in whose hands would the other, non-state-owned monopoly capital remain? In the hands of reaction, of the big bourgeoisie. This view which identifies bureaucrat capitalism with state monopoly capitalism is a revisionist concept and in our Party it was upheld by the left liquidationists. Hence, we understand this problem to be a very important one.

Furthermore, politically it allows us to differentiate very clearly between the big bourgeoisie and the national or middle bourgeoisie. And this gives us the means to understand, so that we don't pin ourselves to the tail of any faction of the big bourgeoisie, either the comprador or bureaucrat bourgeoisies, which is what revisionism and opportunism have done and continue to do in Peru. There have been decades of this perverse policy of labeling one faction of the big bourgeoisie the national bourgeoisie, hence progressive, and supporting them. Grasping bureaucrat capitalism permitted us to more clearly understand the differentiation, I repeat, between the national bourgeoisie and the big bourgeoisie, and grasp the correct tactics to carry out, taking up again precisely what Mariátegui had established. For this reason we consider the thesis on bureaucrat capitalism to be of utmost importance.

EL DIARIO: How would you sum up your political and economic analysis of the present conjuncture and its prospects? Is this situation perhaps favorable for the PCP? What does it pose for the reaction, revisionism and opportunism?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We believe that bureaucrat capitalism has entered into a general crisis. Moreover, we believe that this bureaucrat capitalism was born sick, because it derived from semi-feudalism (or is tied to it) and from imperialism. Semi-feudalism is obviously outmoded, and imperialism is moribund. What kind of child could come from these two parents condemned to death by incurable disease? A sick, stunted monster that has entered its phase of destruction. We think that the crises will become sharper and sharper, that, even as some economists say, there have been more or less 30 years of crisis from which we have not emerged except for some small ripples of recovery. Or, as APRA says in its own internal documents, this is a crisis that has existed since the middle of the '70s.

We can see that each new crisis is worse than the previous one. And if we add to this the twocritical decades of the '80s and '90s, back to back, the situation becomes clear. What do they themselves say? That this government will leave behind an extremely grave situation, and that those who follow, supposing that others do follow through their electoral renovation, will have to seek some way to overcome the problems left behind, and consequently, not until I995 can they even think about any kind of development--and this is being said in a country which is already twenty years behind. Because of all this we think the prospects for them are extremely bleak. Is this favorable for the revolution, for the people's war, for the Party? Yes, it is. First and foremost for our class and the people, because all our work is for them, so that our class can rule, lead, so that the people can exercise their freedom and satisfy their centuries-old hunger. We see no prospects whatever for revisionism and reaction. We believe that they are united, they are like Siamese twins, and they will march together to the grave. This is what we think.

EL DIARIO: Why do you characterize the APRA government as fascist and corporativist? What do you base this on? What is your opinion of Alan García Pérez's speech at the APRA Youth Congress in Ayacucho and the one he gave in Paita? What is your opinion of the economic measures of the new cabinet?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Concerning the characterization of the APRA government. Without looking at its historical aspect, which has other implications that we don't need to examine today, the concrete situation that APRA was faced with, when by agreement it was given leadership of the Peruvian state, was one full of dilemmas. There existed two tendencies within it. One was fascist and the other was demo-liberal. This is what was going on in APRA, and we understand that in this case the demo-liberal position meant the maintenance of the reactionary constitutional order established in 1920, in 1933, and in 1979. That's what we mean by the demo-liberal order.

APRA had a problem--its need for investments to be able to push forward the economy, or more exactly, to showcase some successes. This is what they have done, use up what little they had in order to present us with a showcase of successes as fragile as glass. And we are seeing the proof of this today. So there is no way you can say that APRA's plan was a good economic plan, because if it was such a good plan, why are the results so bad? It doesn't make sense. So APRA had to resort to using capital from the comprador bourgeoisie and they, obviously, demanded certain conditions. In APRA's own documents they say that by the end of I985 the big bourgeoisie, particularly the comprador bourgeoisie, was already beginning to recover and to cash in. The year I986 was like paradise for them. They made billions of dollars in profits, as they themselves have said, thinking that later they would reinvest. But this plan was not going to work, the economy was bound to go into crisis and fail, and therefore they could not reinvest. Since then the conflict between them has sharpened further, hence the struggles between the two factions of the big bourgeoisie.

On the other hand, APRA, with regard to the people, was confronted with the immense, unsatisfied needs of the masses. Demagogically, as always, they made promises to everybody; demagogically, because what APRA sought to do was simply try to develop, to unfold the reactionary economic process which could not be carried out without restricting the income of the people, because, where do profits come from? From surplus value. So they had a problem with the masses and they knew it, hence, their repressive, anti-popular, anti-union, anti-worker policies. This could be seen from the beginning. But there were other circumstances, the people's war. Even though they did not want to, APRA had to confront the people's war, which was already a central problem.

All these conditions are the ones that determined that changes had to take place inside APRA in order to resolve their dilemma. But when did they resolve it? The dilemma got resolved with the genocide of 1986. The class struggle of the masses, the people's war principally, and the genocidal actions pushed APRA to choose fascism and brought about the triumph of the fascist faction. We believe that it was then that it happened, and so began what everyone now recognizes as the loss of prestige and a setback for APRA, not only in Peru, but in the whole world.

Why do we call it fascist? The fascist faction that already existed in APRA took political measures to implement corporativization, although it was already contained in the first speech by García Pérez in July 1985. What do we understand by fascist and corporativist? For us fascism is the negation of liberal-democratic principles, the negation of the bourgeois-democratic principles which were born and developed in the eighteenth century in France. These principles are being abandoned by reactionaries, by the bourgeoisie world-wide. So it was that the First World War that made us see the crisis of the bourgeois democratic order, that's why later fascism emerged. So, in APRA what is going on is this negation of the principles of the bourgeois-democratic order and we see daily proof of the negation of all the constitutionally established rights and liberties. We see fascism also on the ideological plane as an eclectic system without a defined philosophy. It is a philosophical position made up of fragments chosen from here and there according to what's most useful. This is clearly expressed in García Pérez. When he goes to Harare in Africa he's an African and he salutes the Africans, salutes Kenneth Kaunda. When he goes to India he salutes Gandhi, he's a Gandhian. When he goes to Mexico he hails Zapata, he's a Zapatista. When he goes to the Soviet Union, if he ever does, he'll be the champion of Perestroika. He's like that because this is the ideological and philosophical training of fascism, it does not have a defined stand, it is eclectic and it takes what is at hand.

With regard to its corporativism. We understand corporativism as the setting up of the state based on corporations, which implies the negation of parliamentarism. This is an essential point that Mariátegui gave emphasis to in "Historia de la crisis mundial" ["History of the World Crisis"--TRANS.]. He said that the crisis of bourgeois democracy expresses itself clearly in the crisis of parliamentarism. Looking at the parliament here, while it is true that in the last decades it has been the executive branch that has produced the most important laws in this country, it is during this APRA government that the executive has monopolized the creation of all the fundamental laws for its own purposes. No important laws have come from the parliament. This is a fact, and everything has been aimed at giving powers to the executive so that it can do and undo as it pleases. Everything is a negation of parliamentarism.

The problem of corporativism in our country is not a recent one. Already in 1933, during the second restructuring of the Peruvian State in this century, when the Constitution was being debated, Víctor Andrés Belaúnde put forward the corporativization of Peruvian society. Villarán, who was the chairman of the reporting committee of the Constitution, opposed it stating: how are we going to corporativize if there are no corporations? It was a way of dodging the issue Those are precedents. Now that they are talking so much about Mr. Belaúnde, whose works have just been published, it is fitting to remember his stand: in the face of liberalism--which focuses on money--and communism--which negates the individual--what we need are corporativist systems modeled after those of medieval times. It is good to keep this in mind in order to see corporativism's affiliation and its roots, and also keep very much in mind that it is intimately linked to the positions set forth by the Papacy starting in the past century.

Velasco also tried to corporativize the country. That's why he started the formation of corporations of agricultural producers, for example. His own agrarian law 17716 had the political aim of establishing corporativist bases. The industrial law did, too. How? Through the industrial community. His famous political organization, which was never consolidated, also put forward positions which were clearly fascist and corporativist. But they didn't succeed in carrying it out in Peru. And what are they trying to do? What do they want? They want the formation of corporations, that is to organize the producers and all members of society along corporativist lines. Let's assume that the small factory producers, the agricultural producers, merchants, professionals, students, the Church. the Armed Forces, and the Police Forces all name their delegates and, in this way form a corporative system. This is what they are seeking to do and what APRA is doing. And the regions and micro-regions, what is their significance? This whole plan for establishing regions today serves thecorporativization of our country, that is why we have to oppose It openly- not only because it represents political maneuvering by APRA for electoral advantage, but because it is a corporativist system, and furthermore, it is putting a country which doesn't even have a consolidated national unity at risk. These are extremely serious matters. For these reasons we say it is a fascist and corporativist government. The road they are trying to promote explains their great preoccupation with the regions that they want to impose, no matter what it takes. This is what we are seeing and hence all these extraordinary parliamentary assemblies which have failed to fulfill what García has called for. Last year he stated, either the regions are formed or I'll stop calling myself Alan García Pérez. A year has passed and I don't know what he is calling himself today, because the regions have not been formed. Now they say by the end of this year. We'll see.

With regard to identifying fascism with terror, with repression, we think that this is a mistake. What's involved is the following: if one remembers Marxism, the State is organized violence, that is the classic definition. All states use violence because they are dictatorships How else would they assert themselves to oppress and exploit? They couldn't do it. Consequently what happens is that fascism develops a broader, more refined, more sinister violence. But to identify fascism as being the same as violence is a crass error. These are ideas that have developed here in Peru since World War II and they are ideas that Del Prado often promoted and spread. These same ideas were also put forward by Dammert.

Identifying fascism with terror means not understanding Mariátegui, who in "Figuras y aspectos de la vida mundial" ["Figures and Aspects of World Life"--TRANS.], when talking of H.G. Wells, tells us that the bourgeois State goes through a process of development and that it is this process that leads to a fascist and corporative system. This can be understood very well if we study Mariátegui's works, the previously mentioned "Historia de la crisis mundial" or "La Escena contemporánea" ["The Contemporary Scene"--TRANS.]. Let's not forget that he lived it, studied it, and came to know it directly.

In this country, we have to look at fascism in its different aspects beginning with its ideology, its politics, and its organizational form, how it uses violence, its terror. Today we see how it practices a skillful violence, more developed, broader, more brutal and vicious. This is what is called terror. But apart from this, white terror has always been practiced, has it not? The reactionaries, when they have encountered difficulties, have always applied white terror. So we should never identify and reduce all fascism simply to terror. We must understand that fascism means a more refined violence, and the development of terrorism, yes, but that is not the totality of it but a component, it is fascism's means of unfolding reactionary violence.

As for García Pérez's speech at the APRA Youth Congress: in sum, there is an intense struggle in APRA, which has to do with their next congress, and the problem consists in whether Garcia Pérez will maintain his control over that party or not, while keeping himself in power in collusion with the Armed Forces. For some time it's been apparent that the APRA youth have questioned the work of the government, and this expressed itself in a big way at this congress in Ayacucho. And Garcia Pérez had to make a desperate trip in order to explain, to explain himself and to present himself as the Savior. This is what he wants, because he sees the importance of winning over the youth in the interest of his appetite to be fuhrer. I believe this gets to the essence of it. Concerning what he said about our Party, and the supposed admiration he says he has for it, this simply reveals the struggle inside APRA, because someone who is a genocidal assassin, who daily murders the people, the fighters, the communists, can't have admiration for us. This is demagogical posturing, uncontrollable appetites linked to the APRA Congress and related to his political prospects, because he can still play many cards. The man is quite young.

Concerning Paita, the "Paita speech," essentially it was a fascist speech, openly fascist. It was not, as some say, to give the parliamentarians who were raising a ruckus a slap on the wrist. That kindof thing is commonplace among them and there is nothing extraordinary about it. But that was not what this was about, it was a strictly fascist speech. Garcia Pérez wants to become fuhrer. There's a reason why they call him "conductor" Many times Congressman Roca himself has called him "conductor." Isn't "conductor" the same as fuhrer? It means the same thing in German. Therefore I think it's correct when some call him "the apprentice fuhrer." But in the end what he is showing us is that he's just a cheap demagogue with a big, unrestrained appetite, ready to do anything to satisfy it. I think self-idolatry is one of his characteristics.

As for the economic measures of the new cabinet, as was inevitable, no one agrees with them. Of course no one agrees with them, and the people least of all, which is what interests us. So a double contradiction emerges. The first one is with the comprador bourgeoisie, because the economic measures are insufficient. They ask the APRA government for more measures and they demand a definition of the plan, because this plan is for 18 months, but consists only of a general outline, without dealing concretely with important problems. (For its five years in office, APRA is going to proceed like this, from one emergency plan to another and yet another. From emergency to emergency, which amounts to the total unraveling of the plans it had thought to implement during its term. I am referring here to their own documents.) And the second contradiction is inevitably with the people, whose belts are being tightened in the interest of generating new capital. How and from where can capital be obtained? By reducing salaries. These are, in sum, the measures, and that's why they have created more problems for APRA than they already had. Meanwhile they continue, demagogically, postponing what the very order within which they operate imposes on them and what they themselves bring on by being puppets, because they have long been in collusion with the United States, with imperialism. Their ties with the World Bank and the International Development Bank (IDB) are extremely clear, and these are the instruments that the imperialists are using more now due to the discrediting of the IMF--although the prospects are that APRA will return to the fold. So those economic measures are not resolving the situation, they are worsening it. And we are going to have an extremely grave and critical economic situation which will develop even further, becoming a tremendous burden on the backs of the masses.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, how do you see the upcoming elections shaping up, and the possibility of a coup or a coup backed by the government itself?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: If you'll allow me, I'd like to say that the main thing about the elections is the need to boycott them, and if possible, prevent them. Why do we say this? What do the people have to gain? Nothing. The people won't gain anything through an electoral renewal. I think this can be seen very clearly in this country's history. In the document, "Desarrollar la guerra popular sirviendo a la revolución mundial" ["Develop People's War, Serving the World Revolution"--TRANS.], we pointed this out, we showed this to be the case and no one has disproved it. We showed how the percentage of votes for the IU was what prevented the majority from expressing their opposition to the elections. I believe this has been shown. We have therefore put forward, and the facts have borne out, that the tendency in Peru is to expect nothing from elections or from a new government. The tendency is to reject elections. Where does the problem lie? In the way revisionism and opportunism continue promoting elections, that's where the problem lies. So what is the key point here? To strike blows and expose what the electoral process means, that it means nothing except allowing the renewal of the authorities of this old and rotting order, that it means nothing else. Because they won't be able tell us that it means maintaining the democratic arena. This is an old story that no one is going to believe any more. This is the story that those who today belong to the PUM told us at the time of the Constituent Assembly. And then, in 1980, they said that there was democratic space, that we were in a pre-revolutionary situation, and that by using the parliament as a tribune we could go over to a revolutionary situation--only to tell us later that we had to focus on defending the existing order. I think that this is the main thing for the people, that the majority express their repudiation of the elections,even if by simply casting a blank vote, even if it is just by doing that. This is important because that is how the will of the masses of people, the immense majority who already understand that the electoral road offers no solutions, will be expressed.

I think they have wanted to make use of the elections, putting forward the electoral campaign, in order to get the people to focus their attention on the elections. But we see that this plan has failed for two reasons. The first is the serious problems that the people have, and how their fighting spirit is growing daily, which the People's War serves to push forward. Secondly, the very contradictions that have thrown all the existing political institutions into great turmoil. The IU is a jumble of contradictions, so is the so-called FREDEMO, and APRA is a pot brimming with party hacks. That's how it really is. And if their eager plans to divert the attention of the people have failed. and if the conditions are those of a people's war with great prospects, as is really the case, all revolutionaries who want to see this country transformed must push for the people to reject this process Let them figure out how to replace their authorities. It's their problem, not ours. That's how we see it.

About a possible coup d'etat, well, in this country the possibility of a coup always exists. And we understand that the Army itself is already alarmed, pointing out that they don't see any political force capable of confronting the people's war. If the army is saying that, then it means that a coup could occur at any moment. But it could occur in many different ways, and that's another question. It could be something similar to what happened in Uruguay with Bordaberry, which would be García Pérez in this case. It could be a self-engineered coup. That's another card that García Pérez has up his sleeve because a coup would remove him, as a victim and not as the political failure that he is. And since he's young, some time later he could come back as a martyr and defender of democracy. That's why this is another card this demagogic expert in sleight of hand might pull from the deck. And looking deeper, the armed forces really do have to more and more unfold an increasingly developed counterrevolutionary struggle that strengthens their power. That's the way it is. And we think that the movement of the contradiction is in such a direction that we will have to confront each other--the revolutionary forces, the Communist Party of Peru leading the people's war, on the one hand; and on the other hand, the reaction. the armed forces leading the counterrevolutionary war in Peru.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, would you accept talks with Alan García?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The idea of talks is being bandied about, and it is also part of the superpowers' game, especially the social-imperialists. We see the situation this way: there is a time in the development of a people's war when relations and diplomatic dealings become necessary and do occur. For example, the meeting between Chairman Mao and Chiang Kai-shek. This is something people are familiar with. We also saw it in the case of Vietnam. It is a facet in the development of a revolutionary war and, even more so, of a people's war. But we must start from the understanding that in diplomatic meetings agreements signed at the table only reflect what has already been established on the battlefield, because no one is going to give up what they have not obviously lost. That is understood. Well, one could ask, has that moment arrived in Peru? That moment has not arrived So why raise the issue of talks? Such talks are simply aimed at halting or undermining the people's war, that's what they are aimed at and nothing more. So I repeat, the truth is that the time for meetings and diplomatic dealings has not arrived, it makes no sense.

As for the rest, I think it is a demagogic matter that they have been stirring up since the time of Belaúnde's government, when due to a proposal from someone from the United Left that was accepted, the then-president stated that there was no suitable interlocutor. Words! At bottom it was nothing but cheap demagoguery without rhyme or reason, and it's still the same today. And who talks about talks? The revisionists, the opportunists, and those who have hope for APRA, for this demo-bourgeois order, for this reactionary order. They are the ones. But are they not at the same time the ones who are promoting pacification, our destruction? Are they not the same ones who make proposals about how to pacify better, which means how to sweep us away, because such are their sinister dreams to satisfy theirappetites? They are the same ones. What a coincidence! So then, these talks are a sinister betrayal. Furthermore, one could ask: how can they talk about dialogue, those who even made an amnesty pact with García Pérez, which he never honored?

So for me all this jabbering about talks is nothing, I repeat, but looking for a way to undermine the people's war, because it doesn't correspond to reality. When the time comes, the people's war will necessarily have to undertake diplomatic dealings. But our diplomacy will be aimed at seizing Power countrywide, fully and completely. We don't want a North Vietnam and a South Vietnam, we don't want a North Korea and a South Korea. We don't want a North Peru and a South Peru, we want only one Peru. This is our condition: full, complete and absolute surrender. Are they ready for that? No. What they are plotting is our destruction, and so talks are nothing but a part of that same plan despite all their demagogic and philistine cackling.

EL DIARIO: What do you think of the United Left and its political line? What destiny do you foresee for this revisionist front? And what is the PCP's stand on the National People's Assembly [Asamblea Nacional Popular (ANP)--TRANS.]?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Concerning this I would like to be very brief. First, because what is the line of the United Left at this time? We don't know. In earlier documents they state that the IU is "a mass front of the socialist trend," and it has focused, as is evident, on parliamentary cretinism. What is at the heart of their positions? A very simple matter, they think they can take over the government, and then, as they say, take over power. Well, they must understand that they cannot take over one without seizing the other. Moreover, first you seize Power and then you set up your government, because the essential problem of state is what system of state, which means: what class does the dictatorship that you exercise correspond to? And from this is derived your system of government. The rest are cheap inventions of putrid revisionists. If you look at their statements, they are not for the destruction of the reactionary State, but for a government that would permit them to continue evolving this outmoded and rotting order. This is what they are after with their proclamations about how, with this government and reforms, they can advance toward socialism. And all this is simply the unrestrained revisionism already criticized by Lenin.

On the other hand, we should look at their political theses and their congress. Regarding their political theses, they are yet to be published. I believe that in the IU--which is a front--let's not forget what we see is a re-creation of the old opportunist electoral frontism that we have seen many times in Peru. Such a front is the negation of a Party that leads, and if there is no Party of the proletariat to lead, there is no transformation, no revolution. Revolution has never been made through parliament, nor will it ever be. They are giving a facelift to old arguments already discussed in the I9605. The IU, to be concise, how do I see it? As a jumble of contradictions, of collusion and struggle. What unites them? Collusion, greed, following the road of parliamentary cretinism, reviving old failures, or using them as a card for the reaction to play, to perform a sinister role like Ebert in Germany, that vile and perverse assassin of the revolution of 1919. I believe that is what unites them. And what divides them? Their struggles, their rank and file, their appetites, and the fact that they have different masters. Therefore, they subordinate themselves to how their masters define the situation, because there are revisionists in the IU who serve the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and revisionists who serve Deng, and they are subject to what their masters and the intermediaries of their masters say. Not to mention their ties with other centers of power.

That's the crux of the problem. There are things that should make those who really want revolution think. These are those who have the duty to think if they really are for revolution. They have to break with this useless, groveling electoral front which is an obstacle, and assuming their class position, according to the class that they defend, converge in a really revolutionary front. Let them do so, and come together for real. It is not enough to call others sectarian, you have to show that you are not, and in order to do so you must first quit being an opportunist, cease being a revisionist. And forothers, they must stop trying to take us down the dead-end road of Christian Socialism. If they want revolution, let them prove it, and express it in deeds by abandoning the erroneous road they are following. Let them stop being the tails of Soviet and Chinese revisionism; that is the first thing they would have to do, aside from, I repeat, not coming to us with positions based on the road of Christian Socialism. They should really come to understand Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism; so long as they do not understand it they will not advance. Let them understand what it means to make revolution through people's war. And let them understand and open their eyes, because the truth is irrefutable, they cannot deny what all the world except them sets. They must stop being so power hungry and must explicitly accept their class limitations and accept that it is the proletariat as a class that leads through a Communist Party, and this is what mainly interests us.

Regarding the National People's Assembly, the ANP is a peculiar thing. On the one hand they say it "is the germ of power." Very well, "germ of power." I ask, are they trying to form soviets? Are they recreating the Bolivian experience at the time of Juan José Torres? Can power be created this way? To raise this supposed "germ of power" is simply and plainly to oppose the New Power that we are actually forging in the real world. On the other hand, they also say that the ANP is a "mass front." So is it a competitor of the IU, which is also a "mass front"? Okay, let them define what it is then. Is it a "germ of power" or is it a "mass front"? What is it really? Let them clearly state how power can be forged. What do we see here? Simply that the ANP is run by revisionism. There's lots of evidence. Their strikes follow the same mold and even the dates are the same as those established by the revisionists through the CGTP. Therefore revisionism is the leader here, and revolutionaries cannot follow revisionists. And those who really want revolution, I repeat, let them demonstrate it in their actions, and let them understand, first and foremost, the authentic revolutionary process of people's war that is taking place here in this country. Because as long as they don't understand it they will not be able to play the role that many of these people could very well play, people who simply have good intentions, but totally lack clarity, even though they believe the opposite is true.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, how do you see the situation in regard to the class struggle of the masses? What do you think of the existing organizations?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: As to how we see the class struggle of the masses, I'd like to start from this basic point: our people are heroic, our class, the proletariat, even more so. Since the people and the proletariat in general are persistent protagonists of the class struggle, they have never let up, nor will they ever let up, until we reach communism. I think the first thing that we must do is recognize the greatness of our people, of our proletariat. And secondly, we must recognize and be grateful for--see clearly and say firmly--that without their support, without their sustenance, we would have done nothing! Absolutely nothing! Because the masses are the ones who make history, and we believe this fervently. Just like we believe that "it's right to rebel." This is another key principle of the masses.

How do we see the masses? With the deep rejoicing of a communist, my greetings to this growing flood of arising masses who are beginning to recapture past glories, and write new pages in history. The masses have begun to participate in and will continue participating in an intense process of class struggle, and the pessimism that reigns in the IU, as Mr. Moreno, who leads the Patria Roja, himself recognizes, will not take hold among the masses, because the masses are not pessimists. Let's remember that Chairman Mao said: only the revisionists and opportunists are pessimists, the proletariat and communists are always optimists, because the future is ours--it is historically determined so long as we keep to our course. The masses will not fall into pessimism, nor have they ever done so. That is absurd, it is a slander. The masses fight, but in order to fight they need leadership, a Party, because there is no mass movement that can unfold and sustain itself, much less develop itself, without a Party to lead it.

We are filled with revolutionary joy when we see how these masses are fighting and, as their own actions show, learning from those masses already involved m the people's war. And how themasses begin to put into practice the great slogan, Combat and Resist! This is not a time to just receive, we must be gracious and give in return, and do so doubly, so as to be doubly gracious. And I think that the masses are doing that, giving really outstanding examples that make us see the brilliant future, the future the masses themselves will see. Because they are the ones who make revolution, the Party only leads them. I think this is a principle that we all know, but it's useful to repeat it.

In regard to your question about the organizations, we believe that today more than ever we have to seriously study what Lenin taught us in his work, "The Collapse of the Second International," Chapter VIII. He says that the state of the exploiters, the bourgeois state, the reactionary state, allows the existence of organizations that sustain and serve it so that it can maintain itself and survive. And what do these organizations do, in order to maintain themselves? They sell out the revolution for a mess of pottage. I believe this saying fits them like a glove. But Lenin tells us more, that the revolution can expect nothing from these organizations. The revolution has to create its own organizations in times of war and revolution like the ones we are living in now and will live in from now on. And in the future, the revolution will triumph. So Lenin tells us that we have to create new organizations that serve the revolution, even though we have to go over the heads of those who sell out the workers, of the traitors to the revolution. I believe that those are Lenin's words, they deserve immense respect from us, and should move us to profound and serious reflection. Otherwise we would not be serving our class, or the people. And we have to emphasize the urgent necessity to help everyone acquire more and more class consciousness so that they live as what they are, as the working class or as the people, with interests that are opposed to and antagonistic to the exploiters. And they should feel clearly the power that they have when their strikes stop production. And let them understand and feel and carry forward a strike as a School of warfare, as a School of communism, and continue unfolding their strikes as the main form of struggle in the economic sphere, because that is what they are. But under the present circumstances, these struggles must be inseparably linked to the conquest of Power. So let's unite the struggle for economic demands with the struggle for the seizure of Power--with the people's war. Because it is in the defense of their class interests, of the interests of the proletariat, of the people. That is what we need and that is what we believe the masses are pushing forward evermore.

In our Party, we came to the conclusion a long time ago on what we call the law of the masses, the law of incorporation of the masses into the war and into the revolution, like the one we are unfolding. And this is what applies here. The masses are joining the struggle in surges, bigger and bigger surges. This is the course that we are following and we will unite 90% of the Peruvian people. What for? So that the masses bring about the victory of the revolution and the culmination of the work that they initiated eight years ago, and have been carrying forward with their own blood. Because the revolution is theirs, it has arisen from them, from their depths. They, the masses, make history, I repeat, the Party only leads them. I believe this is true.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, in what political and social sectors does the PCP seek its allies? Do you have any affinity with political groups in the country? The opportunists claim that you are sectarian. How do you determine your united front policy? What is the strength of the Party in the countryside, in the workers' movement, among the people as a whole?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: If you will allow me, I will start from how we see the front. We have already explained how we are carrying it forward, but what we need to state clearly here is how we conceive of the united front which Chairman Mao spoke of. While I'm on the subject, let me say that it was Mao who established the laws of the front, the six laws of the front. There were no such laws before him. In accordance with these criteria of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, our goal is a front of classes, with the proletariat as the leading class, the peasantry as the main force, the petty bourgeoisie as an ally which we must pay attention to, and in particular the intellectuals, because they are necessary to the revolution, as Chairman Mao also taught us. And in this front, under certain circumstances and conditions, even the national bourgeoisie can and does participate. This is what we understand by theunited front. This front has a foundation, which is the worker-peasant alliance, forged in the countryside. We are forging it today, and have been for eight years with arms in hand. Why is the worker-peasant alliance necessary? Because without it the proletariat would not have hegemony, and this front requires a Communist Party to lead it. This is our position. We are absolutely opposed to the revisionist theory being applied in Central America, and that they want to spread elsewhere, that "everyone is revolutionary," "everyone is Marxist," "there's no need for the leadership of a Communist Party," "it's enough to simply unite everyone and base oneself on a front in order to lead a revolution." That is the negation of Marxism. It is the negation of Marx, of Lenin, and of Chairman Mao. No Marxist has disregarded the need for the leadership of a Party. Without it, how can the hegemony of the proletariat be concretized? Only through a really genuine Communist Party, that is, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Party that firmly and consistently serves the interests of the class and defends the interests of the people. This is how we see it and this is what we are forging and developing. For us the issue of the front has to do with the aforementioned thesis, that the Party is the selection of the best elements, and is the necessary leadership, but it does not make the revolution, because it is the masses who make it. Therefore, there is the need for a front to bring together 90% of the population, the immense majority. This is what we are seeking, what we are pursuing, and what we are doing.

As far as groups, we've had, at different times, links with organizations. And when we've had them, we have treated those organizations as they should be treated, as equals, and we have exchanged experiences. In some cases they have asked that the Party help them politically, and we have done so. There are various cases like that, but it is better not to mention names now.

About whether we are sectarian, please let me read what is in the document, "Desarrollar la guerra popular sirviendo a la revolución mundial" ["Develop People's War, Serving the World Revolution" TRANS.]. These are the words of our founder, and we use precisely these words because those who claim to be Mariáteguists must truly be just that. But you cannot be a follower of Mariáteg u without being a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. Mariátegui said, "We are living in a period of total ideological war. Those who represent force for renewal cannot, either by accident or chance, unite or merge themselves with those who represent conservatism or regression. There is a historical abyss between them. They speak different languages and have a different understanding of history.

"I think we should unite the like-minded, and not those who differ. We should bring together those whom history wants together. There should be solidarity between those of whom history requires solidarity. This, it seems to me, is the only possible alliance. A common understanding with a precise and effective sense of history.

"I am a revolutionary. But I believe that men who think clearly and definitively will be able to understand and appreciate each other, even while struggling against each other. The political force with whom I will never reach an understanding is the other camp: mediocre reformism, domesticated reformism, hypocritical democracy."

We adhere to this. We are not sectarian, nor are there any actions on our part that indicate that. What no one can demand of us is that we march into the swamp. Lenin taught us: if someone decides they want to head into the swamp, they have the right to do so, but not to call upon us to go into the muck with them. Lenin said, we must follow our steep and difficult road all the way to the summit, or, in other words, we must face the enemy's fire, but we will continue to advance. We are not, then, sectarians or dogmatists. We are simply communists, and we adhere to those wise words of Mariátegui. And what's more, we demand that those who claim to follow Mariátegui really follow him, and that they prove it.

As to the strength of the Party in the countryside, what I can say concretely is that the majority of our members are peasants, the vast majority. And a limitation that we have is the insufficient number of workers. This is a serious limitation, but we are making, and will continue to make, more efforts to correct it, because we need proletarian communists. The workers offer temperinl!, their steel-likequality, because this characterizes them as a class.

Moreover, we know how our strength and influence is growing among the people as a whole. We can say that the People's Guerrilla Army is made up of masses, of peasants, of workers, intellectuals, people from the petty bourgeoisie--we are talking about thousands of people. We have hundreds of People's Committees organized in Base Areas. And we exercise Power over tens of thousands of people. This is our reality. The influence of the Party is growing. We are gaining more and more influence among the masses. We are applying what Marxism espouses, teaching the proletariat, the people, the masses, by means of powerful actions that drive home the point. We believe that our growth among the masses has begun to make a big leap. This is what we can say to you. We want, and it is our task and part of our plan, to make a big leap in our work among the masses. The masses in this country need the leadership of the Communist Party. We hope that with more revolutionary theory and practice, with more armed actions, with more people's war, with more Power, we can reach the very heart of our class and the people and really win them over. What for? To serve them. That is what we want.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, other organizations either don't define or talk vaguely about socialist revolution in Peru. Why does the PCP say that the Peruvian revolution has stages? What is the democratic revolution? What will the socialist revolution be like, and what will the proletarian cultural revolutions that the PCP will lead after the defeat of the counterrevolutionary forces be like? Will they be like the ones Chairman Mao led in China?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Defining the character of a revolution is a key question. For us, in keeping with what was established in our own Party Congress, the revolution is a democratic one. Adhering to Maoism, we have been able to develop a more complete understanding of the situation in our country. We think that Peru is a semifeudal and semicolonial society in which bureaucrat capitalism has developed. Therefore, the revolution is a democratic one. We think that the democratic revolution must confront three mountains: imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism, bureaucrat capitalism, and semifeudalism. This democratic revolution demands that we undertake a people's war. That is why we have insisted on this course. This people's war is what will allow us to destroy these three mountains and seize countrywide Power, in our opinion, in the not too distant future. That depends, in the end, on the increased effort that all of us who fight in the people's war exert, and on the masses rallying more and more to the people's war. This democratic revolution must be followed immediately by a socialist revolution. I want to spell this out. Basing ourselves on what Chairman Mao taught us with great farsightedness, thinking of the situations that might arise, he tells us that the democratic revolution ends the very day that Power is seized country-wide and the People's Republic is founded. That very day and hour, the socialist revolution begins. And in the socialist revolution we have to unfold a proletarian dictatorship and thus carry forward fundamental transformations in order to develop socialism.

We think that there is a third kind of revolution. By studying Chairman Mao Tsetung and the resolutions of the CPC, we are increasingly understanding the importance of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution as the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. It is indispensable--without it the revolution cannot continue its march towards communism. We believe there will be successive cultural revolutions, but we think that those cultural revolutions will have to be forged in practice. While we should base ourselves on the Chairman's thesis and the monumental experience of the CPC, we have to apply them to our own reality--in this we are also anti-dogmatic. We cannot be mechanical, that would be going against Maoism. We think that as a Communist Party we have one goal: communism. But to get there--excuse me for reiterating--either all of us on earth will get to communism, or none of us will get there. We are totally opposed to Khrushchev's revisionist thesis, in which he talked about communism in the USSR by the year 1980. Chairman Mao reaffirmed once again that either everyone or no one will enter the stage of communism. That is why our revolution is unbreakably linked to the world revolution. That is our final and definitive goal.Everything is stages, steps, moments. We believe that the prospect for arriving at communism is a long way off. We believe that Chairman Mao Tsetung's outlook on this is correct.

EL DIARIO: They say that when the PCP seizes Power in this country, it will confiscate all kinds of property. Is this true? How will it deal with the foreign debt?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We've already seen that the Party Programme clarifies these matters. A democratic revolution like the one we are carrying forward has its targets, the three mountains we've already talked about. That is to say, that we are for breaking with imperialist, principally Yankee, domination. But at the same time, we struggle to prevent social-imperialism or any other imperialist power from ever exercising domination over us. We are for the destruction of semi feudalism, implementing the great slogan that is still valid: "land to the tiller." It is good to emphasize this, because many things are said about it. Chairman Mao stressed this slogan again and again, which for us means the destruction of semifeudal property and the distribution of the land as property to the peasantry, mainly the poor peasantry. And we are for the confiscation of bureaucrat capital, and I repeat again: this is very important because it gives the New Power an economic foundation from which to direct the economy and lead the way toward socialism. We are against those three mountains. As for the national, or middle, bourgeoisie, the policy is to respect their rights, and we adhere to this. Further than that we cannot go without changing the character of the revolution. The idea of "confiscating all property is nothing but one of the tales, one of the lies, that they have always spread against communists, as Marx so masterfully explained. To oppose communism, the reaction and the enemies of the revolution have always concocted falsehoods and lies. Since the great founder of Marxism endured all these slanders, lies, and distortions of his sagacious teachings, we believe that what is being said against our Party is nothing but a continuation of that old reactionary school and of the enemies of the revolution.

EL DIARIO: What will the Party do about the foreign debt?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Since it is imperialist property, it will be confiscated. And I think we can add that it is the only way to really get rid of this immense weight which is oppressing so many countries, and impoverishing nations and peoples. Only through revolution can this be done--there is no other way. All the other means and approaches that they raise are only aimed at getting imperialism off the hook. Furthermore, we believe historical experience bears this out.

EL DIARIO: And the Communist Party, how is it solving the land problem? And what plans are APRA and PUM implementing?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The land problem is fundamental, because this problem is really the one that is resolved through democratic revolution, apart from the other questions we've already discussed. What we carry out is the destruction of semifeudal relations of production, and the distribution of the land to the peasantry, principally the poor peasants, then the middle peasants. On the condition that there is some land left, or if it is judged to be correct, land can be given to the rich peasants, and likewise, if it is correct or necessary, we can take land from them if there is not enough land to go around. Even the landlords, as the Chairman taught, if they want to work, can earn their bread by the sweat of their brow, as the saying goes, and learn what it is to till the land and not live from simply collecting rent. This is the policy we follow.

The policy of the Party on this question has been developing. One of the important things that we have done has been to promote a movement of land invasions, a very important one was in the department of La Libertad where more than 300,000 hectares were distributed, and 160,000 peasants mobilized. Looking at all the mobilizations that we have had, this one succeeded in mobilizing the most masses. This movement was promoted in order to undermine APRA's plans, and we also carried it out in Puno; we were the ones who started the land invasions in Puno, while PUM was arguing with APRA about what to do and how to do it. This is the plain and simple truth. Later, the government was obliged to issue decrees for Puno in particular, decrees that they have not enforced. In this case, as in others in the Andean region, APRA has aimed to carry out the redistribution that Morales Bermúdezproposed when he was president. The dispute with PUM has been over how to do it, whether the government should do it alone or if other organizations would take part.

What have the government and PUM sought to do? To keep the river from overflowing its banks. This is what they've tried to do, and once more we see them doing what they did in I974, when they were the "Revolutionary Vanguard," with the "land seizures" in Apurímac where thousands of peasants were mobilized. And for what? To negotiate based on Law 17716, a corporative law of Velasco's fascism. The famous Acts of Toxama and Huancahuacho stand as proof of this. Someone should answer for this, and it would be good to refresh their memories. Did they help the regime or not? They helped it, because their analysis then was that law 17716 was a good one, and that its only shortcoming was that it was not a socialist law. This is political stupidity, because the land problem is an elementary democratic demand. And if it were not, Marxism would have to be modified on this question. This is what they are resuscitating today in collusion with APRA. Well, there are some things that get said a lot. But it would be good if, being what they are, they would put their hands on their chests and make an act of contrition and come clean as to whether they have served the enemy, even serving as informants with the result that our forces were attacked. It would be good if they thought about this. It has been proven, and we've known since the '60s, and also through a new study that we carried out in the '70s, that the simple act of getting land, if it is not linked to a people's war, to the struggle to seize Power, simply produces an incorporation into the system, and becomes a prop of the system, and the same stagnant semifeudal process continues. There is proof everywhere, Pomacocha and Ccaccamarca, in the department of Ayacucho, for example. I think that those are things we have to think about. The experiences in Apurímac in 1974, Vanguardia's "land seizures," what ends did they serve? The setting up of a corporative system, the development of the associative forms. Was this or was it not what Velasco wanted? Consequently this represented consolidation into the system, the evolution of feudalism, when the point is to demolish it, to destroy it. This is what PUM still does not understand today. Nor will they understand it. It requires analyzing things from another ideological viewpoint, from Marxism, in order to understand how to take and how to defend the land, with guns in hand. That's the point.

Furthermore, APRA has other plans. We must pay a lot of attention, especially to the plans they have for the uncultivated land of the coast, with the recent decrees, and "development plans" for those who have the ability to invest for the purpose of generating export products. And this is leading to a sham distribution and a scramble for land in Lambayeque, La Libertad, Ica, and in the Peruvian coastal region as a whole. With their recent decrees it is lawful to allot up to 450 hectares to one person. Will the poor be the ones who acquire these lands? With what money will they be able to dig wells, for example, in order to have access to water? Impossible. These are greedy plans whose results are already clear, a sham distribution. Why else are they in La Libertad? For whose benefit, if not for APRA's, and for its leaders and associates, outstanding among whom is Minister Remigio Morales Bermúdez, a partner in several big monopolist enterprises, who plays an important economic role. This does not benefit the peasantry, and on the coast there are also peasants who need land, and the land should be for them. And that's why we saw an uproar not long ago in La Libertad, condemning the plans to irrigate the land.

Other problems: the distribution of land in the jungle region, 30 thousand hectares. Who will be able to administer this land? Dionisio Romero or someone similar. A poor peasant will not be able to oversee it, much less receive it. But the land is for those who work it, mainly for the poor peasantry. On the other hand, APRA has been handed a resounding defeat in their counterrevolutionary plans in the so-called trapecio andino. And we openly say to them, as others have even said to them, that we made them see that the Andean Region exists in Peru. It is because of this that García Pérez has rediscovered his trapecio andino in order to make his own showcase. But hisperverse plans have failed, they have fallen apart, are paralyzed. If that's not true, what happened to the Cachi plan in Ayacucho? This plan was inaugurated by the man who calls himself president, who flew there in a helicopter, and with a lot of fanfare explained from the punas what he neither knows nor understands. Or the plan for Rasuwilca? We destroyed it because it was a counterinsurgency plan, and because we insist that the lands be given to the peasants who need them, mainly the poor peasants.

I also believe that mention should be made of a few other things the rondas, the peasant patrols. What have they done with these organizations the masses created to defend themselves? These organizations are now under the control of the State, the armed forces, and the police. This is clear and concrete. And it is they, the IU, who proudly approved that famous law, and today are throwing a fit over the regulations in this very law. But the regulations are derived from the law, so if you approved the law, you have to put up with the regulations. Basically, what they have done is simply facilitate what the army and the armed forces were demanding, a law to sanction the mesnadas or "defense committees" set up by them. They said that there was no legal protection for what they were doing. Well, such a law did exist, it was called the law of the peasant night patrols. Do the police use them or not? Does the army use them or not? Do the gamonales use them or not? This is the reality. They owe us an explanation for this. That much they owe us, not to mention their statutes. What are they like? Are they really Marxist? Were they drawn up based on the standpoint of our class, of the people? Don't they involve the outmoded ideology of the Incas? Don't they express a stand of Christian personalism? Don't they work in close connection with the Church? If not, why does the Church publish their documents? And when I talk about the Church, I mean the ecclesiastical hierarchy. It would be good, when you have time and you need a little diversion, to read over these regulations. They are extremely revealing.

We also denounce APRA's plans in the Alto Huallaga where, under the pretext of fighting drug trafficking, they permit the use of the deadly pesticide "Spike," which the Yankee monopolies themselves say is like a series of small atomic bombs.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, what will be the main characteristics of the New Democratic People's Republic that you and your Party propose?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Its characteristics are essentially those of a joint dictatorship. I insist on this, because in Peru we must think seriously about the problem of the State, and analyze it from the standpoint of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. And the first thing that the problem of the State raises to us is the question of the State system, or the kind of class dictatorship that is exercised. In our case, it is a joint dictatorship. Presently it is a dictatorship of only three classes, the proletariat, the peasantry and the progressives (the petty bourgeoisie). The national bourgeoisie is not taking part, but we respect their rights, this we do. The government system derived from the above is a system based on People's Assemblies. How do we carry this out in practice? As Committees. And these People's Committees grouped together form Base Areas, and the sum of the Base Areas constitutes the New Democratic People's Republic. This is what we are unfolding and will be unfolding until the end of the democratic revolution. What I would like to stress is that the Party has decided "to sow the seeds of Power" so that the people begin to exercise it, and to learn to run the State. Because once they learn to run the State they learn that this State can only be maintained by force of arms, as it is conquered so must it be defended. "Sowing the seeds of Power" requires that we sow in people's minds the need for the New Power and that people see it in practice. This is what we are doing. The people perform the overall functions of leadership, construction and planning as part of the New Democratic People's Republic. I think that's enough on this subject, because other things have already been explained in the Party's documents.

V. International Politics
EL DIARIO: Chairman, let's talk now about international politics. Since communism is your goal, how do you see the conditions for world revolution? And what problems do the communists have to resolve?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We start from the understanding that revolution is the main trend, and this continues to be so, this trend put forward by Mao continues to develop. In our view, there has been no stability since World War II, not even relative stability. The whole world has been shaken by great revolutionary storms. They've come in waves, of course, because it couldn't be any other way.

We hold that there are three fundamental contradictions in the overall situation that is unfolding. The first and principal contradiction is between the oppressed nations on one side, and the imperialist superpowers and other imperialist powers on the other. Although it may be redundant, we prefer to list them this way for the sake of clarity. This contradiction is resolved through democratic revolution, through people's war. A second fundamental contradiction is the one between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. This is resolved through socialist revolutions and proletarian cultural revolutions, but also through people's war, bearing in mind, I repeat, the type of revolution and the specific conditions of each country. A third contradiction is the inter-imperialist one, between the superpowers, between the imperialist superpowers and the imperialist powers, and among the imperialist powers themselves. These contradictions among them are resolved through aggression, and imperialist wars, and tend toward defining who will have world hegemony through a third world war.

Why do we put the contradictions in this order? Because we consider this to be their order of importance. We insist that the contradiction between the oppressed nations on one side, and the imperialist superpowers and imperialist powers on the other, is principal and of great importance for the world revolution. It has to do, in our opinion, with the weight of the masses in history. It is obvious that the great majority of the masses who inhabit the earth live in the oppressed nations. It is also evident that their population is increasing four times as rapidly as the population of the imperialist countries. We apply the principle that the masses are the makers of history, and we take into account the fact that World War II caused the masses to stand up politically (something that even reactionary U.S. analysts recognize). We think that should the inter-imperialist contradiction generate a world war, it would be a new inter-imperialist war for world hegemony and redivision of the world; and therefore it would be to divide up the spoils of war, and the spoils are the oppressed nations. They would therefore have to proceed to occupy our countries in order to rule us. And so, once again, the contradiction between the oppressed nations on one side and the imperialist superpowers and imperialist powers on the other would become principal.

We firmly believe in this, and it is not because of chauvinism or of being, as some say, inhabitants of oppressed countries or nations. It is not. This is the trend that can be seen in history, and this is the weight of the masses in history. And, moreover, facts continue to demonstrate that where imperialism is more and more being defeated and undermined is in the struggles that are being waged in the oppressed nations. Those are irrefutable facts. Therefore, we consider this principal contradiction to be of great importance, and think that it is going to be decisive in eliminating imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth, provided that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is put in command of the world revolution, that Communist Parties develop based on this ideology, and that they take up people's war again, in accordance with the type of revolution and the specific conditions.

This is the way we understand the great importance of the principal contradiction that we uphold. There are some who don't agree, and think that what's really going on is that we don't believe in revolution in the imperialist countries. We believe that these revolutions are a historical necessity and that the development of the principal contradiction provides them with more favorable conditions, and that even a world war will provide more favorable conditions for them to make revolution. And revolution will be made because it is a necessity. In the end, the two great forces, the two greatrevolutions, the democratic revolution and the socialist revolution must converge so that revolution may triumph in the world. Otherwise, it would not be possible to eliminate imperialism and reaction from the whole planet. That's what we think.

The question poses itself: what is the key point? It is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, because it is a question of having a correct ideological and political line, and you can't have a correct political line unless you have the correct ideology. For that reason, we think that the key to everything is ideology: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism. Secondly, the development of Communist Parties. Why? Because the masses thirst for revolution, the masses are ready and crying out for revolution. So the problem does not lie with them. The proletariat cries out for revolution, the oppressed nations, the peoples of the world cry out for revolution. So we need to develop Communist Parties. The rest, I repeat, will be done by the masses, they are the makers of history and they will sweep imperialism and world reaction away with people's war.

EL DIARIO: What role is U.S. imperialism playing in the world? What do you think of "Star Wars"? What about the so-called disarmament plans of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. and other European countries?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: In sum, U.S. imperialism arose after World War II as the gendarme of world reaction. But later it entered into a contest for world hegemony with social-imperialism. Thus, both of them make big plans to win hegemony. The issue of "Star Wars," or the "Strategic Defense Initiative," which is its official name, is related to this.

The U.S. government, particularly with Reagan, has started to elaborate big strategic plans that encompass decades of the next century. That is, they are thinking of their survival, and how to maintain hegemony and defeat social-imperialism. Within this, "Star Wars" is nothing but a plan that seeks to deploy a shield that would prevent missiles with atomic warheads from reaching their cities, and in turn allow them to protect themselves if they carry out an atomic attack against social-imperialism. But these are only plans and wishes, because up against one plan is another. Not long ago the Soviets retaliated by saying that there were ways to overcome this would-be shield, and consequently the supposed invulnerability of the U.S. would not exist.

As to the issue of disarmament plans between the superpowers, the U.S. and the USSR, we have to start from what Marxism as well as our own founder teaches us: the more they talk of peace, the more they prepare for war. A lot of empty talk, a lot of deceptive demagoguery is being made in relation to the disarmament agreements they've signed for the withdrawal of medium range missiles from Europe. What is being disarmed is the missile, that is the vehicle, but they keep the warhead in order to use it for whatever suits them. That is the essence of the farce.

The European powers are obviously in the line of fire of both superpowers, and if there is a world war, they would like to prevent it from taking place in Europe. That's what they want, because at bottom they are eager, as is Japan, that the two tigers fight each other so that later one of them can emerge as a great power, as the supreme ruler. Such are the dreams of Japan, West Germany, etc. But a world war would also be waged in Europe, and the two superpowers are very aware of the Europeans' desires. So the situation creates contradictions among the powers and the superpowers, which unfold as a complex process involving collusion and contention. It could not be otherwise. How these powers fight to fulfill their dreams is also evident: Japan for dominance over Asia and South America, Europe over Africa and Latin America. And they don't restrict themselves to these regions, hence their bustling about and mediations, their separate and conflicting policies, because they each defend their own interests.

We believe that these are all demagogic debates that only serve to conceal big plans involving contention for world hegemony. That is what we believe, because imperialism will not cease to exist until we sweep it away. Its essence won't change--its essence is to exploit and oppress, to reduce nations to the state of semi-colonies and, if possible, to colonies. While I'm on the subject, it's high timethat we go back to using these terms, because they are terms scientifically established by Lenin. But the point is that in the face of these plans the main thing is not simply exposing them, but getting prepared to take them on. And there is but one way to prepare, and that is by means of people's war. Chairman Mao said: we have to prepare ourselves and prepare ourselves right now against an imperialist war, and principally against a nuclear war. How will we respond? Only with people's war, in no other way. That is the most important thing. Exposing them is part of carrying out a propaganda campaign that shows the world their sinister and hideous plans for mass genocide. But this will never stop a war, as Stalin dearly stated. These campaigns never stop wars, so the only thing to do if we want to prevent war, is to develop revolution. As the Chairman taught us: either revolution will prevent world war, or world war will give rise to revolution. This, I believe, is how we should view the situation.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, what do you think about the Soviet State? Lately they've been talking a great deal about Perestroika. How do you see this question? What is your opinion of the attacks on Stalin?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Lately, the subject of Perestroika has been bandied about. Perestroika, as far as I have been able to see, because I think it is necessary to study it carefully and understand all the revisionist filth it contains, is part of this new offensive of modern revisionism that we communists are facing. Gorbachev is thoroughly revisionist, a revisionist from head to toe. He claims that the XXth Congress of the CPSU was a historical event of enormous importance in the USSR. That was the fateful Congress in which the dictatorship of the proletariat was attacked under the pretext of attacking Stalin. He admires Khrushchev, and portrays him as a great man, bold, determined, whose problem, he says, was that he fell into subjectivism, that he didn't elaborate correct plans, but overly ambitious plans that couldn't be carried out. Khrushchev was Gorbachev's teacher. And Gorbachev learned lessons from him, as well as from his other teacher, Brezhnev, even though he would like to distance himself from Brezhnev.

We have to focus on a key question with regard to Perestroika. Gorbachev himself says that Perestroika may be defined in many ways, but if we focus on "the key that expresses its essence most accurately, then we can say this, perestroika is a revolution." But there are those who don't see it that way. We have to pay very close attention to this. It is not a revolution, but a development of the counterrevolution, a more unrestrained unfolding of capitalist restoration aimed at eliminating what little remains that might serve the proletariat and people in combating social-imperialism. He says it is a revolution because it proposes an acceleration in the socioeconomic sphere, a radical change, and an advance to a new type of State. What would that new type of State be? A more shamelessly bourgeois State, structured in a new way that they have not yet found a way to define, because it has not been defined, not even in their most recent conference. So Gorbachev is completely unabashed. That's why it is useful to call attention to this term, because it is generally said that "perestroika is a restructuring, period. But Gorbachev says that the term that corresponds perfectly is "revolution," and that is a mockery, an irony, an outrageous joke.

What else does this individual put forward? He is developing Khrushchev's positions. Let's look at the question of war. He says that a world war will lead to the disappearance of humanity. In his own words, "In this war there will be neither victor nor vanquished. There will be no survivors," "If a nuclear war breaks out all living things will be obliterated from the face of the earth." And, "In a global nuclear conflict there will be neither winners nor losers, world civilization will inevitably perish." But what does he add? Allow me to read, "Politics must be based on realities. And today the most formidable world reality is the vast military arsenals, conventional as well as nuclear, of the United States and the Soviet Union. This gives our two countries a special responsibility in relationship to the whole world." What is this? Unabashedly he is telling us that his might is based on military superiority, and he brandishes it alongside the military power of Yankee imperialism, clamoring that they are all that matters in the world, and as a result, we are dependent on them. This is what he espouses, the mostshameless, blatant superpower politics that we have seen. But according to him, it is not only a nuclear war that puts humanity at risk, but conventional war as well: given the sophisticated and deadly weapons that exist today, it could bring the same results. Thus Gorbachev tries to impose on us the most monstrous policy of subjugation. Faced with this, we raise even higher Chairman Mao Tsetung's banner, "It's right to rebel."

This high Russian official's revisionist inventions lead him to propose "a new thought." Listen clearly! A "new thought" that "takes into consideration, beyond ideologies and differences, the highest interests of humanity." What happened to the formal mention of a class viewpoint? Isn't this a revival on a higher level of Khrushchev's preachings? Clearly it is. And an essential part of this "thought" is that war is no longer the continuation of politics by military means. In his own words, "Clausewitz's maxim that 'war is the continuation of politics by other means,' which was classic in its time, now turns out to be ever more desperately outdated. It is destined for the libraries." But this thesis was upheld by Lenin and reiterated by Chairman Mao in this century and it is key in the military theory of the proletariat, and we are guided by it in the people's war. Thus, Gorbachev clashes openly with Lenin, as did Khrushchev. And the so-called "new conditions" that lead to the revision of Marxist principles is an old story that has been used since the days of the old-style revisionists, so it shouldn't serve as any type of comfort to this new revisionist standard bearer according to whom, "So much the better that in the West just as in the East new thoughts and new men are emerging, men who are beginning to see how they can reach agreement, because cooperation is the only thing possible." But we say that this collusion between the two superpowers goes on so long as the conditions have not yet emerged for fighting a third world war--if we do not sweep them away first. That is the essence of things, and I believe that it is necessary to point out clearly how Gorbachev, who perversely opposes Lenin, is so brazen in his deceit that he calls himself a "follower of Lenin" who is bringing about a "return to Lenin" and "has learned a lot from Lenin." This is what he tells us, and I believe these things are very corrosive.

On the other hand, after he advocates "basing international politics on moral and ethical norms common to the whole human race," Gorbachev says, "What will happen to the military-industrial complex, they ask... to begin with, each job in the military-industrial complex costs two or three times more than in civilian industry. In place of one, we could create three jobs. In the second place, the present military sectors of the economy are connected with the civilian economy, and they do a lot to help it. This is a starting point to using their potential for peaceful purposes. In the third place, the Soviet Union and the United States could carry out extensive joint programs, pooling resources, and scientific and intellectual know-how to resolve the most diverse problems for the benefit of humanity." Thus he swaggers like Khrushchev and opposes Lenin's conception of imperialism and its economic process. Here also, as in everything, he is anti-Leninist, as is clear from his positions, similar to Deng's, separating the Party from the State and promoting economic growth more and more in the service of the bourgeoisie and imperialism.

Like the other imperialists, the social-imperialist Gorbachev proposes to combat so-called terrorism. He commits himself to this and to the use of the United Nations for this purpose as well.

Finally, I think something deserves to be said about how he sees Latin America, and Nicaragua in particular. In Nicaragua he thinks that because a dictatorship, that of Somoza, was overthrown by a popular revolution, this proves the correctness of the outlook that has guided and still guides the Nicaraguan revolution. This is extremely revealing. Concerning Latin America, his view is that the Soviets have no interest in disrupting the empire, or as they say, the relations between the U.S. and Latin America. This concerns us directly.

What do the social-imperialists of the USSR want? They are in a stage of trying to see how to resolve urgent problems. It is a moment when collusion is principal, and so they look to contain or cool off points of conflict in order to devote themselves to the development of their economic systems, while they continue making big plans to contend for world hegemony. Collusion is temporary, conflict andstruggle are absolute.

In conclusion, Perestroika is a perverse plan to continue with the modern revisionism that Khrushchev initiated. It is a new counterrevolutionary offensive of revisionism.

In regard to the attacks on Stalin, Khrushchev attacked him and so does Gorbachev, but Gorbachev has gone even further, rehabilitating those whom Stalin condemned. One of the things that should really make one think is the rehabilitation of Bukharin, as well as others. They've even recognized his status as a party member. You have to ask yourself, who's left? Only Trotsky, now he's the only one left. The attack on Stalin remains, as it has been, a pretext for deepening capitalist restoration, developing political plans to wipe out anything that may remain, and that might be of some service to the people in once again making revolution. That is their dream, but it will amount to nothing but a dream, pure and simple.

Concerning Comrade Stalin, the revisionists say a lot about him and attack him. What is deplorable is that others should do the same, accusing him of all kinds of errors and maligning him. We believe that Comrade Stalin was a great Marxist-Leninist. What Chairman Mao said about him is correct: his errors amounted to thirty percent, and the root of these errors was in his limitations in grasping dialectics. But no one can deny that he was a great Marxist. The attacks on Stalin by Gorbachev and his henchmen should make others, who claim to be communists and who also attack and denigrate Comrade Stalin, think. They should really think about these coincidences there is something important behind these attacks.

EL DIARIO: How do you see the present leaders of China? Are they in the counterrevolutionary camp? What is the way out for the Chinese people?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The present leadership of China is revisionist, and is really led by a perverse character, an old and rotten revisionist, Deng Xiaoping. During the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution he was thoroughly exposed and the world saw what he was and continues to be, an out and out revisionist, a lackey of Liu Shao-chi. It's Deng who is leading China, once a socialist country, in a rapid and all-out restoration of capitalism. It is pertinent to point out that positions espoused by Gorbachev were previously espoused by Deng, in accordance with his own conditions.

What camp are they in? China acts like a world power. This is the political road they are following, one of collusion and struggle with powers and superpowers. Their dream is to be a superpower in the next century, that's their dream. The way out of this, as in other cases, is revolution, people's war. Let's remember that Chairman Mao, towards the end of his brilliant life, said to Comrade Chiang Ching that she could carry the flag of revolution to the summit, pointing out to her, if you fail, you will fall, your body will shatter, your bones will break and then once again guerrilla war will have to be waged. He gave us the answer. It's part of a poem. I don't remember the text very well, but that's the basic idea. The central point here is that guerrilla war will have to be waged again--people's war.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, do you think there are socialist countries in the world today?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Frankly no, I don't think so. There are those who believe, for example, that Albania is a socialist country. I'd say to those who believe that Albania is socialist that they should study carefully, for example, the documents of the VIIIth Congress of the Party of Labor of Albania. That would be a good thing to study, because it says there that the center of world reaction is U.S. imperialism. And Soviet imperialism? What happened to the two enemies we have to fight? It was always just words. With Hoxha himself it was just words because he always wrote more about fighting Yankee imperialism than social-imperialism.

The same Congress also said that humanity has never been closer to its extinction than now. They repeat this just like the others, which is no mere coincidence. But what do they propose that we do? Concretely, expose imperialism. That is not the solution. Exposing imperialism will not stop a world war. The solution is to make revolution by carrying out people's war.

And if one looks at everything that is said there about the serious economic problems they have,one can see quite clearly the road that Albania has taken. However, it was not Ramiz Alia, the present leader, who chose this road, but Hoxha himself, who in 1978, in a speech before the electorate, stated that in Albania there were no antagonistic classes. We know very well what that means, because this question has been thoroughly explained by Chairman Mao Tsetung. And if we add to this his deceitful attacks on Chairman Mao, on the development of Marxism, what is he but a revisionist? Therefore Albania is not socialist.

If we look at Vietnam, the road it is following is that of an instrument of the Soviet Union that today clamors for imperialist aid with an economy in crisis and ruin. So much blood, for what? It's because there, there was Ho Chi Minh, a centrist, as can be seen in his famous testament, where he says he regrets seeing conflict within the International Communist Movement, when the question was which side he would take in the struggle between Marxism and revisionism. A communist has but one solution, to stand on the side of Marxism. Ho Chi Minh never did. Later came Le Duan, a rotten revisionist. Hence, the present situation in Vietnam.

This is why I hold that there are no socialist countries today. All this makes one reflect seriously, and come to understand the problem of restoration and counter-restoration. It's not a question that calls for lamenting or whining, as some try to promote. The point is to confront reality and understand it. And we can understand it if we grasp the question of restoration and counter-restoration that Lenin himself had put forward and that Chairman Mao masterfully developed. Historically, no new class has established itself in power all at once. Power was seized and lost, reseized and lost again until, in the midst of great contests and struggles, that class was able to win and hold Power. The same thing is happening with the proletariat. But we've been left with great lessons, including in socialist construction. And so it has been a monumental experience.

In the final analysis, it is a historical process, and what we must be concerned about is how to prevent the restoration of capitalism. And every revolution that is in progress must think, as we've been taught, about the long years ahead, the long years to come, and be confident that the process of development for the proletariat in seizing Power and establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat and defending it and leading the revolution has already been defined. There have already been great historical milestones achieved in this process, and so the prospects are that our class, learning its lessons, will seize Power and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat throughout the world, and the proletariat will not be overthrown anymore, but will continue along this road of transformation until the State is brought to an end when we enter communism.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, with the triumph of the revolution, what kind of international relations will the New State have with bourgeois governments, especially with the Yankee State and with social-imperialism?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: The situation is clear. We must put an end to the domination of Yankee imperialism over our country. At the same time we must prevent the social-imperialists from introducing their domination, as well as warding off domination by any other power. In synthesis, that's the answer to your question.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, wouldn't the danger of total isolation put the New State in a precarious position?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We believe the following: that we must keep to the path that will lead us to the emancipation of our class, the path that will take us to communism. And this path demands that we maintain our independence, so as to fulfill the interests of the proletariat in the world revolution. We believe, as is known, that there are disputes and contradictions among the imperialists, and these can be made use of, for example, to acquire certain resources. Since the market is getting tighter and tighter, and there is a real trade war, we may find those who will sell to us. Of course, they will demand an exorbitant price and, as Lenin said, we will pay them with our curses. But at the same time, there are oppressed nations, revolutions in progress, there is the international proletariat, there arethe people throughout the world, and Communist Parties--they will help us and we will have to learn, because based on proletarian internationalism they will respond to our call and they will be well received. We are already seeing how ties between backward countries have been initiated, even how barter is used. We will find the appropriate forms.

We have not studied this question sufficiently, because it involves problems that will pose themselves in the future. We have general guidelines, but we agree with what Lenin said: You want to know what war is like? Wage it. And let us have inexhaustible confidence in the international proletariat, in the oppressed nations, in the people of the world; and most particularly in the communists, in the parties and organizations, whatever their level of development. Holding fast to our ideology, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, we will advance, even if we begin by feeling our way in the dark, finding temporary solutions for certain situations or for brief periods of time, until we find the definitive one. As Lenin taught us, no revolution can be planned out completely ahead of time. And many times it must grope its way forward uncertainly, finding temporary or momentary solutions but that's how it advances. This is our approach, because our fundamental weapon is our ideology. We take what Marx said as our starting point: how easy it would be to undertake a revolution if we were absolutely certain of winning and having the whole problem resolved it would be easy, but revolution is not like that. The question is to commit ourselves to it and carry it forward, no matter what the cost. Since the masses are the makers of history, our people will rise to the occasion, and since it falls to us to arm them with the overall weapon Marx has given us, then we will defend our State by force of arms, because no revolutionary State can maintain itself on the good graces of imperialism and reaction. And in this way, with this firmness, with this determination, with the conviction that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, gives us, we will find the way, and we will find new roads.

Chairman Mao has taught us that we must think in new ways and generate new forms; this is a fundamental question. He laid out that, in economic matters, the question comes down to a clear political line, organizational forms, and great efforts. In regard to all problems, especially those we face that have not yet been resolved, we begin with a firm Maoist conviction that while there are Communist Parties and masses all manner of miracles will be achieved.

EL DIARIO: How does the PCP see proletarian internationalism today, and in the future?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: First of all, we see it as a principle, a very important principle, because, as I'll say again, the proletariat is an international class and we communists are internationalists, because in no other way can we serve communism. Our Party has always been concerned with training its members, its fighters, and the masses in proletarian internationalism, concerned with educating them in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, to serve the world revolution and to fight untiringly and unswervingly so that communism may flower on earth.

For a time we lost our links with other Parties. Later on, those ties were reestablished, and we are contributing in struggling for the International Communist Movement, which is why we are members of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement which we consider to be a step in the regrouping of the genuine communists. We think that this is a complex task, because, if it is complex and difficult to form a Party and carry it forward, how much more complex will it be to struggle so that the communists, through their different parties and organizations, can unite. We know that this is an enormous but indispensable task. We believe there are those who concur, who struggle; and we are struggling, with all the limitations we might have, to see that proletarian internationalism may again bring together the communists in the world to struggle jointly for the realization of our final goal. We understand that the problem is extremely complex and difficult, but we communists are made for this kind of task.

EL DIARIO: How do you, Chairman Gonzalo, analyze the different struggles being waged today in the oppressed nations? How do you analyze the armed actions in Europe, and the various national movement?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: There are numerous struggles in the oppressed nations. There are struggles in Africa, in Latin America, and in Asia, a region of such importance and weight in the world. Asia always deserves our very special attention because of the weight of the masses in history, and because of what Marxism itself has taught us. We think that the problem with the struggles in the oppressed nations lies in the lack of or insufficient development of the Communist Parties. Yes, some Parties really are going to have to make great contributions. We believe, on the other hand, that the question is that people's wars are not being developed. Consequently, we see the need to persevere in contributing to putting Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in command of the world revolution, so on that basis powerful Parties can be formed and lead people's wars. We see this as the biggest limitation.

There are nationalist movements in the Middle East, Palestine concretely, in South Africa, etc. But we believe that these revolutions, in order to really follow the path opened up by the new era initiated by the October Revolution, must develop Communist Parties, because without them the revolution cannot go all the way. Africa has given us several examples of this. In Algeria, for example, there was an armed struggle, and a very fierce one, but socialism was never built because they had no Communist Party to lead a real revolutionary struggle. Without Communist Parties, nationalist movements develop that seek simply to be recognized as nations, in order to change from being colonies to being semi-colonies, while remaining dependent on imperialism, or, in other cases, changing masters. We have seen this in various movements tied to England and France, for example. In other cases, armed struggles are developed that the United Nations resolves, deciding what will happen, like in Cyprus. So the point is not simply waging armed struggle. The heart of the matter is people's war, a Communist Party and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Nevertheless, all these movements give strength to the struggle against imperialism, but they will only serve to completely wipe it out if they are led by a Communist Parry waging a people's war.

As for the armed actions in Europe, we've seen protracted armed struggles. They are an expression of objective reality. Therefore, the task is not to condemn them, but to understand, study, and analyze them to see how they are an expression of the fact that there is also a revolutionary situation in old Europe. And beyond that, that there are those who have taken up arms, understanding that that is the only way to seize Power. This is a powerful blow to revisionism, because in Europe itself, considered to be one of their bastions, revisionism is beginning to be abandoned. Regardless of the level reached, and the problems that remain to be solved, this is undeniably an important advance.

In some cases, the national question is involved, as in Ireland. In other cases, the issue of how to make their revolution is raised. We believe that these struggles must be studied seriously. The problem is in understanding what their ideology is, what politics guides them, what class they serve, and how they approach the question of the superpowers. We believe that they deserve a lot of attention, especially when there are organizations that propose taking up Mao Tsetung again, or that are starting to raise the need for a Party, or that the armed struggle alone is not enough. We must look at this as a new awakening and understand that they might make a lot of mistakes when you get right down to it, who doesn't? But they themselves will sum up lessons from their errors, as they are doing, they'll advance, grasp Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and form Parties and wage people's war in accordance with the socialist character of their revolution and in accordance with their specific conditions.

In sum, to repeat, it is proof that in Europe, too, there is a revolutionary situation developing unevenly. There are people who are sick and tired of rotten revisionism who, in such difficult conditions, within the belly of imperialism where the struggle is complex and difficult, are taking up arms to change the world, which is the only way it can be done. This provides more hope, and helps us see that the main trend is revolution, and to see how Europe is also turning toward revolution. Let's also recognize that, after having been pioneers in the past, they are opening up a path and, in the end, providing more hope. And they deserve greater understanding from us since there are already thosewho are concerned about the Party and are taking up Mao Tsetung again. That is, they want to return to Marxism and to grasp it completely as Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. These struggles being waged in Europe also have their limitations and errors, as all struggles do, but we should see them as an expression of the irrepressible advance of revolution and how more and more countries and peoples are coming forward to take up arms to overthrow the existing order. They are summing up experience, and setting their course toward the Party and the ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism.

For me, seeing revolution begin to open a path in Europe is reason to rejoice. And regardless of possibly stumbling and falling along the way, we must have confidence in the masses and in the peoples--confidence that, as in other places, they will make revolution with arms in hand, following Marxism. They will do it there as well, that is how we must think. I emphasize that we must see this in historical perspective, take a long-term view, study these movements seriously, and encourage everything that tends towards Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, forging a Party and developing people's war.

EL DIARIO: What is your opinion of Nicaragua and Cuba?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I would like to state what I said once when I was talking about these problems with some friends. Nicaragua carried out an incomplete revolution and their problem is that they didn't destroy the power of the whole big bourgeoisie. They focused on being anti-Somoza. I believe that is one problem. A democratic revolution must wipe out the three mountains, and in Nicaragua that has not been done. Another thing is that the revolution has developed within the Cuban framework, readjusted in recent years. And this simply leads, in the end, to dependence on the Soviet Union. How can we prove this? Because the fate of Nicaragua, like Afghanistan or the Middle East, is discussed, manipulated, and dealt with in conversations between representatives of the two superpowers. The moves and countermoves they have made are indicative--the measures that are adopted in Nicaragua with regard to the "contras" coincide closely with meetings and agreements between the superpowers.

We believe that Nicaragua, in order to follow the correct path that the heroic Nicaraguan people certainly deserve, must develop the democratic revolution completely, and this demands a people's war. They must break with dependence on the Soviet Union, take their destiny in their own hands, and defend their independent class interests. This requires a Party which, of course, adopts a proletarian outlook. Otherwise, they will, lamentably, continue being a pawn. We believe that the Nicaraguan people have demonstrated a great fighting spirit, and their historic destiny can lie nowhere but in developing the revolution as it must be developed, with a Party based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and people's war, developing independently without the tutelage of any power, whether it be a nearby or distant one.

About Cuba, I can only say this concretely, they play a role in the service of the Soviet Union, not only in Latin America, but also in Angola, for example, and in other places. Cuba changed hands, from one master to another, by a process that the Cubans themselves call exceptional. One must recall clearly the basis that they laid out to guide their struggle: that there is no clear differentiation of classes, and what is needed, in sum, is a collection of saviors to redeem the oppressed. We've seen this along with the four following points in documents that are circulating in Peru. The problem here is not taking the class struggle as their starting point: "socialist revolution or a caricature of revolution," which means upholding a one stage revolution in the oppressed countries; a united front of three classes without the national bourgeoisie; no need for a Communist Party, which means dismissing the leadership of the proletariat; and the negation of people's war starting with rejecting the need for Base Areas. These ill-fated principles are propagated by the Cubans.

Cuba has a big responsibility in America, because it provided hope. But we must remember very clearly what happened in 1970. Fidel Castro said that the strategy of armed struggle had failed, and he sought to abandon what he had encouraged and supported. Douglas Bravo confronted him, counteringthat the strategy had not failed, but Castro's tactics had. But, unfortunately later Bravo chose to accept amnesty. We believe all of this has generated a lot of problems in the Americas, but today these same criteria, readjusted to the dictates of the social-imperialist master, are being propagated and presented as a new revolutionary development being applied concretely in Nicaragua. This is false. What we must and do affirm is that Latin America is (and has been) ripe for people's war, and that is its road. Latin America has an important role to play. Let's not forget that it's "the U.S.'s backyard" according to the arrogant Yankee imperialists. Latin America also has an importance for the world which it will realize if it grasps the ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, forges Communist Parties and carries forward people's wars as part of the world revolution.

We Latin Americans will number over 500 million at the end of this century. There is much that unites us, and we must work together because of this closeness, which doesn't mean that we can detach ourselves from the world revolution, because we can only carry out our task as part of the world revolution. Latin America is not enough. Communism is for the whole world or for no one.

EL DIARIO: What is the Communist Party of Peru's contribution to the world revolution?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Our main contribution is to uphold Maoism as the new, third, and highest stage of Marxism, committing ourselves to help put this ideology in command of the world revolution, and as part of this to demonstrate the validity and all-encompassing perspective of Maoism. Also, to demonstrate that if one sustains oneself by relying on one's own efforts, maintaining independence from the superpowers or any other imperialist power, it is possible to make revolution, and what's more, it is necessary to do it that way. And to demonstrate the power of people's war, which makes itself felt despite all our limitations. And if possible, to provide, as some have said, hope, which implies responsibility- to be a beacon for the world revolution, an example that can serve other communists. In this way we are serving the world revolution.

Other Points
EL DIARIO: Chairman, we have come to the end of this interview. We've been talking with you for more than 12 hours. Now we'd like to talk about you personally, about Dr. Abimael Guzmán Reinoso. Was there anyone among your family or friends who influenced you in the development of your vocation and ability in politics?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I'd say that what has most influenced me to take up politics has been the struggle of the people. I saw the fighting spirit of the people during the uprising in Arequipa in 1950--how the masses fought with uncontainable fury in response to the barbarous slaughter of the youth. And I saw how they fought the army, forcing them to retreat to their barracks. And how forces had to be brought in from other places in order to crush the people. This is an event that, I'd say, has been imprinted quite vividly in my memory. Because there, after having come to understand Lenin, I understood how the people, how our class, when they take to the streets and march, can make the reactionaries tremble, despite all their power. Another thing was the struggles of 1956, when the people fought, while others betrayed them--well, that is what the opportunists and reactionaries do--but the people fought and carried the day, and there were mass movements, powerful ones. These events, for example, helped me understand the power of the masses, that they make history.

I also had the occasion, going back a little further now, to see the uprising in Callao in 1948, to see with my own eyes the people's courage, how the people were brimming with heroism, and how the leadership betrayed them. And going back even further in my memory, I believe that World War II affected me profoundly. Yes, I remember, if that's possible, not very clearly--but as if in a dream--when the war began in September of I939, the uproar and the news on the old radios. I remember the bombing, the important news. I remember the end of the war too, and how it was celebrated with the blast of ships' horns, loudspeakers, a great clamor and happiness because World War II had ended.

I had a chance to see the so-called big five in the newspapers, and Comrade Stalin was among them. So I'd say that these events left their mark on me, and impressed upon me in an elemental and confused way the idea of power, of the masses, and of the capacity of war to transform things. All these things exerted an influence on me. I believe that like every communist I am the child of the class struggle and of the Party.

EL DIARIO: At what age did you take up Marxism? Were you still in school, or were you at the university?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: My interest in politics began to develop at the end of high school, based on the events of I950. In the following years, I remember forming a group with my schoolmates to study political ideas. We were very eager to study all kinds of political ideas. You can probably understand what kind of period that was. That was the beginning for me. Then in college, the struggle at the university, I experienced firsthand big strikes, confrontations between Apristas and communists, and debates. And so my interest in books was sparked. Someone saw fit to lend me one, I believe it was "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back." I liked it, I began to study Marxist books. Then the figure of Comrade Stalin made a big impression on me. At that time people who were drawn to communism and those who became Party members were trained using Problems of Leninism. It was our mainstay and I studied it as it deserved to be studied, seriously, given its importance. Stalin's life interested me. He was, for us, an example of revolution. I had problems getting into the Communist Party. They had an absurd policy. To become a member, you had to be the son or daughter of a worker, and I wasn't. But others had different criteria and so I was able to join the Party. I participated in the defense of Stalin. At that time, taking him away from us would have been like taking away our soul. In those days, the works of Stalin were more widely propagated than those of Lenin. That's what the times were like.

Later I made a trip to Ayacucho for work reasons. I thought it would be a short stay, but it lasted for years. I thought it would just be for a year, because that's what the arrangements were. I had my plans, the proletariat had others. The masses and the people change us in many ways; Ayacucho helped me discover the peasantry. At that time, Ayacucho was a very small town, mainly countryside. If you go to the poor sections, even today, you find peasants there, and if you walk towards the outskirts, in fifteen minutes you're already in the countryside. There too, I started to understand Chairman Mao Tsetung, I advanced in understanding Marxism. The conflict between Marxism and revisionism has been very important in my development.

Some unlucky soul lent me the famous Chinese letter, "A Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement." He lent it to me on the condition that I'd return it. Obviously it was an understandable theft. The letter led me to get more deeply into the great struggle between Marxism and revisionism.

I committed myself to work within the Party and to wipe out revisionism, and I believe that together with other comrades we achieved it. We gave up on one or two who were too far gone, they were dyed-in-the-wool revisionists. Ayacucho was of enormous importance for me, it has to do with the revolutionary road and Chairman Mao's teachings. So through this whole process I was becoming a Marxist, and the Party was molding me, resolutely and patiently, I believe.

EL DIARIO: Many people know that you've been to China. Did you ever meet Chairman Mao?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I was not that fortunate. I was only able to see him from a distance. But I saw the recognition and deep affection of the people for a great Leader, an extraordinary Marxist, a pinnacle of Marxism. I didn't have the good fortune of meeting him, as I said. The delegation I belonged to made a lot of errors and demonstrated some foolish arrogance. I think that kept them from granting us that privilege.

Yes, I've been to China. In China I had the chance, which I'd like to see many have, of being in a school where politics was taught, from international questions to Marxist philosophy. They were masterful lessons given by proven and highly competent revolutionaries, great teachers. Among them Ican remember the teacher who taught us about open and secret work, a man who had devoted his whole life to the Party, and only to the Party, over the course of many years--a living example and an extraordinary teacher. He taught us many things, and he wanted to teach us more but some didn't accept it--after all, there are all sorts of people in this life. Later, they taught us about military questions. But here they also began with politics, people's war, then the forging of the armed forces, strategy and tactics. And then the practical part that went with it, like ambushes, attacks, military movements, as well as how to assemble explosive devices. When we were handling delicate chemicals they urged us to always keep our ideology first and foremost, because that would enable us to do anything, and do it well. We learned to make our first demolition charges. For me it is an unforgettable example and experience, an important lesson, and a big step in my development--to have been trained in the highest school of Marxism the world has ever seen.

Well, if you'd like an anecdote, here's one. When we were finishing the course on explosives, they told us that anything can explode. So, at the end of the course, we picked up a pen and it blew up, and when we took a seat it blew up, too. It was a kind of general fireworks display. These were perfectly calculated examples to show us that anything could be blown up if you figured out how to do it. We constantly asked, "How do you do this? How do you do that?" They would tell us, don't worry, don't worry, you've already learned enough. Remember what the masses can do, they have inexhaustible ingenuity, what we've taught you the masses will do and will teach you all over again. That is what they told us. That school contributed greatly to my development and helped me begin to gain an appreciation for Chairman Mao Tsetung.

Later, I studied some more and I have tried to apply it. I think I still have a great deal to learn from Chairman Mao Tsetung, from Maoism, as well as from Mao's practice. It isn't about trying to compare myself to him, it is simply using the highest pinnacles as a reference point for achieving our objectives. My stay in China was an unforgettable experience. I was there on another occasion as well, when the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was beginning. We asked them to explain what was then called Mao Tsetung Thought. They taught us some more and that helped me understand more, a little more I should say. One thing that seems ironic is that the more I understood Mao Tsetung, the more I began to appreciate and value Mariátegui. Since Mao urged us to apply creatively, I went back and studied Mariátegui again, and saw that we had in him a first rate Marxist-Leninist who had thoroughly analyzed our society. It seems ironic, but it's true.

EL DIARIO: How does it feel to be the man most wanted by the repressive forces of the government?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: It feels like you re doing your job and working hard at it. What remains is to shoulder more responsibility for the revolution, the Party, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, for our class, the people and the masses. And to always understand that we carry our lives on our fingertips. If that weren't so, we couldn't be communists. So they have their reasons. Mine are those established by the Party, to which I wish to be more and more true and useful, because life can become entangled anywhere along the road, moreover it has a beginning and an end, more time, less time.

EL DIARIO: Is there anything you're afraid of?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Fear? I believe that fear and lack of fear form a contradiction. The point is to take up our ideology, and unleash the courage within us. It is our ideology that makes us brave, that gives us courage. In my opinion, no one is born brave. It is society, the class struggle, that makes people and communists courageous--the class struggle, the proletariat, the Party, and our ideology. What could the greatest fear be? Death? As a materialist I know that life will end some day. What is most important to me is to be an optimist, with the conviction that others will continue the work to which I am committed, and will carry it forward until they reach our final goal, communism. Because the fear that I could have is that no one would carry on, but that fear disappears when one has faith in the masses. I think that the worst fear, in the end, is not to have faith in the masses, to believethat you're indispensable, the center of the world. I think that's the worst fear and if you are forged by the Party, in proletarian ideology, in Maoism principally, you understand that the masses are the makers of history, that the Party makes revolution, that the advance of history is certain, that revolution is the main trend, and then your fear vanishes. What remains is the satisfaction of contributing together with others to laying the foundation so that some day communism may shine and illuminate the entire earth.

EL DIARIO: What do you do when you're not busy with politics and the war? What books do you read?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Many times I don't have time to read what I'd like to. What do I like to read? I read a lot of biographies. I think that literature is a great form of artistic expression. For instance, I like to read Shakespeare, yes, and to study him. When you study Shakespeare you find political issues. There are very clear lessons in Julius Caesar for example, and in MacBeth. I like literature, but politics always wins out with me, and leads me to look for the political significance, what is behind it. After all, behind every great artist there is a political leader, there is a man of his time who is waging class struggle. I have also read Peruvian novels and sometimes I reread them.

I once read a short work by Thomas Mann about Moses. Afterwards, we used it to help us politically interpret a struggle in which we were involved at the time. One part of this work says that one can break the law, but not negate it. How did I interpret this? To break the law is to go against Marxism, to deviate, to have wrong ideas. That is permissible, but one cannot allow Marxism to be negated. I think it is possible to learn many things. I read Broad and Alien is the World, and All the Races [Todas las Sangres--TRANS.], and I have studied them as well. I like literature and music. Before I liked music more, now I enjoy it less. What other interests? I like science, books about science. In my early days at the university, I studied law because I had to have a profession. But I liked philosophy and I devoted myself to it. Through philosophy I discovered science. I spent a lot of time studying questions of mathematics and physics. In my opinion, physics is an extraordinary science. It is quite fitting to call it "an adventure of the mind." The problem with science is that scientists, whose starting point is a materialist one, are good so long as they stay within the realm of science, but when they start to get into philosophy or other areas, if they are not materialists, they fall into idealism. This happened even with Einstein. I like science, I think it is extraordinary. This inclination for science can be seen in the thesis that I wrote for my degree in philosophy. It is an analysis of time and space according to Kant, from a Marxist point of view, using mathematics and physics. I would like to read it again, because there's no time now to go back and study all that again. But I don't even have a copy.

EL DIARIO: Do you like poetry as well?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: Yes. At one time I was surveying world poetry in an anthology. And I studied it before, too--there were some works at the university library that I had access to. I like poetry. It is another one of the things I admire about Chairman Mao, who was an extraordinary poet. As to Peruvian poetry, for me, Vallejo. Yes, he is ours, and besides, he was a communist.

EL DIARIO: Some say that your speeches, "The Flag" and "Initiate the Armed Struggle in 1980" are beautiful political poems of war. What do you say about that, Chairman?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: I'd say that sometimes in politics you have to let yourself go, so that the passion, the deep feelings, can strengthen our determination. At such times, so they say, the heart speaks and I believe that the revolutionary passion which is indispensable for war expresses itself. What literary value it might have I couldn't really say.

EL DIARIO: Do you ever get depressed?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: No. I believe that I've got an almost built-in optimism. And I occupy myself more with problems of understanding and conviction than with problems of feelings or depression. On the contrary, I think that I am quite optimistic. It is Marxism, Chairman Mao, who has made us understand that people, especially communists, are optimists. Whenever I find myself in a difficult situation I strive to look for its positive aspect or for what potential for development may stillexist within that situation, because nothing is completely black, nor is anything completely red. Even if there were to be a big defeat, even though we have not had one yet, there would always be a positive aspect. The point is to draw out the lessons, and continue to do our work based on the positive aspect. You will always find someone to support you, to lend their ardent enthusiasm and assistance to the struggle, because communism unites people.

EL DIARIO: Do you have friends?

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: No, I don't. I have comrades. And I am very proud of having the comrades I have.

EL DIARIO: Chairman, we have reached the end of this interview.

CHAIRMAN GONZALO: We have worked very hard and I thank you for your efforts. I very much appreciate the difficulties you've had to go through in order to meet with me and be able to publish this first interview, which will reach the people through El Diario, a newspaper that has fought tenaciously to serve the people. Thank you very much.

EL DIARIO: Thank you, Chairman.

July, 1988
——————————

——————————
1990 - Elections, no! People's war, yes!
Contents
1 ELECTIONS, NO! PEOPLE'S WAR, YES!
1.1 CHAPTER 1. ELECTIONS ARE CRUCIAL TO REACTION.
1.2 CHAPTER 2. THE POLITICAL CRISIS INCREASES. THE CONTRADICTIONS DEEPEN.
1.3 CHAPTER 3. THE BOYCOTT DEVELOPS THE PEOPLE'S TENDENCY AGAINST THE ELECTIONS AND SERVES THE PEOPLE'S WAR.
1.4 I. GUERRILLA ACTIONS. PLANS AND CAMPAIGNS DURING NINE YEARS OF PEOPLE'S WAR.
1.5 COMBAT ACTIONS AND ARMED STRIKE.
1.5.1 AGITATION AND PROPAGANDA.
1.5.2 SABOTAGES
1.5.3 SELECTIVE ANNIHILATION.
1.5.4 GUERRILLA COMBATS.
1.5.5 ARMED STRIKE.
1.5.6 PLAN OF STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT
1.5.7 THEATER OF OPERATIONS
1.6 PLANS AND CAMPAIGNS OF THE PEOPLE'S WAR
1.6.1 CONCRETE ACTIONS
1.6.2 AYACUCHO: The Heroic Struggle
1.6.3 APURIMAC: Area of Intense Confrontation
1.6.4 HUANCAVELICA: Place of Devastating Ambushes
1.6.5 THE CENTRAL REGION.
1.6.6 THE HUALLAGA VALLEY.
1.6.7 THE SOUTH.
1.6.8 THE NORTH
1.6.9 ABOUT THE NEW POWER.
1.6.10 THE REACTIONARY DREAM "SPLIT IN SENDERO".
1.6.11 THE BOYCOTT: AN UNDENIABLE SUCCESS
1.7 CHAPTER 4. ELECTIONS, NO! PEOPLE'S WAR, YES!
1.7.1 PROGRAM
ELECTIONS, NO! PEOPLE'S WAR, YES!
CHAPTER 1. ELECTIONS ARE CRUCIAL TO REACTION.
As the recent Session of the Central Committee, celebrating the victorious 10th ANNIVERSARY OF THE PEOPLE'S WAR, concluded, Peruvian reaction and its master, Imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism, needs to reinvigorate bureaucratic capitalism, once again restructure the old State, and annihilate the People's War. Those are their needs and their dreams because bureaucratic capitalism is experiencing its most profound economic crisis up to now, sinking the whole of Peruvian society into its deepest crisis ever. Its state, the obsolete dictatorship of the big bourgeoisie and landowners, restructured in 1978 for the third time this century, is still a rotten military- bureaucratic machine, more oppressive and bloody, the more impotent it becomes with the development of the People's War. Because the People's War, over these ten victorious years, mainly supported by the masses of poor peasants and under the leadership of the Party, has achieved the really thrilling prospect of conquering power throughout the country for the proletariat and the people. Reaction and the imperialists design new plans and actions, which inevitably will give more momentum to the class struggle, developing the struggle of the masses and raising the People's War to its highest expression.

The above is happening at a time when the superpowers and the powers, all of them imperialist or social-imperialist, in collusion and contention, stir up the contradictions on a global level (oppressed nations versus superpowers and imperialist powers; superpowers versus themselves and other imperialist powers; and the bourgeoisie versus the proletariat; of the three, the first is the principal contradiction); thus developing collusion and contention for areas of domination and a new partition of the world, which entails new defined wars, regional and worldwide in perspective, despite all the sweet talk about pacifism aimed at once more stupefying the world. Within these circumstances, from the middle of the last decade, a new counterrevolutionary revisionist offensive is developing led mainly by Gorbachov and Teng Xiao-ping (Deng). This offensive has intensified lately, and is acting colluded with the imperialist offensive against Marxism, loudly voiced again the presumed and widely publicized "obsolescence of Marxism." Thus, the collusion and contention of both imperialism and revisionism, and in this case mainly the collusion, are clearly seen in their sinister attacks against Marxism-Leninism- Maoism. Under international conditions in which revolutionary struggles, and increasingly the People's War acquires greater transcendence in the oppressed nations, they become the base of the world proletarian revolution as the main tendency in world history. This is a complex reality materialized in facts as it is happening in the country, like Eastern Europe with its contention between the decomposition of revisionism and the scramble for imperialist spoils, or Nicaragua whose incomplete democratic revolution has wrecked in the waters of black prospects, or the dialogue of M-19 in Colombia, with such instructive results, to name just a few.

Finally, there is the so-called "legitimization" as a political objective of the counterinsurgency war, in its form known as "low intensity warfare," which seeks governments produced by elections as a mean of providing them with "legitimacy" and "authority," which should be recognized as such by the people. In addition, according to them, they would "serve to satisfy the needs of the people." In that way, elections are but a tool of the counterrevolutionary war.

All this makes the 1990 general elections vital to the interests of Peruvian reaction and imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism.

CHAPTER 2. THE POLITICAL CRISIS INCREASES. THE CONTRADICTIONS DEEPEN.
In, "Against Constitutionalist Illusions and for the State of a New Democracy," the Party said:

"ON THE ELECTIONS. Marx pointed out: 'Every few years the oppressed are authorized to decide which members of the oppressor class will represent and crush them in parliament!' And that is even more true when the elections are to approve constitutions. Thus, elections are merely the method to renew the government administration of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in capitalist societies, and this happens even in the most democratic government we could imagine, and they are the usual means to preserve and develop capitalism.

In the landowning-bureaucratic States of Latin America, when elections have fulfilled their function of a changing of the guard, and at times during which the electoral norms of the bourgeois-democratic system are respected, election is just a tool of domination by the semi-feudal landowners and big capitalists, whether the renewal is done at standardized periods as lately in Colombia, or to end a period of military rule as also lately happened in Argentina, these are few examples of many in which our America is so prolific.

"The above can be demonstrated for this country. Although with important interruptions to the periodic electoral processes by military rulers -interruptions linked on the one hand to the development of the People's War and, on the other, to the contradictions between the landowners and the big bourgeoisie, and between the comprador bourgeoisie and the democratic bourgeoisie. Highlighting that the military governments themselves have been instrumental in implementing elections, be it to legalize its own situation, or to end its rule, or to guarantee them- elections in Peru have helped to preserve or develop the character of Peruvian State, the formal republic, the dictatorship of the semi-feudal landowners and the big bourgeoisie. Thus, elections have been, as couldn't be otherwise within the established social order, a tool first in the hands of the comprador bourgeoisie and then in the hands of the bureaucratic bourgeoisie. This has been the main characteristic in the electoral processes of the Peruvian State during this century, which has determined the class character of elections in this country.

"These fundamental matters establish the following:

1. The Peruvian State is landowning-bureaucratic, a dictatorship of a feudal landowners and big bourgeoisie, under ultimate control by Yankee imperialism; against whom the people struggle for the construction of a State of new democracy, which requires the destruction of the existing old order. 2. The Peruvian State, like every State, sustains, defends and develops itself by the use of violence, in the face of which the people need revolutionary violence, following the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside. 3. The elections are means of domination by the landowners and big bourgeoisie. For the people they are neither instruments of transformation nor a means to overthrow the power of the current rulers. Therefore, the correct orientation is using them only as a means of agitation and propaganda."

That was said in 1978 and it is still valid. Let's point out that the elections of 1980 and 1985 proved it with facts. Thus, within this function of elections in Peru, similar to that of other countries, and being as they are crucial to reaction, the 1990 general elections showed and developed themselves in defense of the obsolete existing order and evolution of Peruvian society. It was in this context that parties like APRA, IS (Socialist Left), IU (United Left), FREDEMO and CAMBIO 90 sustained and defended very similar objectives and goals which only differ in form and means of utilization.

The mobilization of troops for the elections amounted to 300,000 members of the police and armed forces, the largest ever for an election, as the State itself has recognized. In addition, they added tension and put into motion all State institutions; they unleashed an all-out campaign aimed not just at capitalizing votes but to pressure the people into voting and fighting against the People's War; all of that besides the most vile and low demagoguery. Let's highlight clearly how the open intervention by the Catholic Church in Peruvian politics is increasing by the day, as shown in these elections; but at the same time we must see with concern the role of the evangelicals in these elections, and behind which is the invisible hand of Yankee imperialism. Thus, while the armed force is still the big elector and warrantor, the so-called "spiritual power" of the Church rises more and more as political power. These elections show more clearly than others held previously in the country that "everything is valid in order to win elections," and how reactionaries, in their own intestine fights, are capable of snatching from the rest of the pack the best parts in the interests of their own groups or factions. So, what would they not do in their struggle against the people and the revolution? The current general elections have set on their way two additional reactionary offspring: racism and religious struggle. The first is a nefarious fly-by-night ideology of purported superiority, which are totally opposed to the forging of a nationality in formation like ours, and the second, the religious struggle, is a sinister utilization of religion not just as an instrument in the class struggle, which it really is, but to pit masses against masses, derail the people's struggle and fetter the advancing revolution, the People's War. But not only have those foul elements been put into motion; the reaction and the classes, factions and groups that compose it, maneuver perversely with the threat of a coup d'etat, its useful instrument, while cynically declaiming themselves in favor of bourgeois democracy. All that, in addition to well- known machinations, tricks, chicanery and fraud at the vote counting, take place along with repression and genocide in the countryside. In that manner the electoral process smells of the dense foul odors of fascism.

Based on the review of data from the "Total compilation of the April 14 general elections," by the National Board of Elections and of the "National Consolidated Presidential Results" published by the same body (JNE) on May 11, 1985, the results are shown below as well as others in which we will refer to later on:


GENERAL RESULTS
Registered Voters	9,983,400
Not Voting	2,116,600
Voting	7,866,800
The table shows that those not voting are 21.2 % of the registered and 27% of those voting.

VOTING PERCENTAGES
FREDEMO	27.6
CAMBIO 90 (Fujimori)	24.6
APRA	19.1
IU (United Left)	6.9
IS (Socialist Left)	4.0
Others	2.2
Null and Blank	15.3
The very low vote obtained by the first two candidates stands out. Neither one of them, Vargas Llosa or Fujimori, reached even 30% of the votes cast; very far, then, from the 50% plus one votes their constitution demands to assume the presidency. It was also very clear, and we will return to it later on, that absenteeism, simply staying away from the polls, has increased noticeably, reaching 21.2% of the registered and 27% of the voters; that is, the highest vote getter only obtained 0.6% more than absenteeism. There you see the self-proclaimed triumph of the so-called "democracy" and their purported defeat of the so-called "terrorism!"

The 19% APRA vote implied the bankruptcy of their "traditional third," which they bragged about for decades; however, their parliamentary contingent allowed them to continue fulfilling their nefarious role in Peruvian history.

On another side, the self-proclaimed "United Left" and "Socialist Left" were crushed by the same electoral process they worship so much; together, the two of them didn't even match the number of null and blank votes. This, their unrestrained parliamentary cretinism has suffered its most humiliating and catastrophic defeat: the just punishment to revisionists, opportunists and traitors to the class and the people.

In synthesis, last April's general elections were earmarked by vote dispersal and indefiniteness; the runoff election showed itself up as a still more murky, ambiguous and demagogic contest of gambling political hacks. But, besides that, with the distribution of seats, in parliament will develop a worsening collusion and contention between the various groups and factions of exploiters, causing the decrepit parliamentary system to rot even more. All of this shows how the Peruvian State has further weakened at its base, and will have to be sustained once more by the armed and repressive forces, showing more clearly to the people how the armed forces are the backbone of the State, and how this State is merely based on an organized violence for perpetuating the slavery of the people of Peru.

The electoral process highlights fundamental problems in Peruvian society, despite the pretensions of covering them up: First, the subsistence of semi-feudalism, basis of the agricultural production crisis, bringing back to the forefront the land problem which supposedly had been overcome. Second, the existence of bureaucratic capitalism, which is sustained in economic underdevelopment tied to imperialist domination; imperialism, mainly Yankee, as always sucking us dry of our blood and getting ready to suck us drier yet. In synthesis, it shows the generalized crisis of an obsolete society having only one solution: revolution, the victory of the ongoing People's War. On the other hand, the disastrous result obtained by the APRA government headed by the genocidal demagogue Garcia Perez, is evident. In 1985, we said that the new government would provoke more hunger and would be still more genocidal; today hunger eats away and devours the class and the people; and while according to data from the so-called "Pacification Commission" of the Senate, the Belaunde government bloodied the country with 5,880 dead, the current one surpassed it with 8,504 dead from 1985 to 88, and with another 3,198 dead in 1989. Both of our 1985 predictions were correct, and in fact the APRA government of Garcia Perez created more hunger and more genocide than any previous one in Peruvian history The people will never forget him! All of which is sharpened and accented even more by the uncertainty of the first round of the election and the postponement of the resolution until the runoff.

The political parties were strongly shaken by the results of last April's elections and were forced out of necessity to enter all sorts of realignments and regrouping, not just for the sake of the runoff but, mainly, for their later development. While in the electoral campaign they upheld "non partisanship," to lure the vote of the independents, candidates trafficked with the lack of prestige of their own political parties and the repudiation of the revisionist parties of Eastern Europe, aiming in essence and perspective, against the party of the proletariat, against the Party, preaching the putrid thesis of "no need for political parties." On this, let's remember what Lenin said:

"Non partisanship is a bourgeois idea. Partisanship is a socialist idea." (Read communist.) All that merely shows is the crisis of the parties which sustain the old order; not a new crisis, but now sharpened by the electoral process and its disastrous results; a crisis of the parties which obviously reflects the deterioration of the old Peruvian State.

The first go around left two candidates. One, tired and in bad shape, Vargas Llosa, of FREDEMO, the arrogant preacher of the upstart personal success, individual freedom and the market economy, triumphant after having obtained first place with a meager 27% of the vote. The other, catapulted and infatuated, Fujimori of CAMBIO 90, the treacherous and sneaky carrier of the vaunted "Honesty, Work and Technology," the dark horse of imperialism and reaction who obtained a second place with 24% of the vote. Both represent the big bourgeoisie and imperialism. In the case of Fredemo the matter is clear. However in the case of Cambio 90 confusion arises because of the class origins of their candidates, from the petty-bourgeoisie and medium bourgeoisie, and by hiding their pragmatic points, especially before the first run. But what have Fujimori himself, and his advisors now preparing his government program, promised: a market economy, not even a "social market economy"; to recognize the foreign debt and find ways to pay it; to strengthen the banking system; to promote exports and even big mining interests; to promote foreign investments and so-called international "assistance." Those are all positions of the great bourgeoisie, and especially of one of its factions, the comprador bourgeoisie, which will benefit the most. In addition, most of his advisors were formed by imperialism and are linked to big bourgeois institutions, opportunists who had participated in the APRA government, in IU, or coming from the Velasco regime. Of notice are the links with Hernando de Soto, a character with strong links to Yankee imperialism, directly endorsed by Reagan and Bush and a researcher of the so-called "informal production" with which all now pretend to traffic, even Vargas Llosa and Fujimori themselves.

So both Fredemo and Cambio 90 represent politically the big bourgeoisie. Already the recent Central Committee session pointed out: "Cambio 9O, that movement led by the former rector of the Agrarian University (Fujimori) has the same positions but not the weight of Fredemo . . . " The assessment of its class character is correct, however its definitive weight depends on the runoff election, given the importance of the Presidential elections. The heart of the matter is, while both are focused on the interests of the comprador bourgeoisie, Vargas Llosa presents himself as a defender of the exclusive interests of that faction, while Fujimori presents himself as a defender of the interests of the entire big bourgeoisie, but in addition, demagogically, he also claims to defend the interests of the medium bourgeoisie and the people. Although they try to deny it, that is the class character of the positions of both candidates, who lead Fredemo and Cambio 90 like "caciques" . Vargas Llosa desperately tries to overcome that limitation by appealing to all the people and promoting projects such us his so-called "social support program," while Fujimori assembles and reassembles his plans and keeps knocking on doors in search of connections and equipment for his possible future government.

In these circumstances the runoff election is prepared, in which APRA, IU and IS and their groups and factions play up to the highest bidder, leaning more and more toward Fujimori, and APRA looking for important posts in the new government. It already presented its detailed "conditions" to support Cambio 90, with phrasemongering to justify their "principles," while the poor orphan "Socialist Left" (IS) begs for crumbs off the big boys' table.

With all that, the basis on how the next government will look like, are being set. Whoever wins, it will govern in the midst of contradictions, with collusion and contention in the heart reaction and its lackeys.


CHAPTER 3. THE BOYCOTT DEVELOPS THE PEOPLE'S TENDENCY AGAINST THE ELECTIONS AND SERVES THE PEOPLE'S WAR.
Once more the "defeat of terrorism" is preached to the four corners of the world: from the genocidal demagogue Garcia Perez, to the various self-proclaimed and well paid "senderologists"; and from the political parties of reaction and their flunkies, to the bloody police forces; from the muddled and desperate presidential candidates, to well-maintained hacks of all sorts; in unison, as should be expected, all shout at the top of their lungs the purported and worn out defeat of Sendero," so they, in defense of Peruvian reaction and especially of the big bourgeoisie, of social-imperialism and of imperialism, mainly Yankee can create counterrevolutionary public opinion for the benefit of the Old State and the armed forces' counterinsurgency plans. Once more their cruel black dream of forever crushing the people and annihilating the People's War sets in motion the fraud of the "defeat of Sendero, "which will materialize, they claim without proof, as ghosts labeled "strategic failure," or "the first and foremost loser," and "split and surrender" of Sendero. As their notorious wishful thinking prays, the Peoples' War "got into the swamp" in 1989, the elections would show the great defeat of the boycott, and the Party would split, and the fighters of the People's Army of Liberation would surrender.

Let's begin with the so-called "strategic failure" due to "Sendero's falling into a swamp in 1989." Nothing better than starting from the Report on "Great Fulfillment of the Pilot Plan!", presented to the Central committee in June of last year, one of whose parts we transcribe below:

I. GUERRILLA ACTIONS. PLANS AND CAMPAIGNS DURING NINE YEARS OF PEOPLE'S WAR.
"The process of forging and development of nine years of People's War contains four milestones:

1. Definition,

2. Preparation,

3. Beginning and,

4. Development;

The People's War, strictly, speaking has developed as a process of qualitative leaps by means of four plans up to now. Each plan is a more higher and comprehensive than the previous plan expressing thus how the People's War has been getting more complex.

1. THE BEGINNING PLAN, fulfilled by way of two sub plans, spans less than a year: a) from May to July of 1980, 280 actions were completed. That was the beginning; and, b) from July to December of 1980, driving forward the People's War, fulfilling 1,062 actions. We already notice a leap, a growth, and the time also was longer: in total 1,342 actions.

2. THE DEPLOYMENT PLAN was broader yet, the plans spanning longer periods and consisting of more campaigns. Deployment had a previous plan: Opening up guerrilla zones, and developing platoons and detachments leading to Bases of support. Since the objective was to unfold the war fanning throughout the country, three campaigns were conceived:

a. Conquering weapons and resources,

b. Shaking up the countryside with guerrilla actions,

c. Scouting for the advance toward Bases of support, this last was applied in two stages. It spanned two years and carried out 5,350 actions.

While the earlier plan initiated the armed struggle, this new phase generated the New Power. By the end of this plan, the armed forces entered directly to fight us (December of 82). This plan was more complex: several campaigns began to be managed as part of the same plan, each campaign marked by the definition of political strategy and military strategy.

3. PLAN OF CONQUERING BASES, from May 1983 to September of 86. First two campaigns were unfolded: Defend, Develop and Construct precisely in 1983-84, which was the most difficult moment; the armed forces were stopped short by those campaigns. This third plan developed a Campaign of great importance with a sub plan, The Great Leap, which meant largely overcoming the problems, and expanding the theater of military and political operations from Cajamarca to Puno, centered in the mountains but also spanning the Jungle and the Coast. By then, too, reaction thought they had annihilated us and swept away the People's War.

The plan of Conquering Bases took three years, four months, and consisted of 28,621 actions; it provided support bases and the entire support system, guerrilla zones, zones of operation and points of action.

4. GREAT PLAN OF DEVELOPING BASES (GPDB), with this we entered a very transcendental process because the support bases are the core of the People's War, there is no People's War without support bases; the Central Committee decided to apply the plan first as a Pilot Plan, from December 1986 to May 89, 2 years eight months more or less, with three campaigns, the third one in two parts; it consisted of 63,052 actions; it showed its merits and exceeded the objectives, now we begin its definitive approval.

Thus, we have in nine years a total of 98,365 actions; counting the complementary actions there were more than 100,000; mainly, the great final conclusion completed in July, as a second special ending.

The plans are strategically centralized and tactically decentralized; they are strategic plans that include actions and construction; they are developed through campaigns. Later the plan begin to be more complex and of longer duration; later still sub plans are developed, or limited plans developed within the general plans; and finally on entering into the GPDB, we propose applying it as a pilot plan. Each plan has its political and military strategy. They are tested and implemented in battle; the results show the readjustments to be made, and above all the subsequent conditions for the success of the subsequent plan. We concretize our judgement of the results in clear phrases that allow us to wield them easily, for example: "The Great Completion of the Pilot Plan!"

The Central Committee approves Strategic Operating plans; such as the 1979 Expanded National Conference agreed upon, strategically centralized plans, which also takes into consideration the operational situation and establish the four forms of struggle:

1. agitation and propaganda,

2. sabotage,

3. selective annihilation and,

4. guerrilla combat.

They determine the parts, establish periods and fix the chronology.

We must always pay close attention to strategic centralization, since that's what determines our ability to within the plan and to develop the revolutionary waves systematically and simultaneously hit diverse and broad areas with all possible forms and means, to deliver hard and serious defeats to the enemy. Those who have studied the principles and military theory of Chairman Mao always point out that he established a strategically centralized plan, a key point that allows us to develop the actions: Applying it has enabled us to deliver hard and simultaneous blows to the enemy in almost the entire country, thus causing them more difficulties.

We must insist on strategically centralized plans, without forgetting they are tactically decentralized. Apply Strategic Operating Plans because these establish the nexus between strategy and tactics. Already comrade Stalin had suggested visualizing the bond joining the strategic whole with the concrete actions.

Let's point out how we began "out of nothing," because that is how Chairman Mao taught us. The main thing is to have a Party with a correct and just line, then the problem is to begin. Since the problem is not how many we are but is rather, if we want to initiate the armed struggle or not. With the People's War we have developed the Party, built the People's Guerrilla Army (today the People's Army of Liberation) and molded the New Power, and our mass work has experienced great quantitative and qualitative leaps; we have been wresting the weapons away from the enemy and the transfer of modern weapons is taking place more often.

The People's War has brought us to the Grand Completion of the Pilot Plan, which we finished successfully and brilliantly! Thus, we have exceeded the accomplishment of the Pilot Plan of the Great Plan to Develop Bases; from that derives the need to Drive Forward the Support Bases. If we had not conceived it that way, it would not have the sense of having been completed. It began as pilot plan because this great plan implied very important qualitative changes. It was already proved in practice, its mandatory objective was to proceed with, Drive Forward the Development of Support Bases! , within the new GREAT PLAN OF DEVELOPING BASES TO SERVE THE CONQUEST OF POWER in the entire country.

In nine years we have developed, through these plans, the People's Army and the New Power and we have applied and will insist that the Party leads the People's War and absolutely leads the army, since we are guided by the Party commanding the gun and will never allow the gun to be in command of the Party. We have also insisted that, as Chairman Mao taught us, the war follows the politics; we will follow Lenin: War is the continuation of politics by military means; it has been and will continue to be that way, therefrom derives the class character of war. When Marxism is negated by others, we communists have to reaffirm ourselves more in our principles. When we confront counterrevolutionary campaigns like those worldwide against Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, like those in our country against the Party and the People's War, those are the moments we must grasp our principles more firmly and visualize the undeclinable objective toward which we are going: Communism. Let's insist on this more today, when Gorbachev, Deng and their cronies spread that we can no longer understand war with criteria from the past, that we can no longer say war is the continuation of politics; that what Clausewitz set forth, to which Lenin agreed and Chairman Mao developed, is not a principle that applies today according to Gorbachev, who also cries out loud that war will take us to the disappearance of the human race, that war will have neither winners nor losers because no one will survive it: sinister positions he inherited from Khrushchev. We condemn, and mark with fire, those revisionist positions against the People's War; we reaffirm ourselves that People's War is the continuation of politics by the force of arms in the service of the proletariat and the people, of their interests. If we were not firm in our principles and flexible in their application we'd lose the direction of the people's war and crash down into revisionism. That's why we must persist in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, in the people's war and in the Communist Party leading it until Communism.

Furthermore, let's emphasize:

1. centralization;

2. more complex plan;

3. the new, Great Plan of Developing Bases to Serve the Conquest of Power in All the Country! ; and,

4. persisting in the principles of People's War.


COMBAT ACTIONS AND ARMED STRIKE.
The Pilot Plan was successfully completed in three campaigns. The second part of the third campaign, Grand Completion of the Pilot Plan! , Whose balance we areevaluating, materialized an increment of 172% compared to the first part, a very noticeable increase even if the second part lasted longer than the first. In nine years of People's War there were 100,000 actions, this figure does not include complementary actions.

The total number of actions of the, Grand Completion of the Pilot Plan! Was 32,646 and the third campaign, in its two parts, shows an immense jump relative to the second campaign of the Pilot Plan, since it quadruples it despite lasting only three more months; there we have one of the extraordinary results of the First Congress of the Party.

AGITATION AND PROPAGANDA.
It's one of the four forms of People's War and, consequently, it is erroneous to see it as a separate thing; not to see it as a form of war leads us to make mistakes. The main thing is to develop it as the most profound campaign of agitation and propaganda ever made by any party in the country; that is, propaganda as the diffusion of ideas aiming toward the objective, and agitation as the utilization of concrete problems, which the masses struggle through. These actions, like the other forms, spread revolution, People's War, politics, ideology; today they disseminate the need to conquer Power countrywide. Thus, we go down to the lowest masses, who normally can neither read nor write; Engels taught us to solidify with facts the ideas in the minds of men, as a matter of principle; it is the material fact that generates knowledge; the four forms of war are material facts that those who execute them, or experience them, militants, fighters and masses, go on enduring the effect and the confirmation of the need for the war, for conquering political objectives, for conquering Power; of the need for the ideology of the proletariat. Thus, agitation and propaganda deepen among the masses of the country, stir the mind, disseminate and go on confirming the need for revolution; they deal with the real source of knowledge. Agitation and propaganda develop as psychological action and psychological warfare.

Lenin said that propaganda is never lost, no matter how much time there is between the sowing and the reaping, and if the action is done with weapons in hand, with armed actions aimed at mobilizing the masses, that is the best school to forge the people in the ideology of the proletariat, in the politics of the Party and in the need for the People's War to conquer Power. Let's consider its great importance: it is linked to winning over and to forming public opinion to the fact that the People's War goes on generating a spirit of transformation among the masses, as Tulio C. Guerrero says. It has much potential to disseminate the People's War, and is fundamental to generate public opinion, to accentuate the People's War, the political objectives, the conquest of Power, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, the ideology, the politics of the Party and the policies on different levels, and we must keep in mind that we cannot conquer Power without generating public opinion.

SABOTAGES
They continue to play an important role, hitting the Peruvian economy hard, which develops itself in the worst conditions, in the deepest crisis in our history. Sabotaging the mining sector that has transcendent importance because the largest percentage of convertible currency comes from this activity; it hits the Peruvian State directly because, besides creating problems for it, those are blows it receives in the economic activity of the State, for instance Centromin It creates problems for the State itself, we burden with debt their corporative plans, which are fouled up. Furthermore, their "social measures," which they must always recur, are also hit and so the counterrevolutionary armed action itself is weakened. The sabotage of the electrical network is very important; the last few blackouts affected nine departments, from the northern Department La Libertad to the southern Department of ICA and going through the nation's capital, going inside the departments of Jun¡n, Pasco, Hu nuco, Ayacucho, Huancavelica, the heart of their economic system, the very axis of their administrative system, which is the capital. The blackouts are generating more problems for them each time. The paper El Comercio published about the last blackout that electricity could only be restored in Lima 10 days afterward. They have implied that they intend to utilize more thermal generators, a greater expense because the cost to produce that type of energy is very high. Besides hitting the public administration and their banking system data processing, industry also experiences difficulties. They greatly impact on the masses because whoever sees the blackout knows what its cause is, and the masses see how the Peruvian State, expressing its class character, tends first to the needs of the big bourgeoisie and postpones those of the people; that way, the masses are gradually forging clearer judgement each time. The big bourgeoisie suffers with the sabotages, hence the Society of Mines and Petroleum demand that armed forces and police reinforce the military occupation in the mines.

The main thing is to let the effects of sabotage be felt in the most important, most advanced economic zone, in the central economic zone which at the same time is the most strategic zone to restructure the old Peruvian society, their old State.

SELECTIVE ANNIHILATION.
It is increasing and hitting hard the authorities. We reaffirm that this way the functioning of the State apparatus is beheaded and paralyzed. Some, the reactionaries and their cronies the opportunists, say "how is it possible to vilely murder mayors elected by the people?" First, it must be explained that the election is only a reactionary instrument of the bourgeois democratic system. We will never allow ourselves to be deceived by the political stupidity of those who only speak of dictatorship if there are no elections. United Left (IU) and their ilk may say such things; but a communist can never think that way since the State, first and foremost, is a class dictatorship, and the mayors, the governors, or the bureaucratic authorities, of the CORDES or similar organizations, are part of that State system, of that violent reactionary structure. Hitting or beheading State authorities or bureaucrats of whatever level hampers the running of the State and even more generates a Power vacuum. One of the traditional problems of the Peruvian State, as Mariategui already noted, is that it has never been able to extend its power to the remotest corners of the country; it is a fact that reaction is sited in central locations, in the cities, and has been extending its power to intermediate size cities, and once in a while it reaches small cities; while the annexes or towns in the countryside, villages or shantytowns are beyond the State and do not endure steady control; it is a problem linked to the semi-feudal bases sustaining it. So, then, the annihilations undermine the State order and that is good. It helps to erode it, because the political vacuum created is left in our hands, to fill it and exert power. Having five forms of Power we can set up any one of them. Remember that some say, "the Vietnam example is good," but they forget 13,000 authorities were annihilated there; thus, the annihilations made by the Vietnamese were good, but the ones we make are bad? Why? What objectives did they accomplish and do we accomplish? To undermine order, a problem clearly established by Cassinello in Guerrilla and Counter guerrilla Warfare .

GUERRILLA COMBATS.
The quantity is high and its percentage begins to grow even more. The two fundamental forms of combat actions are developing:

1) ambushes and

2. assaults.

Ambushes are developed, each time more stunningly and we are hitting the armed forces; to hit their officers has much importance and we already see its results: petitions to leave the army are growing so much that they had to prohibit them; desertions increase and clashes among them are starting; the selling of weapons is increasing and will continue to grow.

On this point reaction reaches the extremes of sarcasm, stupidity and ridicule by decrying we are "cowardly ambushing them," "they don't fight face to face." In what ambush does one show the face? The key to ambush is surprise. Ambush is a norm to us, as it is to all armies, but we should not allow ourselves to be ambushed nor counter ambushed. When we hit the military, they cry out, "Barbaric! ," "Brutal murder!"; so then, how do they say "we are at war" and what role do their armed forces have other than to fight in a war? Mercado Jarrin says the armed forces are the "insurance policy of the nation"; yes, they are the insurance policy of reaction and its backbone; that is why we have to annihilate them totally and completely.

Guerrilla combat, like annihilations, are lowering the morale of the armed forces, which are drafted troops fighting against their will, with little instruction and kept in check by ferocious reactionary iron discipline. Some say they would rather have a more reduced professional army, better armed with sophisticated weapons and very well paid, but that would not be beneficial to them, it would only allow us to increase our forces and make more critical the disproportionate ratio between us and them; as is well known, the norm is that when a guerrilla activity is well developed, reaction requires a ratio of up to 20 to one, as shown by international experience; in our case, although we are not highly developed, they need to increase their forces. In second place, can they do it? , No. They do not possess enough means to do it, officers themselves are badly paid and the severe crisis the country is experiencing does not permit great investments like that, consequently they need the "foreign aid" of the superpowers and/or imperialist powers and to them they appeal more and more. The USSR just sold them helicopters from Afghanistan at bargain prices. The USA gives them "military aid," training and giving them resources, and their direct participation is obvious, such as the struggle against "drug trafficking" in words and against the People's War in deeds. Keep in mind what we have seen already about a possible Yankee aggression, considering especially the U.S. actions in Huallaga; remember what we read in the military magazine of the U.S. army about national strategy, it maintains that even not having a declared war, they develop subversive wars, insurrections, terrorist actions, drug trafficking and that those are areas in which the armed forces must participate and fight.

Thus, they are finding serious problems with the development of the guerrilla combat. As regards quality, we are seeing a leap especially in the guerrilla combats; each time the assaults are more important, an example is Uchiza , which even caused the enemy internal contradictions between the armed forces and the government, and between the armed forces and police forces; and successive ambushes show a better handling of them.

ARMED STRIKE.
It is a new modality in the struggle, which implies an entire combination of actions, it has to manage the four forms of war: agitation and propaganda, sabotage, selective annihilation and guerrilla combat; and at the same time it implies mobilizing an enormous mass which helps the force of the New Power, the existence of the New State and the questioning and negation of the old State. The armed strike, militarily speaking, manages the four forms and impacts on huge numbers of masses leading to isolating vast areas and demonstrating besides how easy it is to isolate the capital city (Lima). Since 1979 we know that Lima is the most vulnerable capital in Latin America, keep that in mind to continue hitting them, and for tomorrow, when we have Power in the whole country, we will defend it from counterrevolution.

Confronted with armed strikes reaction will aim, as it does, to fetter them and prevent them, to break them up; it will make false calls to strike or will use its weapons; for instance in Chosica they called a false strike just to make a show of force, to pressure, intimidate and lead the masses to reject the strike; but that will not be enough for them, they will have to repress the armed strikes, answer them militarily, not merely as a show of force, but to break the actual armed strikes with fire and blood.

Armed strikes are also making the revisionists nervous, the trade union bureaucracy, all those who ride on the backs of the masses; these hacks will continue opposing the armed strikes claiming these are "an authoritarian imposition," that "the unions are not the ones calling them." Our answer is simple: it is not an industrial or trade union action but a military action to keep on isolating, hitting, eroding and undermining the old order so the people can see clearer each time the powerlessness, which the Peruvian State is being reduced to. Therefore, we are not talking only about a struggle for labor demands or just vindications, but rather we are developing a military action to undermine the old order, show its impotency, create public opinion and impact the broader masses; and that, in perspective, entails the sectionalizing of the country in a more extensive way, which will involve another problem of the plan we put in motion: the leap from guerrilla warfare to mobile warfare.

Military work develops in the country and the city following the path of surrounding the cities from the countryside, and our specific condition is that we also shake up the cities, but the four forms of war develop mainly in the countryside, and as complement in the cities. That scheme will continue to develop more, considering that the armed strike happens above all in the cities; for example the armed strike in Central Peru involving important cities like Huancayo, Jauja, Oroya, Huanuco, Cerro de Pasco; that is, departmental and provincial capitals. Work in the countryside is good, extremely important and principal, but advancing the work in the cities is a necessity that will increase and we must focused on that type of work.

In synthesis, as regards quality and quantity we can say that qualitatively and quantitatively the People's War is developing strongly and vigorously; we persist on the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside; the countryside is principal and the encirclements are already closing in more and more. Therefore, the People's War has made a great quantitative and qualitative leap in this Pilot Plan and it germinates a more transcendent advance.

PLAN OF STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT
Our investigation shows that everything remains firmly grounded within the main points (the axis, sub axis, directions and mobile lines), they are well established and are being managed even better. What derives from this is that at this moment we have no need to change things; it would even be inconvenient to alter them at this time. Reaction enters into strong difficulties and contradictions; the problem of the municipal and general elections, the two electoral runs and the new administration take them to a collusion and contention; but each collusion is sustained within the contention and can explode at any time; these situations, of contention, of rupture, that can even lead to a coup d'etat at least in the next two years that must lead us to advance boldly. For that reason it is not convenient to vary our plans and we must strive to wield them better. Don't forget that all of our Party's work is developed within the strategic development plan, provided that the Party leads everything.

THEATER OF OPERATIONS
It remains even clearer that we are developing within the Sierra region of the country. Historically Peru has had a vertebrate axis: the center-south mountains, it was that way at the times of the Incas; in the war with Chile it was the area defending itself better and where forces can retreat before a foreign attack.

We also develop within the jungle strips, areas which are showing good fighting conditions for the masses; most peasants there are linked to coca growing, the Upper Huallaga is the largest producing area in Latin America, larger than those in Colombia and Bolivia; for that reason as well it is important to reaction. We are also developing within the Apurimac jungle strip and we must emphasize our penetration into the Central region. The perspective is to cover all the jungle strips.

The theater is also being extended on the Coast. From the edges of the Coastal areas, you can penetrate into the Sierra, for example the mid-North (Norte medio) and the Mid- South.

This leads us to develop the other coastal zones, especially the work in the northern and southern coast of our country. Also, to develop more the cities in the Sierra. It is very important to focus the struggle in the cities, it has to do with the insurrection; if we don't prepare for the seizure of the cities, mainly the largest ones, to complete the final stage of the People's War, the conquest of power in the entire country will be delayed. The work in Lima must be developed more, considering that it is the capital.

Also the theater enables us to develop incursions, which facilitate developing the theater or retreating during enemy offensives.

In synthesis, the theater is showing its expansion and the interrelation between the committees, also the capacity of incursion between the one and the others. Consequently, the perspective of the theater is to vertebrate the entire People's War. With the development of the war, we will have to redefine the committees, above all to conform to the development of the EGP (People's Army.) Thus, the theater shows how it is expanding and we see a process of vertebrate in which the encirclement of the cities is setting in, not just the capital but the rest of the cities too.

This ends the partially transcribed report. But let us consider the following outline:

PLANS AND CAMPAIGNS OF THE PEOPLE'S WAR
THIRD MILESTONE: BEGINNING OF THE PEOPLE'S WAR
I. INITIATION PLAN (MAY-DEC. 1980)
Initiate the Armed Struggle Drive Forward Guerrilla Warfare

1, 342 actions

FOURTH MILESTONE: DEVELOPMENT OF GUERRILLA WARFARE
II. DEPLOYMENT PLAN (JAN. 81- JAN 83)
Open Guerrilla Zones

First Campaign: Conquer Arms and Resources

Second Campaign: Rock the Countryside with Guerrilla Actions

Third Campaign: Stir 1 and 2 to Advance Toward the Support Bases

5, 350 actions
III. PLAN TO CONQUER BASES (MAY 1983-SEP. 1986
Defend Develop and Construct I and II

Great Leap

First Campaign: Initiate Great Leap!

Second Campaign: Develop the Great Leap!

Third Campaign: Develop the People's War!

Fourth Campaign: Cap off the Great Leap! (First Part)

Cap off the Great Leap with a Golden Seal! (Second Part)

28, 621 actions
IV. GREAT PLAN TO DEVELOP BASES. PILOT PLAN (DEC. 1986-MAY 1989)
First Campaign: Pilot Plan to Develop Bases

Second Campaign: To Brilliantly Fullfill it and Establish a Historical Miliestone!

Third Campaign: To consolidate and Develop the Great Completion! (First Part)

Great Completion of the Pilot Plan! (Second Part)

63, 052 actions
V. GREAT PLAN TO DEVELOP BASES AND TO SERVE THE CONQUEST OF POWER (AUG. 89- )
First Campaign: To Drive Forward the Development of Support Bases

The partial implementation to the end of 1989.

23, 090 actions
TOTAL NUMBER OF ACTIONS	121, 455
NOTE: Up to this time four milestones have been specified in the development of the People's War: FIRST: DEFINITION, whose center is the IX Plenum of the Central Committee, June of 1979. SECOND: PREPARATION, centered in the Expanded National Conference, November 1979. Furthermore, this table does not include the actions carried out within the complementaries.

This shows clearly the immense progress and great development of the People's War, unless someone tried to sustain the absurd claim that the leap was quantitative, a change, but not qualitative. It is seen clearly and convincingly how each subsequent plan implies a higher leap than the previous one. If we compare plans III and IV, although plan III took three years and four months, and plan IV only took two years and six months, the number of actions in the latter plan more than doubles the former.

On the other hand, if we consider the application of the new GREAT PLAN TO DEVELOP BASES IN SERVICE OF THE CONQUEST OF POWER just begun in August of 1989 with the First Campaign of Driving Forward the Development of Support Bases, in its four months of execution, until the end of last year, it materialized 23,090 guerrilla actions. Consequently, considering that four months is half the duration of the Grand Completion of the Pilot Plan! , The second part of the preceding plan, the new Great Plan has already achieved the notable increase of 41.5 percent in its guerrilla actions; an increase whose importance is better understood if we keep in mind the enormous increment that the completion of the Pilot Plan implied. And if we compare results, the 23,090 guerrilla actions involve 19.0 percent of the total actions up to December of 1989; 23.5% of the actions in the nine years before this plan started and 36.6% of the actions in the entire Pilot Plan. In about four months we achieved almost 37% of what we achieved previously in thirty! There it is, the new Great Plan has begun resolutely and victoriously.

Finally, if we center on 1989, the year of the proclaimed and supposed "swamping"; considering from October 88 to December 89, a period in which 32,644 actions were registered in the completion referred to above and 23,090 in the New Plan, we have a total of 55,736 guerrilla actions; that is about 46% of all the actions completed. There you have the great "defeat of Sendero!"

CONCRETE ACTIONS
With regards to concrete actions in this period, we emphasize the following: Regional armed strike in Ayacucho, lasting one week, in February of 89; while rural nucleations built by the armed forces were destroyed. Harvest [campaign] took place in Huaycan, in the capital itself in the same month: 2,000 people were mobilized with the support of the EGP (People's Army), who annihilated the manager and a foreman of the Fundo under attack; the masses appropriated the produce by sharing it. Assault on the police counterinsurgency base DOES-6 at Uchiza, March 27: the base was taken, the contingent of 48 military surrendered among them 15 wounded, three dead officers and seven police dead. The taking of Pampa Cangallo: in April, the 600 soldiers were kept at bay and unable to leave their barracks while the town remained under the control of the People's Army (EGP). Also in April, mobilization of the Committee of Families of Prisoners of War and Disappeared, in Lima, against the Ministry of Justice, with agitation and sabotage; it kept in check the plans of repression against families, and lawyers and genocide against the prisoners. The same month assaults to police posts in Yauricocha, Upper Lar n and Clemente, in the Mid South.

Regional armed strike in Central Peru, departments of Jun¡n, Cerro de Pasco and Huanuco. On May 10-12 an armed strike took place in Ca¤ete, southern part of the Department of Lima, on June 1-2, and on the 7th, assault against the police station of Ambar, northern part of the Department of Lima. Ambush of a presidential escort transport car, "Jun¡n Hussars," in downtown Lima; 7 soldiers killed and 29 wounded in June 3. In the same month, armed strikes: June 5-7 in Huancavelica; on the 7th in Huaraz; and June 15-20 in Upper Huallaga. June 19, ambush of the army in Aguayt¡a, as part of armed strike: a convoy of six trucks on F. Basadre highway; annihilated were an army major (second chief at Ucayali political-military command), a lieutenant and 14 soldiers, besides 10 wounded, total 26 casualties.

In the month of July, armed strikes: on the 14th in Huamachuco; on the 20th in Lima, against hunger and repression, organized by MRDP [Revolutionary Movement in Defense of the People]; and from July 27-29 in Ayacucho. On the 5th, sabotage of a bus of the Soviets who pillage the country's marine life; 33 wounded; an ambush against a DOES police patrol in Az ngaro, Department of Puno, annihilated a commander, a captain, a lieutenant and three subordinates, on the 6th; assaulted the police station in Pacar n, Ca¤ete; the station was destroyed, the bridge joining Pacaran, in Yauyos, and Huancayo was blown up. The military barracks in Madre Mia was destroyed, 150 soldiers (120 infantry and 30 engineers), in the Upper Huallaga Valley; the assault took place on July 27, on the eve of the "national anniversary": after a pitched battle the People's Guerrilla Army destroyed the reactionary army barracks thoroughly and completely, causing them 64 casualties (39 dead and 25 wounded) and conquered a good quantity of military supplies.

Also in that area, a year ago the police station in Cotahuasi, Department of Arequipa, was assaulted; and the police station at the Huancaray hydroelectric, in Apurimac. As well, in the Department of Huancavelica mesnadas of Pachaclla were annihilated and several towns were taken in the principal axis of the People's War in the region, generating a Power vacuum. And, ambush to army in Milano, Upper Huallaga; assault to police stations in Julcan, in Otuzco, Department of La Libertad, and in Cajacay, Department of Ancash.

Now, if we focus on the People's War according to the regions or zones in which it is developing we have the following scenario, centered on the First Campaign of the plan Driving Forward [Impulsar], opening the new Grand Plan:

AYACUCHO: The Heroic Struggle
If we consider from Pampa Cangallo in the south of the department; in October a series of actions against the armed forces and the micro region were carried out; the main one was the attack and eventual collapse of the barracks in Vilcashuaman, sabotage of State installations, propaganda, agitation and mobilization in the town, which was taken over by the People's Army (EGP); as well, the harassment and collapse hit the anti-guerrilla bases in Pampa Cangallo, Cangallo, Puente Matero, Accomarca, Ocros, Cayara, Hualla, Canaria, Huancapi and Chipao. Because of the large impact on the masses, especially those who under pressure of the military joined the mesnadas, and who have stopped patrolling and standing guard. The army reacted desperately and imposed a curfew, repressing, arresting, shaving heads.

Municipal elections in November were confronted by the new armed strike from the 5th to the 15th, which has proven to be a big weapon to hinder, boycott and impede elections wherever feasible. There were no candidates in Concepcion, Carhuanca, Huambalpa, Andamarca and Cabana; in Huancapi, Mualla, Colca and Cayara nobody knew who the candidates were; in Vilcashuaman all resigned except for a member of United Left while in a showcase of "bourgeois democracy," in Carhuanca and Huambalpa, on the same day as the elections, SIN members captured two peasants at the town square, told them, "You are the candidates! ," and beat them up until they accepted their "candidacy." That is how their "democracy" and their "elections" truly are, the people are witnesses! However their objective failed because most of the population did not vote.

An action related to the elections is the stunning ambush on an army convoy on the 13th, in Andamarca, where 10 soldiers and an official of the electoral jury were annihilated.

And, though partially, the Little March that mobilized hundreds of people armed with various means and carrying red flags with the hammer and sickle, banners and posters about the People's War, traveled through many towns and villages like a little machine sowing the People's War, developing actions and profoundly moving the masses. On the other hand, hard crushing blows are delivered to the recalcitrant black heads who lead the "mesnadas" controlled by the armed forces, as in Huamanquiquia and Sacsamarca, province of Huancasancos. At the same time that the People's War extends to the main part of the Coast by the taking of towns like Ocana and the destruction of the police station, close to the highway to Nazca.

Consider the northern part of the Department of Ayacucho, the provinces of Huamanga, Ruanta and La Mar. The municipal elections obviously carried great importance. In the city of Huanta, the provincial capital, there were no candidates, since all of them quit; in Ayacucho, departmental capital, the candidates quit too, but when the APRA candidate quit (a former Bela£nde man who was unknown in Ayacucho and was not even there on election day) his resignation was not accepted by APRA; when the resignation of the United Left (IU) candidate, violating electoral norms, was withdrawn with the opposition of the rest of his ticket, he persisted in resigning, disowning his candidacy. Applying the boycott, as in other parts, the Party carried out the armed strike on November 11-13, throughout the area; from the 10th, transport was paralyzed by blocking and opening ditches across highways; through radio broadcasts, the masses were even asking for the electoral process to be halted. The armed forces, the police-military command, answered them by applying a 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. curfew; on the day following the attack of the 9th, the simultaneous capture of Ayacucho and Huanta by the People's Army (EGP); the armed forces decreed "a suspension of public activities until the 13th"; making large roundups and threatening arrest and other draconian sanctions to anyone who did not vote, according to the provisions repeatedly broadcasted through the radio.

On the 12th Ayacucho woke up amidst great explosions and under a huge deployment of military and police forces. The genocidal demagogue Garcia Perez came the same day to stage "the triumph of democracy in Ayacucho"; he proffered orders and counter orders as he saw fit, as he does daily; he conducted a rally of Apristas (APRA members), mesnadas (paramilitary peasants) and soldiers dressed in civilian clothes in which very loudly, histrionically and egotistically he announced his personal "victory" and the "defeat of Sendero," the "triumphant and exemplary electoral process" and the "boycott failure." But elections were not held in Huanta nor did Ayacucho elect a mayor, since the "leftism" chosen by some vanished amidst the over two-thirds of blank and null votes, of the small minority who voted at all; that too was the "victory" which United Left celebrated euphorically, loudly shouting "we won at Ayacucho!".

At the end of the counting, even the JNE hacks had to declare the results invalid. In addition, like in 1985, in some places the masses were forced to vote by soldiers and police kicking and hitting them, such as in San Jose; or their electoral books were simply stamped, then soldiers filled in the ballots for them, such as in Pischa and Acocro; while in Llochegua and Churcampa voting simply was done at the military barracks. In Julcamarca the People's Army (EGP) captured the town and after keeping the antiguerrila base at bay burned the municipal council (consejo municipal) and prevented the elections; in Acocro it forced them to be stopped, and the same in Pacaysasa, where soldiers abandoned protection of the tables leaving their lieutenant alone. In synthesis, the boycott was a brilliant political triumph; absenteeism was massive and even the minority who voted, voted mostly in blank or null ballots.

But notwithstanding the importance of the boycott, part of the People's War, a basic question in its development can be seen in the great advancement of work in cities such as Ayacucho and Huanta; the taking of both, by siege, on November 9, applying containment to prevent the police and armed forces from massively leaving their quarters, and forcing the foreign mercenaries to keep away and hide like rats in their nests at the airport, is clear proof of this advance. Also, the incursion into People's Cooperation in Ayacucho, against the Aprista candidate, annihilating his police escort, in October; and the attack on the technical police departmental headquarters annihilating a lieutenant and a corporal and wounding two others, in the same month; or the car bombs, one at the office of the director of education, and the other thirty meters away from the main square (Plaza de Armas), respectively in October and December. However, the main and more transcendent development of the People's War is still in the countryside: the destruction of the mesnadas in five towns and finishing off fifty of their most recalcitrant members; the demolition of the nucleations in Vicus and Huayllay and the annihilation of their black heads, and nucleations organized and sustained by the armed forces against the will of the masses, especially of the poorest peasantry; the ambush against mesnadas in Pichihuilca or to an army truck in Palmapampa, barely three hundred meters from their anti-guerrilla base, in November and December respectively, and repeated hits to the marine infantry, show this in all clarity.

APURIMAC: Area of Intense Confrontation
The Department of APURIMAC too, is an area of hard and intense confrontation. Proof are the sabotages and leveling to the ground of installations, and Town councils, micro regions, "cooperation popular," Entel Peru, Ministry of Agriculture, the electoral registry, Sierra Centro-Sur, military registry, National Bank and TV stations; or the selective annihilations of snitches, infiltrators, cattle rustlers, promoters of the mesnadas and spies; or the assaults, ambushes and multiple confrontations registered. All that, together with hundreds of agitations and mobilizations and dozens of seizure of towns. There the State acts with harsher repression and the police and armed forces become increasingly more bloodthirsty and virulent; one sample of this are the genocidal forays by the army, in this area and in others; one of the most recent, in April, departed from Antabamba province, Department of Apurimac, going all the way to Cusco, plundering, burning and murdering in the peasant communities it overran; it was denounced, in vain as usual, before Congress. But responding to the slaughter, guerrilla actions rose up vigorously, Pushing Forward the People's War in those areas; such as the assault to the Vilcabamba police station, province of Grau, on May 14, 1989, executing in combat a policeman, a lieutenant, wounding several more, and generating a blackout in seven districts; that is the truth and not the deceit (fairy tales) printed by the reactionary press about "15 terrorists were killed in the surroundings of Cotabambas." Or the ambush to the army in Caraybamba, on 5 October 1989, annihilating three soldiers, and one lieutenant and wounding seven soldiers.

Close to that area we have the actions in Caraveli province, Department of Arequipa; and the taking of Caraveli, on December 1, 1989, where two police stations, the military registry, the Bank of the Nation, the electric power plant, a TV antenna and the quarters of the Ministry of Agriculture were sabotaged and destroyed; the old authorities ran away and took refuge in the port of Atico. Also the taking of Pausa, capital of the province of P ucar del Sara-Sara, Department of Ayacucho, on December 2; the masses were mobilized, flags were raised and revolutionary slogans painted; besides the sabotage and burning of the council, police station, electoral registry and quarters of the Ministry of Agriculture, Entel and Center-South Sierra; this stunning blow also helped destroy electoral materials and by doing so elections were crippled in the entire province. And, of course, the just policy of "escape" applied in the Caraveli jail in December, which was easily overrun by the People's Army.

HUANCAVELICA: Place of Devastating Ambushes
Also has to its credit devastating ambushes, on October 23 the combatants handed another blow to the army in Lanchoj; a land mine blew up two trucks in a convoy of three, and after a demolishing attack; and later a violent combat with eight soldiers, who commanded by a lieutenant, remained some distance from the third truck; of those three were annihilated in combat; this convoy was heavily armed since it carried chiefs to their anti-guerrilla bases; as usual, newspapers minimized the facts: "four officers and nine soldiers were annihilated." when in fact we annihilated 36. Add to this action the clashes at Santa Ines and Chupamarca and the harassment at Castrovirreyna, totaling 11 dead. So the reactionary Peruvian army suffered 47 dead, among them 10 officers, not counting the wounded which, obviously, raises the number of casualties. Their furious response, impotent for not being able to hit their ambushers, preys upon the unarmed masses; at Santa Ana, on 25 October, they tortured peasants asking them about the guerrillas and murdering five; in the same place, on the 28th, they burned the hut of a peasant and murdered him for being an uncle of a revolutionary soldier; and in Lachoj, 70 soldiers stationed themselves on the road, on the 28th, stopping anyone coming through, they robbed, tortured and raped women; and on the 31st they murdered four more in Pucara. Here too, the electoral process has been deepened the class struggle; reaction has set up its elections, maintaining them primarily on its armed forces; to that end they brought in more soldiers from Huancayo and marine infantry from El Callao; from Huancavelica to Ticrapo they deployed into the countryside campaigning for the elections and calling on people to vote, threatening with the firing squad anyone not doing so.

Part of their control was to establish a permit (safe-conduct) system for traveling; 5 days before the elections they stopped the train leaving Huancavelica, arrested 400 passengers, whom they robbed, tortured and paraded through the city while they shouted the same would happen to all those who don't obtain and produce a safe-conduct pass. In the same city the soldiers waged war against revolutionary signs (paintings) with Party slogans on the walls, taking down red flags, which they dragged through the streets, shooting and reaping them, but contrary to their expectations, the people laughed and ridiculed them. Then military proceeded to conduct illegal searches of homes and murdering and disappearing noncombatant civilians (among them 13 students from the Pedagogic Institute, the victims of repeated searches.) The masses were also black mailed, for instance, as a condition to pick up their pay checks, teachers had to attend a boring lecture by the political-military chief; at the same time flyers were dropped from helicopters: "peasant friend, reject the terruco because he is your enemy" (any similarity is not a simple coincidence!). But faced with this sinister campaign, the People's War confronted it boldly and resolutely; as a sign of this advance in the departmental capital itself on October 8, the army barracks, commissary and police cafeteria were sabotaged; there was a blackout and, most important, agitation was begun at the cinema, the masses went out into the streets and formed a steadily increasing chorus, which turned into a roaring rally at the Main Square, shouting "vivas" to Chairman Gonzalo, the Party, the People's War and urging, "Don't vote!", amidst the darkness, dynamite explosions and rifle shots; neither soldiers nor police went out and the People's Army (EGP) controlled the city. The 12th, election day, passed amidst the strike and the daily blackouts from the 11th to the 13th of November; the dawn broke with red flags with the hammer and sickle posted conspicuously on the streets and violent explosions; it was a dead city until about 11:00 a.m., at which time soldiers began to enter houses looking for leaders and members of electoral boards, and bringing the people out to vote by force; but that resulted in less than 40% of the electorate in that city voting; but in the barrios, young towns, and their surroundings they did not go to vote, the strike besides, which the highways into the city were blockaded. If this happened in the capital city, in the smaller cities and in the countryside the problem was worse for reaction; since, besides not having any candidates in many places, not to vote was the sentiment and desire among the masses, because from experience "voting" means nothing for them. Here we have, too, a good example of how to use elections in a revolutionarily manner.

THE CENTRAL REGION.
It is the heart of the economic process of Peruvian society, whose vertex is Lima and it is key within the State's geopolitical plan, considering this reality, the action and development of the People's War in this region is better understood. There the struggle increases in intensity and shows sharper characteristics than in other locations; sabotages there are tremendously stunning, like the leveling to ground in SAIS Tupac Amaru and Ramon Castilla, or the Los Andes fish farm, or the offices and encampment of the Pichis-Palcazu project; and among these, the of SAIS's Tupac Amaru horses used by the army; and sabotage of the agricultural enterprise of Romero , a concoction of bureaucratic capitalism and the big bourgeoisie, in Chanchamayo, where 10,000 sacks of coffee were destroyed. Great sabotages against the State enterprises; at Enafer, blowing up of locomotives or derailments like those in Yauli and Chuccis; attacks at Centromin, sabotages in mines of Casapalca and Morococha, in the latter paralyzing the mineral concentrator or in Oroya paralyzing the refinery and foundry, besides the derailments of trains loaded with minerals; at Electroperu, the taking down of towers, 59 of them during the November armed strike, thus generating large and extensive blackouts.

Also, blowing up of bridges: Four in Mucllo, Comas and Concepcion-Satipo highway. Moreover, not just State mining is hit, also hit are two other "private" mining centers like Allpamina, property of R. Gubbins, notorious member of the big bourgeoisie. In addition, of great importance are the cattle (livestock) requisitions and invasions of land, 8,200 sheep and 10,300 hectares, all for the masses, mainly for the poor peasantry. That way the traditional economic base of Peruvian society is seriously hit and the basis of the Old State deeply undermined in this region, as in others. It is in turn very important how the People's War penetrates into the central jungle strips, developing in the provinces of Tarma, Chanchamayo and Satipo; while at the same time empowering the class struggle in Huancayo, the departmental Capital, whose undeniable examples are the mobilizations by 5,000 high school students secondaries in July, and 15,000 students in October; besides the selective annihilations of authorities and candidates, which shake up the entire region (in August, in Tarma, the sub prefect was the only remaining civil authority; while in Huancayo the sub prefect and lieutenant-mayor were annihilated; and in Concepcion the provincial mayor); and to emphasize how the struggle is elevated, ambushes against Centromin and Enafer train were carried out. As regards the municipal elections, in order to activate them and control them they brought troops from Lima, Trujillo, Iquitos and Tacna; they unleashed electoral blackmail, genocide and psychological warfare, deploying thousands of soldiers and police from their repressive forces. There too, the Party applied the armed strike from the 11th to the 13th throughout the region. It was a remarkable success and the masses observed it, especially in Junin and Pasco. Through force reaction tried to break the strike and force the people to vote, and to that end, from the eve of the elections, above all in the marginal neighborhoods of the major cities, they began to drive the masses like if they were cattle. But they failed in their effort to obtain a large voter turnout since the absenteeism was massive; despite the collaboration of revisionists, opportunists and reactionaries, the elections had to be held only in the departmental and provincial capitals.

THE HUALLAGA VALLEY.
The Huallaga Region, and above all the Upper Huallaga is strategic, and each day of greater importance; not only because of its huge potential in natural riches, whose plundering by the World Bank, the International Development Bank and imperialist enterprises in collusion with the great bourgeoisie and the Peruvian State have been planned for years, but mainly because of the vigor with which the People's War develops there. Its forcefulness and advances are clearly seen in the hard blows administered against the reactionary armed forces, such as the destruction of the army barracks in Madre Mia, added to the numerous ambushes which followed, among which these stand out: against the army again, on the highway connecting Uchiza and Progreso, in the second part of 1989, annihilating a lieutenant and seven soldiers, with four wounded and the surrender of three; and against the police in Villa Palma, with the annihilation six police and two wounded; both in September. And in October, the ambush against an army convoy with 35 troops, of whom one officer and four soldiers died, and leaving 12 wounded. Guerrilla actions which, given the conditions of their development, considerably increase the annihilations against authorities, snitches, infiltrators, spies and enemies of all kinds. Around the elections, as in the entire country, these actions increased, especially against municipal authorities and candidates, paralleling an intense campaign among the masses calling on them not to vote; with all this, in spite of the bloody genocidal electoral repression, it could not prevent a high degree of absenteeism. On the other hand, it is of substantial importance for revolution and counterrevolution (or its risk) the greater repercussion of the People's War each day in the areas bordering the north of San Mart¡n, all of Huanuco and Ucayali; obviously this prospect, as that in the rest of the country, increases the nightmares of reaction, disrupting still more their uneasy sleep of a cornered beast. But the struggle there also justly hits the genocidal demagogue himself, Garcia Perez, capturing and flattening the cattle ranches "Acuario" and "Mi Sue¤o," of his property, located at Km. 35 on the Federico Basadre Highway, and at Km. 7 on the highway to Nueva Requena; attacked on May 24 and June 5 of 1989, respectively; distributing the confiscated goods and cattle among the masses (more than 700 persons participated), among these were 188 cattle and 50 calves, six horses, 15 pigs, etc.; and destroying calamine, dozens of drums of petroleum and oil, 10 tractors, three (large) electric generators, etc. Of course, that is nothing compared to the immense crimes committed by this sinister individual; meanwhile, let us get one hair out of the wolf; some day the people will do justice.

The situation in the Huallaga Region raises an important concern of a possible direct intervention by Yankee imperialism. This matter revolves around the prospect that the contradiction nation versus imperialism might become principal, which would represent a basic change in the strategic and development of the People's War in Peru. A magazine of the United States army states:

"Finally, and more seriously, the United States confronts one aspect of the insurgency in Latin America which offers a greater threat, but one which perhaps could still provide us with the weapon allowing us to recover the moral superiority, which we apparently have lost.

"There is an alliance among some drug traffickers and some insurgents. Several countries in Latin America confront the corruption of their rulers and military officers. These countries make an effort to treat the problem with the uncertain support of the United States and with varying degrees of success. The dollars earned by the drug traffickers are delivered to the boxes of certain guerrillas or, possibly, in the form of weapons and material, to the hands of the guerrilla.

"A solidification of this connection in the public perception and in Congress will carry us to the necessary support to counter these guerrilla terrorists/drug traffickers in this hemisphere. It would be relatively easy to generate such support once the connection is proven and a total war is declared by the National Command Authority. Congress would have difficulty preventing the support for our allies with the training, advising and security assistance necessary for them to fulfill their mission. The religious and academic groups who tirelessly have supported Latin American insurgents would see themselves in an indefensible moral position.

"Above all, we would have an unblemished moral position from which to launch a coordinated offensive effort, for which we would count the resources of the Department of Defense and the rest of the sources. The recent operation in Bolivia is a first step. Instead of answering defensively to each insurgency according to the individual case, we could initiate actions in coordination with our allies. Instead of immersing ourselves in the legislative mesh and the financial constraints characteristic of our position of security assistance, we could answer the threat more swiftly. Instead of debating each separate threat, we can begin to perceive the hemisphere as a unity, and at last arrive at developing the vision that we so much need." (Military Review, Spanish-American Edition, May 1987, pp. 49-51.)

Thus, "drug trafficking" is a "weapon to recover the moral superiority" of Yankee imperialism, providing it with a "moral position for a coordinated offensive" and with the "hemispheric vision," which it now lacks. These criteria, obviously more developed than before, guide Yankee politics. We see very clearly how sinister is the plan to slander the People's War as "narco-terrorism" and whose interests it serves, and what the aim of the Old State is, of reaction, of revisionism, of the opportunists and their lackeys of all kinds, whose arch-reactionary campaigns for many years have slandered and charged the People's War with "narco-terrorism." The objective of such slander is plainly and simply to promote the aggression and intervention by Yankee imperialism, serving and defending their interests, as well as those of Peruvian reaction. That is why we must expose even further the counterrevolutionary essence of presenting the People's War as "terrorism" or "narco-terrorism"; we must denounce the increasing Yankee intervention and its plans of aggression. Let's develop and popularize our anti- imperialist campaign of, "Yankees Go Home!". Let's aim better and make an effort to unite the Peruvian people, the immense majority of them, on the basis of the peasant-worker alliance; to prepare ourselves ideologically, politically and organically to continue developing the People's War under any circumstances, raising even higher Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; to go on fighting each day persistently and relentlessly to conquer Power in all the country, as part of the world proletarian revolution, to which we are linked stronger than ever in the overflowing cause of Communism; and to hit our enemies accurately and stunningly, whoever they are, and even more so Yankee imperialism, as we already did in the attack of Santa Lucia, its military base of anti-national aggression, on April 7, one day before the general elections of 1990.

THE SOUTH.
In the South of the country the People's War develops mainly in the Department of Puno. Among its noticeable actions we have the assault and taking of of Ananea, province of Sand¡a; where we hit simultaneously the two police stations, and annihilated the governor, the mayor, the judge and nine policemen, including one wounded and two who surrendered. In Yunguyo, on the Bolivian border, sabotage destroyed the sub prefecture, meeting nearby were Garcia Perez and the Bolivian president. This action generated, once again, patrol incursions by the armed forces of the neighboring country; as in Ananea, it was carried out in October. In November, while Azangaro was taken, peoples' trials and anti-electoral propaganda were made, the candidates resigning en masse as in Huancane. In December, Orurillo, province of Melgar, was taken and peoples' trials and selective annihilations were applied. But actions were not restricted to Puno, also in the departments of Cusco, Arequipa, Moquegua and Tacna, although these departments sabotage and armed agitation and propaganda develops more.

THE NORTH
On its turn, in the North of the country, the city of Huamachuco, capital of the province of Sanchez Carrion, was taken over in October, the mayor was annihilated. In November, annihilation of the mayor of Sanagoran; as well as in Trujillo, capital of the department of La Libertad, five sabotages shook the city, in the near vicinity the ministers of foreign relations of the Group of Eight countries were meeting, the satellite TV antenna was sabotaged, a simultaneous action was done against Channel 7 in Santiago de Chuco and two radio stations run by revisionism in Cajabamba, Department of Cajamarca. And in December, an attack on Cachicad'an and assault on the Mollebamba police station. The actions developed too on the Northern Coast, besides Trujillo, Chimbote, Chiclayo, Piura and Tumbes are, as cities (the three last ones are departmental capitals), theaters of the People's War, developing in them not just propaganda and sabotage but selective annihilations, against an army captain and two policemen, in Tumbes and Chiclayo respectively.

Both in the North and in the South the "land problem" is fundamental, and where the Party's policy is applied, developing (with arms in hands) the invasions and distributing land, as well as defending them later on. The issue is to defend and conquer the land with the People's War, and in a like manner to conquer and defend the necessary conditions to develop production for the benefit of the people. Both in the South and North as well as in the rest of the country, the campaign to boycott the municipal elections were carried out successfully. Armed strikes were promoted to raise the political conscience of the masses, and they were organized only in places where it was possible to guarantee its success, such as in the provinces of Azangaro, in Puno, and in Santiago de Chuco, Otuzco and Sanchez Carrion in the department of La Libertad. These armed strikes paralyzed those regions and resulted in greater voter absenteeism and had repercussions.

In the Mid North, part of the Department of Lima and Ancash, an attack against the president of the electoral board in Huacho, and the annihilation of two policemen at Barranca, both actions took place in September. A sabotage of a bank in Supe and the blowing up of the municipality and police station in Carquin; destruction of micro region in Bolognesi; in Cajatambo, attack on the police counterinsurgency base, peoples' trial to the mayor and sabotage to the regional educational direction; on the Callejon de Huaylas, for three days in a row, electric towers were blown up generating blackouts in 50 towns, red flags with hammer and sickle were raised and anti-electoral slogans were painted; the seizure of Trillos, in Bolognesi province, peoples' trial was held; all these guerrilla actions took place in October. The government decreed a state of emergency in Barranca, Huaura, Cajatambo and Oyon provinces in the Department of Lima; and sent an army battalion to Huaraz. The day before municipal elections, the People's Army took over a bus 25 km from Huaraz, the capital of the Department of Ancash, and after getting the passengers out dynamited it (the companies suspended service); sabotage to the residence of the governor; a general blackout in Aija, Recuay, Yungay, Carhuaz and Huaraz. In the Mid South, the southern part of the Department of Lima and ICA, violent guerrilla hits in the mountain province of Yauyos took place, bordering the departments of Junin and Huancavelica, the People's Army seized several towns and wounding one policeman in a clash in Lincha, in September; and in the same month the towers were blown up at Ca¤ete, while the newspapers themselves cried out: "They have taken over the ICA countryside." In October, taking over the city of Palpa, provincial capital; the precinct and the investigative police post were smashed, annihilating a captain and six policemen. During the same month, a 48 hours armed strike were carried out in the province of Nazca, it was a complete success since the city streets were completely deserted. Also in October, the district of Zu¤iga was taken over by the guerrillas, in the province of Ca¤ete, with more annihilations; and topping off the month's actions, the Coyllor bridge was blown up. The November campaign was focused on the boycott, with propaganda and agitation not to vote; actions against government buildings in Nazca, in the districts of San Clemente and Tupac Amaru of the province of Pisco, whose capital experienced a blackout; actions aimed against the residences of the candidates; the Aprista meeting in ICA was interrupted, and in Pisco it was canceled. In the Mid North, an intense campaign was developed for the boycott and against the municipal elections, and an armed strike was organized in the Callejon de Huaylas with multiple guerrilla actions. It was a complete success throughout the Callejon, helping much to increase electoral absenteeism. Both the Mid North as well as the Mid South are, strategically, of paramount importance to surround Lima, as everyone knows.

LIMA.

The capital city, with one-third of the nation's population; macrocephalic capital of an oppressed and backward nation, is a great concentration of economic, political and military power, a gigantic mirror of the general crisis in Peruvian society; an immense drum of national and international repercussion; but at the same time, mainly the primary center of the Peruvian proletariat, prime witness of the hunger and struggles of inexhaustible legions of popular masses, flesh of the flesh of our heroic people who constantly toil, day after day, working and fighting at the factories and in the neighborhoods and shantytowns.

Based on these outstanding characteristics, we can judge the fundamental and transcendental importance of waging the People's War also in the capital; more so if the road from the country to the city, of surrounding the cities from the countryside, must be crowned, after the arduous struggle of the protracted war, in the insurrection in the cities and mainly so in the capital city; especially if we keep in mind the peculiarities of the People's War in Peru, which follows the road from the countryside to the city, but develops the struggle in both, with the countryside the main part, as it still is, and the city as a complement, as was set in the "Outline of the Armed Struggle" approved in the VIII Plenum of the Central Committee. Starting from that premise, part of the Party's propaganda reaches the capital to profoundly transform and shape its ideological and political foundations; there the proletariat and the people receive the class ideology, turning into the strength of their arms the messages they get in their minds: the "Interview to Chairman Gonzalo"; the poster "Nine years of People's War"; the graphic publication "Day of Heroism. Third Anniversary"; Chairman Mao's "Nothing is impossible to whomever dares to climb the heights"; Lenin's anthology "Imperialism is the waiting room to the social revolution of the proletariat"; or the pamphlets "The proletarian revolution and Khrushchev's revisionism" and "On the dictatorship of the Proletariat"; or "In commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the Chinese Revolution" and "The Party, the People's War and the Boycott."

Among the guerrilla actions shaking up Lima, during the First Campaign of Developing, in the last third of 1989, we conducted armed propaganda and agitation, the successive campaigns developed with the masses, with the proletariat, the leading class of the revolution and the poor masses of the neighborhoods and shantytowns, the base of party work in the capital; an intensive campaign of flyer distribution in support of the class struggle, always aiming at the deepest sectors of the people, who will transform the old society. This form of struggle consists from the simple painting of slogans in people's boards, up to the conspicuous murals painted at San Marcos University, which proclaim the rebellion of the youth; from the vibrant leaflets in the hands, to the huge posters stamping the words "People's War" on the walls, showcases, buses, trains; from the red flag commanded by the hammer and the sickle, which announces the new proletarian dawn, to the thundering unleashed by the explosive charge; from the steeled spirit of the class which animates the marches, up to the vigorous overflow of the armed mobilizations which explodes in blockades and flaming tires of Molotovs and noise bombs. In synthesis, from the idea that arms the mind to the shining hands in guerrilla actions.

The sabotages too express themselves, like the one at Renasa, action in support of the struggling mining proletarians during the month of September. In October, car bombs at the embassies of the USSR and China and at the United States Consulate. The actions against the two imperialists superpowers are part of our answer to the new global counterrevolutionary offensive, which is headed by Gorbachev, Deng and their gangs of traitors. The burning of buses, about ten of them were burned, as well as others before and after October, is another form of sabotage that has had a great impact, which hit mainly State enterprises, since the State uses those enterprises politically, trying to break up the people's struggles.

The electrical blackouts are another type of sabotage that has importance and repercussions each time. In September, October, November and December there have been blackouts of major dimensions, spanning not just from Marcona, in ICA, up to Chiclayo, in Lambayeque, going through the Department of Lima and mainly in the capital, but also hitting all of the Coastal and central Sierra; but besides their duration with all their sequels they often lasts more than ten days. In observing how the state handles blackouts and their derived problems, we see clearly whose interests it protects and whom it benefits, that is, to whom they serve first and better.

Selective annihilation hits hard the snitches, recalcitrant enemies of the class and the people, and other individuals with debts of blood; let's mention only two: first the Commander of the National Police and sub chief of Interpol, who in Ayacucho bathed in the blood of the people, murdering the children of the masses. Second, this is recent, the former president of the Social Security (IPSS), F.S. Salaverry, who was a sharp knife in the heart of every insured in Peru, a hated trafficker of public health and daily murderer of all the retirees in the country; his annihilation hit particularly hard the bureaucracy (one of the fundamental pillars of the State, the principal one after the armed forces.) The hypocritical wailing of some is not truly for the justly annihilated, but a venting of anxiety by the guilty conscience of the big oppressor bureaucrats, over whose heads pend the implacable word of people's justice, which may take a while to be accomplished but it is sure to come.

The guerrilla combats materialized in the attack of the main police station at the San Ildefonso Market on October 2; annihilated were a lieutenant and five subordinates, according to bourgeois newspapers. On December 15, 1989, an ambush of a Peruvian army bus transporting 35 or 40 effective of the army intelligence service (SIE), trapped at the crossing of Zarumilla Avenue and Jiron Pedregal, in the San Martin de Porres district. Four were annihilated and 15 wounded, some seriously, according to reaction's own newspapers.

The armed strike of November 3rd deserves special mention. This strike in the capital acquired great importance since it targeted directly the municipal elections, and for this reason it merited the concentrated fury of the reactionaries, revisionists and all of their lackeys in general. They mobilized heaven and earth trying to break it up; but when they saw it was uncontainable, they appealed to their usual great argument, unrestrained violence, and there we had the real cause of the brutal and widespread repression at Victoria Square. There, the National Police once more unleashed its bloodthirsty fury, and brutally assaulted the multitude of friends and relatives of those victims of repression who marched in the hundreds, carrying wreaths, flowers and banners, led by the Committee of Families of Prisoners of War and Disappeared, to the cemetery, in order to render tribute to the Heroes of the People fallen in the Rebellion in the Luminous Trenches of Combat, and to the rest of the fighters and children of the people who have given their lives for the revolution and shed their blood for the People's War. But the defying courage of the people, the militant defense of the fighters and the support of the masses, shone to confront the reactionary ignominy. For that reason, it deserves our firmest rejection, the treacherous "condemnation" against the brutally attacked marchers, not only by our recalcitrant enemies, but also by those who call themselves "revolutionary," who in collusion with reaction "condemned" the victims of repression, and in essence, as usual they supported the government and reaction. However, repression proved useless to contain the preparations of the strike, which directly threatened the electoral hacks; the self-proclaimed "Left Unity" (IU) jumped to the forefront. Henry Pease, IU candidate to mayor of Lima, jumped to defend what he called "democracy" and against the purported "terrorism"; and he convoked a de facto anticommunist crusade of fascist odor, under the banner of a "civic march," invoking unity of all "democrats" at a meeting held on November 3rd, the same day as the strike. Their meeting was conducted under the umbrella and protection of genocidal army and police guns, and under the "spiritual" mantle of the Catholic Church; present were the candidates, the bosses of the reactionary parties, among them (of course) the revisionist chiefs, including the "caudillos" of the workers unions bureaucracy; first and foremost was Vargas Llosa, for now the narrow winner of the first round in the elections, with whom H. Pease united in an embrace of black collusion and contention. What did IU and its candidate Pease get out of this meritorious service? The defeat of Pease and IU in the municipal elections of 90 and a major disaster in the April [presidential elections], was a just and well- deserved repudiation by the people. But neither the anticommunist march was able to contain the armed strike on November 3, which was a resounding victory for the proletariat and the people, one further step toward the major incorporation of the masses to the People's War. "It doesn't matter what the traitors say!"

It is not possible to speak of the People's War, of the un declinable toil it entails, without having very much in mind the men and women, militant fighters and children of the masses, who every hour of the day, twenty-four fours each day, fight an uphill battle in the dungeons of reaction; those who throughout the country built the Luminous Trenches of Combat out of those dungeons; those who on June 19, 1986, by shedding their own blood gave us the "Day of Heroism," a historic milestone of the rebellion, those who never bent their knees, rose Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought to the heights and do it and will continue to fight for the victory of the People's War, no matter what kind of trench it happens to be in.

This is the direction of ten years of People's War and, in synthesis, the great development achieved on its tenth anniversary. Its uncontainable and ever growing expansion materialized in the multiplication of the Open People's Committees, achieved precisely in 1989, a historic victory and transcendental step towards conquering Power countrywide. Then, what does he purported "swamping" of the People's War claimed by reactionaries consist of? It consists simply of a black vomit spewed by the reactionaries and their hacks. Over this supposed "swamping" they carry out a taunted and widely publicized campaign of "strategic failure of Sendero," which they try to keep up, besides, with their supposed "abandoning of the revolutionary road" and "non achievement of goals." What is their base for this supposed "abandoning of the road?" No other than the advancement of the People's War in the cities! An old publicity trick by the reactionary press, tried in much the same way during the elections of 1985, which is not simply a coincidence. However, what is real and practical are the continuous and victorious actions materialized to date, and how the war flows on the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside and which is applied firmly and consequently.

Moreover, according to our specific conditions, we apply this road following the norm of developing simultaneously the People's War in countryside and city, the countryside being the principal and the city a complement. Dialectically, the progress in the cities is an evidence of the development of the road from countryside to city, and the perspective to transfer the vertex of the People's War from the countryside to the city to conquer Power in all the country. All of which is in strict conformity with the process of surrounding the cities from the countryside; and consequently the People's War in Peru, is the application of the theory of the People's War of Chairman Mao Tse-tung, as part of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, applied to the specific conditions of the Peruvian Revolution.

On the other hand, what is the basis for their empty chatter of "non-achievement of goals?" On this, they viciously traffic with revolutionary secrets, since we can publicize general policies and even concrete policies in certain fields, but not addressing specific details, which obviously only serve the enemy. Thus, competing among themselves on who serve best their masters (reaction and imperialism, mainly Yankee), they cry out loud: "they haven't met their goals," "the People's Guerrilla Army doesn't exist," "there is no New Power," "they didn't achieve the strategic equilibrium." If the People's Army didn't exist, then what armed organization has carried out more than 120,000 guerrilla actions (1980-1989)? What armed organization is developing the People's War in almost the entire country? What armed organization have the reactionary armed and police forces been fighting for ten years? Our military practice is made of solid and stunning realities and only an armed force like the People's Guerrilla Army can fulfill it and maintain it. The thing is that People's Army is an army of the new type, therefore its construction, fighting methods and development follow other principles; Chairman Mao taught us: "You fight in your way and we in ours; we fight when we can win and retreat when we cannot"; great principle explained in 1965 as follows: "In other words, you rely on modern weapons and we rely in the masses of people with a high revolutionary conscience; you play with your superiority and we with ours; you have your combat methods and we have ours."

ABOUT THE NEW POWER.
Since 1982 we have been destroying the Old Power in the countryside; generating in consequence a Power vacuum, each day greater and extending to larger areas; as is well known and recognized. Does that Power vacuum remain a political limbo, an interregnum of the class struggle? Can anyone believe that the Old Power is destroyed and nothing can replace it? Doesn't the destruction of the Old Power imply, as counterweight, the construction of the New Power? Aren't destruction of the Old Power and construction of the New Power two terms of the same contradiction? Well then, over the destruction of the Old Power the New is created, which is a joint dictatorship, based on the worker-peasant alliance and supported by the People's Army. As the ABC of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism reads, the New Power in its development obviously follows the fluidity of the People's War, and the specifications of our concrete reality. But precisely with the multiplication of the Open People's Committees, in 1989, the New State tends to achieve a relative stability.

About strategic equilibrium, we can't just pull it out of a thin air, nor like a gambler pulls an ace off his sleeves. These problems must be studied seriously, and especially the military ones. The point is clear and concise: the defensive, the equilibrium and the strategic offensive, as we well know, are the three elements of the protracted war. The first being longest and, how international experience shows it, the development of the second and third are intimately linked to the complex situation of the overall class struggle in the country, and to the world situation, since they entail sweeping away in the entire country, the rule of reaction and of imperialism and the installation in the entire nation of a People's Republic, with all the repercussions it has in the world, starting from the neighboring countries.

The above is a brief description about the direction and perspective of the People's War in Peru, which continues firmly and on the rise, with unbending tenacity. Have we set any specific date to go over to strategic equilibrium? Did any military plan have that specific objective? Is it an unfulfilled "commitment?" Is it a task linked to the reactionary elections? or is it a "goal" of Capping off the Great Leap with a Golden Seal! or any other campaign, as they say? Pure speculations aimed at slandering the People's War, trying to discredit it before the masses, and sow confusion. As the Central Committee session stated, this engender is being propagated precisely at the time that Peruvian reaction and imperialism have "a need to develop the counterinsurgency war, empower their military actions, mobilize the masses and increase intervention, mainly Yankee," and when, under the disguise of fighting against "drug trafficking," Yankee imperialism plans its greater direct aggression against the People's War. Situations which, linked to the transcendental progress of the People's War in 89 enabled the advance from guerrilla warfare to war of movements, and clearly showed that strategic equilibrium was in the cards and that the revolution developed in decisive moments. That too, of course, was within our concrete material conditions.

In conclusion, the purported "strategic failure of Sendero," supposedly based on the so-called "swamping" sustained by the nonsense that there is "an abandonment of the road" and "non attainment of goals," is simply a new sinister reactionary campaign led by Yankee imperialism itself. It is part of the psychological warfare and the ongoing plan to empower the counterinsurgency war. But besides all that, in the short term, it seeks to sow confusion amidst the Peruvian people and to undermine the linking between the masses and the People's War.

In order to expose and mark with fire those vile mercenaries who miserably and treacherously help reaction and imperialism, it is worth highlighting two questions: First, they do not pay attention to the material conditions of the Peruvian Revolution; this is something they obviously cannot see now or in the future, but we take it fully into account, which at the same time refutes the lie that we practice dogmatism. Second, that behind their demagoguery, lies the old rotten revisionist criteria about revolutionary situations, which take them to imagine today (even if they do not say so explicitly), the existence of a revolutionary crisis that, according to them, not to seize Power now would imply the failure of the revolution in general and of the People's War in particular. Let's remember the three requirements for the existence of a revolutionary situation:

1. Power escapes the hands of reaction,

2. revisionism and opportunism do not exert an influence over the masses,

3. the masses close ranks around the Party.

Specifically in our case, the revolutionary crisis is linked to the People's War, it suffices to say:

1. the armed forces retain it capacity to sustain the old State;

2. revisionism and opportunism continue to ride over the masses through the industrial and trade union bureaucracy and;

3. the People's War must still generate the great jump about incorporating the masses, which happens at the end of it.

Therefore, what we have is a revolutionary situation in increasing development due to the sharpening of the class struggle and, mainly, the People's War, which not only has persisted for ten years, but each day goes on, it is demolishing the Old State and constructing the New Power a little more, aiming at completely sweeping aside the obsolete and putrid Peruvian society of oppression and exploitation. Consequently, the perspective of the current revolutionary situation in development is the revolutionary crisis or the rise (auge) of the revolution, in the words of P. Mao Tse-tung.

Closely linked to the lie about the "strategic failure of Sendero" is the lie about "division and surrender." The "surrender" farce is not new. Since the beginning of his genocidal demagogic government, Garcia Perez and the armed forces staged it; in the [document] "Develop the People's War to Serve the World Revolution," we read:

"The October 1986 Lurigancho genocide followed, after the reactionary APRA government staged the farce of the `massive capitulation of Senderistas' at Llochegua and Corazon-Pampa, province of La Mar, Department of Ayacucho; even, as reported by all the media, an interview was staged between the `supreme chief' (Garcia Perez) with `surrendered leaders' who he received at the Palace, 'an act filmed from a distance' in which nobody heard anything or saw anyone's face due ostensibly to `understandable security reasons.' But the engender was quickly disemboweled by the published statements of a navy officer who took part in the operative in question: `the same officer explained in the interview by this reporter that the hundred or so people who allegedly surrendered, among men, women and children, never got near the bases of Corazon-Pampa or Llochegua, but were rounded up by marine infantry at the mountain heights and later on taken to both localities. When lieutenant Anibal was asked if the peasants, at the time of the surrendering, carried any weapons, he answered no . . . '; according to La Republica of October 25, 1985. That was the famous lie about the 'surrendering.'"

Again today, they resurrect the same treacherous lie trying to undermine the People's War and cover up the forceful nucleation they inflict upon the peasantry, to create mesnadas (paramilitary peasants), repeating obsolete molds previously smashed by the convergence of the enslaved masses themselves and by guerrilla actions. It is evident that with the increasing surrender of mesnadas created by the armed forces, which we saw more frequently these past few months, their aim is to reenact the genocidal blood bath of the years 83 and 84.

THE REACTIONARY DREAM "SPLIT IN SENDERO".
This purulent tale repeated over and over by reaction is "based" on the purported "surrender," "swamping" and "strategic failure" discussed previously, and on forgered flyers distributed by the armed forces (as part of their psychological warfare) as well as on a supposedly, "being tired of so much fighting," "being sorry for so many deaths," "hard life and difficult conditions," etc., all falsehoods that clearly revealed which institutions, organizations and feathery pens were the sources of such engenders. All of them are defenders or sustainers or "retainers" of the old State and the obsolete Peruvian society: deadly enemies of the People's War who cover up the crimes of the Peruvian State and its armed and police forces of the daily genocides they perpetrate against the people. These hacks deny the basic principles of war; the quota needed to annihilate the enemy, the aspects of construction that the war requires. They are sunk in the historical pessimism of reaction and imperialism, whom they serve, incapable of understanding that the People's War is animated and developed by the optimism of class provided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought and that each fighter of the People's Army is forged by the principle of, "Serving the people with all her/his heart." The nonsense they preach, naturally, is well suited to the counterinsurgency plans and aimed against the People's War and the Party, seeking to fetter the brilliant revolutionary perspective.

In addition, those who have internal problems derived from their own mistakes and opportunism, infatuated especially by their persistent electioneering, joyfully cry out the supposed existence of the two positions in the Party: "a militarist one and a political one." Such differentiation is theoretically erroneous; assuming, as they speculate, the existence of a military position as such, would be a right opportunist line, whose component, with regard to the military line, would be bourgeois line opposed to the Party. On what do they base such Philistine speculation? On the disemboweled "defeat and swamping of 1989" and the "strategic failure!" All this only shows their desperation and impotence before the advance of a People's War which threatens their nefarious riding on the masses and shakes their blessed chapels of parliamentary cretinism.

However, all that chatter is only dead leaves before the strong unity of the Party, solidly sustained on the Basis of Party Unity (BUP), sanctioned at the First Congress, and an irreplaceable warranty of the steady development of the People's War.

In synthesis, what are the bottom causes of the insane fabrication about "split and surrender?" The general elections, which acquire a crucial character to reaction and its lackeys, even more so after the major weakening of the demo bourgeois system derived from the April election and the dark perspectives faced by whoever results elected in the runoff. The emboldened wave of strikes, the stunning expression of the sharpening class struggle, which day after day assumes the slogan of, "Fight and Resist!" And the vigorous and expansive development of the People's War, whose brilliant perspective is to, Conquer Power in all the Country! These are the three bottom causes carrying the armed and police forces, no doubt with the approval and support of their "supreme chief," the genocidal demagogue. No one with at least -a half an ounce of brain can take seriously the crude and ridiculous fabricated lie about "split and surrender." A campaign launched also launched as part of their psychological warfare. And each organization, parties, celebrities, candidates and lackeys, "revolutionary leader," and workers' unions hacks, according to his/her particular degree of dialectic collusion vs. contention in the amidst of reaction, as well as appetite and pay, has trafficked with the bizarre farce. But who, with the persistence of a gambler, has trafficked most with the engender, is its coauthor Garcia Perez, the notorious "charismatic" genocidal demagogue, the nefarious head of the government bringing in most hunger in over 1000 years of Peruvian history, who especially in the last few months, cried at the top of his lungs "the defeat of Sendero." In this way, in that personal style of his which cavalierly ignores the most obvious truths, oblivious to reality, champion of the flamboyant empty chatter; and so he stated last April: Terrorism proposed a social revolution, an insurrection generalized in the entire country. And in all that it failed, I assure you without any doubts." What is Garcia Perez after? To present himself as the victor and his government as successful in order to, manipulate the disaster the next government will be, returning as a savior in 95. That is his dream, to which some self-proclaimed "revolutionaries" are helping too. That is, then, the gaseous lie of the so-called "split and surrendering of Sendero," which as its predecessors, vanishes before the fire storm of the People's War.

And since it couldn't be any other way, the reactionaries loudly preached that the votes and parliamentary cretinism of the general elections, as well as the municipal elections in 89, loudly preached the "first and biggest loser," and the imaginary defeat of the boycott. Already in the 1985 election the same was cried; then Belaunde, now a conspicuous member of FREDEMO, proclaimed "the biggest loser is terrorism." While Barrantes, "the natural United Left candidate," who today can't even get 5% of the votes cast, recited: "Sendero will fail . . . the electoral results of April 14th, with the massive presence of the entire people, constituted the best rejection of terrorism." But, who truly failed? Where is now the bankrupted champion of votes and polling places? At the same time, the current editor of "Expreso" pontificated: "there were two big losers in Sunday's general election: sender ism . . . " Therefore, the chatter is nothing new, the lyrics and the tune are the same, except that today is more anguished as well as more unbelievable. Now Garcia Perez, the non-registered candidate, who prepares his presidential dream for 95, who in the municipal elections called to cast blank or null votes, because, he claimed, the issue was to vote in any way in order to "defend democracy against terrorism." On the same April 8th, Garcia Perez proclaimed arrogantly and triumphantly: "Today you will see how the immense majority of the people (99% according to the APRA's daily Hoy) participate in democracy by casting their votes, and will bury terrorism by the electoral act."

Meanwhile Vargas Llosa and Fujimori, the winning candidates of the first round, with the emphasis and interpretation satisfactory to their endeavors, then in closed solidarity greeted the "triumph of democracy and the defeat of terrorism," thus repeating and honoring the same reactionary blabber of their predecessors. H. Pease, the new hero of the so-called "Left" Unity, from the ebb of his 7% of cast votes, proclaimed: "The first and biggest loser is Sendero." Of course, all of their statements were accompanied by an obliging chorus of the media and feathery pens. A simple conclusion follows from all of this: the same script and characters, defense of the existing order and the Old State, only the actors are changing, publicity increases and demagoguery grows. The same grotesque farce every five years!

In their publicity development, elections have the following course: First, to elevate to the skies the importance of elections and fight the alleged "sinister terrorist plan of preventing elections throughout the country by threatening to amputate fingers and murder those who vote";

Second, to loudly celebrate with drums and platters the "massive participation of people in the polling places" (in Peru voting is compulsory and, according to experts, if it wasn't forced not even half of current voters would show up), as well as the "triumph of democracy," the "failures of the boycott" and the "defeat of Sendero," while results are manipulated and adulterated, especially in the emergency zones, and the true figure on absenteeism is hidden; and,

Third, as late (and slowly) as possible, data on results begins to trickle in, until finally the well groomed and tailored results are announced by the National Electoral Board. Keep in mind this process so as not to be fooled by the electoral mumbo jumbo and find the truth behind all that compromised reactionary charade.

Well then, what do the official electoral results themselves say? Besides the fact that some 20% of able voters are not registered at all, 21.25% of those registered did not go to vote, a percentage which rises to 27% if we consider blank and null votes, including those who voted blank or null. Thus, this amount (27%) is only 0.6% less than the one obtained by Vargas Llosa (the winning candidate in the first run), and 2.4% more than the one obtained by Fujimori, who finished second. Consequently, if we compare the last two general elections in the five-year period, while absenteeism in 1985 only reached 8.8% of registered voters, in April of 1990 it climbed to 21.2%. In other words, from 1985 to 1990 absenteeism increased 2.5 times (150%). So, can anyone with a grain of sense speak of the failure of the boycott? , Or can anyone with a breeze of objectivity say, "the first and biggest loser is Sendero?" The matter is very clear and stunning, the tactic of the boycott, applied by the Party as part of the People's War, is each time more successful and complete, deepening the class struggle throughout the country with an increasing tendency against the elections, and in that way undermining one of the fundamental pillars of the demo bourgeois order, of the Peruvian State, of the class dictatorship headed by the big bourgeoisie. An anti-electoral tendency was also reflected in the municipal election of 89, when it was also loudly preached the defeat of the boycott, then absenteeism, according to projections, reached 17%; which obviously shows an evident increase. The boycott, therefore, is an incontrovertible reality and an undeniable success. It shows clearly how the policy of obstructing the elections, of undermining them and impeding them wherever possible is highly successful and, above all, it generates an anti-electoral tendency helpful to the formation of the political conscience of the people. A boycott tactic and anti-electoral tendency applied are forged by the People's War and is developed as an integral part of it. It is a good example of how to utilize the elections in the development of the People's War.

As to blank and null votes, they reached 15.35% of votes cast, that means in 1990 there was an increase of 1.45% with respect to 1985. Although null/blank votes went up, however it was much less than absenteeism; which (reasonably) raises the issue of fraud with this type of votes in detriment of those who cast them.

The following comparative table is most expressive; of importance is the increase of absenteeism, especially in areas in which the People's War develops more intensely:

INSERT TABLE HERE

THE BOYCOTT: AN UNDENIABLE SUCCESS
Here we can see the boycott as an incontestable success, a boycott which besides developing a tendency among the people against the elections, it helps the People's War; and the results of the April 1990 elections, an electoral process which, contrary to what reaction and imperialism wanted, weakened the system undermining its purported legitimacy (an important matter for the counterinsurgency war), a matter of obvious grave repercussions for the existing order. To conclude, on the elections and on the boycott, we only need to remember the following paragraphs of the already quoted "Developing . . . " [Document of the PCP, Developing the People's War at the Service of the World Proletarian Revolution - TRANS. "]:

"The fundamental thing about these tables is that the sum of the non registered, of the non voters and the null and blank voters added millions. This large mass is composed mostly by the non registered, that is people who operate outside the existing political system or who are openly against the same. It is also composed by non voters, who are against the elections or who are not interested in them; and by null and blank voters who formally comply with the obligation to vote and do not expect anything out it, its outcome or are not in agreement with any of the participating political parties. In general terms, this mass of citizens expresses repudiation, or indifference with respect to the existing political order and its elections to choose oppressors, its parties, which are instruments in the service of maintaining the established order, its preservation and evolution.

In synthesis, it means the objective negation and questioning of the Peruvian society and its institutions, of the historically obsolete social system, which must be swept away, as we are already doing with weapons since there is no other way of doing it, in the search of a new society which truly serves the people." And:

"In the last elections, as in others, the Communist Party of Peru only called for the boycott, to obstruct them and impede them wherever possible, but not to prevent the entire process as reaction pretends to impute the Party in order to proclaim its false triumphs due to the lack of real ones. But the historical main tendency is the fusion of the People's War led by the Party, with that great torrent represented by the millions of non registered, non voting and those blank or null vote casters; this is the torrent, which the Party is helping to structure as part of the sea of masses which necessarily will sweep away the old order of exploitation and oppression."

Up to here is the development of the People's War, and the boycott as part of it; but the principal, and transcendental question concentrating our attention, as necessary consequence of the road followed, is the conquest of Power countrywide. This is the brilliant perspective of the People's War; more so in light of the turbulent and decisive years we visualize for Peruvian society in the years to come in the near future, and especially in view of the extremely complex class struggle developing in today's world. For that reason, let's keep more in mind than ever Mariategui's words:

"I am a revolutionary. But I believe that between men of clear thinking and defined positions, it is easy to understand and appreciate each other, even when fighting against each other. Above all, fighting against each other. With the political sector that I will never be able to reach an understanding is with the other one: with mediocre reformism, with domesticated socialism, with pharisean democracy. Furthermore, if the revolution demands violence, authority, discipline, I am for violence, for authority, for discipline. I accept them, as a whole, with all their horrors, without cowardly reservations."

And above all what Marx, the great founder of Marxism, established: "Only under an order of things in which there are no classes or class antagonisms, is that social evolutions will cease to be political revolutions. Until such time comes, on the eve of each general reorganization of society, the last word will always be: `Struggle or die, the bloody struggle or nothing. It is the inexorable dilemma."'

CHAPTER 4. ELECTIONS, NO! PEOPLE'S WAR, YES!
To resolutely uphold Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism, it is decisive to conquer Power countrywide, build the People's Republic of Peru and serve the world proletarian revolution by assuming firmly the undefeated and unblemished ideology of the proletariat in its three integral parts: the Marxist philosophy, the proletarian political economy and scientific socialism, not only to understand the world, but mainly to transform it. Thus, we must always base our politics on the powerful truth of Marxism- Leninism-Maoism, today more than ever, because Marxism is standing up against the sinister converging attack of both imperialism and the counterrevolutionary revisionist offensive led by Gorbachev and Deng. This is true even more so today, when the bloody world counterrevolution dreams of wiping out the proletariat and its irreplaceable historic role, aiming at the heart of the class: its ideology Marxism- Leninism-Maoism Class of which Chairman Mao said: "The proletariat is the greatest class in the history of humanity. It is the most powerful ideological and political revolutionary class, and due to its strength, it can and must unite the great majority of the people isolating and smashing the handful of enemies." Toward this end, we base ourselves on the First Congress of the Party, which in the first part of the Programma, highlights the basic principles:

PROGRAM
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - Concerning the Programme of the Communist Party of Peru

[Document prepared for publication by the Peru People‘s Movement (Reorganization Committee) based on the minutes of the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru, 1988-89. Edited based on further excerpts published on „New Peru“.

PRESENTATION

Before, by way of presentation, it is necessary to reiterate and we are going to do it once and a thousand times more that the defense of Chairman Gonzalo and of Gonzalo Thought is a task indissolubly united to the task of imposing Maoism as the only command and guide of the World Revolution, so that Maoism may go on to lead the New Great Wave of the World Revolution, which is currently developing in the stage of its strategic offensive and is doing so by generating militarized Communist Parties, to develop the People‘s War in the different countries of the world and to converge in the World People‘s War with which we will sweep imperialism and reaction from the face of the Earth. All in a struggle to the death against revisionism.

Suffice it to say that it is Chairman Gonzalo who has defined Maoism as the third, new and higher stage of the ideology of the proletariat, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism for all the Communists of the world. It has given us the first reconstituted Communist Party, as a militarized Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Party. And with the initiation and development of the People‘s War it contributes decisively to the World Revolution, demonstrating the validity of Maoism and the universal validity of the People‘s War. For this reason the Communist Parties and Maoist Organizations of Latin America and the world have established the need to uphold, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism with the universally valid contributions of Gonzalo Thought.

Chairman Gonzalo has been for nearly 26 years in a cell of absolute isolation, without communication with the Communist Party of Peru (CPP) and other revolutionaries and progressives of Peru and the world, only the representatives of the judicial, prison and repressive apparatus of the old Peruvian State and the agents of imperialism and the rats of the revisionist and capitulationist Right-Opportunist Line (ROL) have access to him. The Yankee CIA and the intelligence officers of reaction have made known on various occasions how they have manipulated and fabricated information destined for the most important revolutionary prisoner of war in the world, they themselves say, full of cynicism, that on one occasion they have given him a single issue of „Caretas“ magazine, manufactured expressly for him and the CIA agent Merino declared in court that he had fabricated the so-called „peace letters“.

All of the above leads us to express that we do not recognize or accept anything that imperialism, reaction or the ROL rats say about Chairman Gonzalo, nothing they say he has said, written, signed, etc., and they do not represent anything and lack anything of any kind, and neither do the photos, newspaper reports made on the basis of information notes of the repressors, the videos or alleged presentations made by the enemy of Chairman Gonzalo, even more so if he is only surrounded by judges, prosecutors, jailers, soldiers, policemen, lawyers and their ROL servants, represent anything and lack any validity. All this is a material truth that no one with a handful of brains and, moreover, no dialectical materialist can deny. This is the partisan and historical truth. It is decisive for us to hold fast to Chairman Gonzalo‘s Great Leadership and Thought in order to complete the still pending task of the General Reorganization at home and abroad to overcome the turning point and the bend in the People‘s War. The people clamor to be led by the Party, the people need the development of the People‘s War, the international proletariat and the peoples of the world encourage us with their struggles and hopes, shedding their blood in the struggle against imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and semi-feudalism.

The Communists of our country cannot allow their souls to be snatched away by the enemy, which is what he intends, the enemy with the service of the ROL wants to snatch from us the Great Leadership of Chairman Gonzalo based solidly on his all-powerful Gonzalo Thought.

June 2018

Reorganization Committee
Peru People‘s Movement]

SPEECH CONCERNING THE PROGRAMME OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU

Regarding the Programme, we must think that the Programme must be a document that establishes principles in a concrete way and that at the same time serves to highlight the basic principles that we need to enumerate in an exhaustive way in order to manage them better, this is our need. Thus, the Statutes of ‘45 or ‘69 in China are not written in this way; but we have to think of making the documents according to what our Party needs at present; we must always keep in mind that we have a new militancy that has a little formation, that we must deliver a document in consequence that allows them to have clearer, more concrete things and that at the same time are easier to study and understand; that is why we list in this way, with asterisks, the problems of principles. This Programme and Statutes are adjusted not only to what is read in the 7th and 9th Congresses of the Communist Party of China (CPCh). But also to what Chairman Mao Tse-tung presents us as a Programme in „On Coalition Government“ in volume III; those are our bases, apart from having seen those Programmes we have just read, the Programmes established by Lenin and also the Programmes analyzed by Marx and Engels; „Critique of the Gotha Programme“, for example, is very interesting, of great transcendence, we must think that this was written by Marx himself, of course, as prior knowledge and acceptance of Engels, because they always acted like that.

PROGRAMME

„The Communist Party of Peru is based on and guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism and, specifically, by Gonzalo Thought as a creative application of the universal truth to the concrete conditions of the Peruvian Revolution, as made by Chairman Gonzalo, Great Leader of our Party.“ It is very concrete. Here we would have nothing to substantiate, as we have already done so; it would be useless, especially in the absence of time, to reiterate what we have already seen at length.

„The Communist Party of Peru, organized vanguard of the Peruvian proletariat and integral part of the international proletariat, especially upholds the following basic principles […]“ And to highlight that the Party assumes very specially the following basic principles, that is to say, to highlight basic principles, but it does not say that those are all of them but that those are the ones we assume very especially; that must be taken into account, […] there are 11 and in order not to number them but to highlight them well, we have put an asterisk because it would not be good to put 1, 2, 3, 4, it would not be right; but then why do we not put them one after the other? Because this way it is clearer, sharper, that is the reason.

„Contradiction as the only fundamental law of the incessant transformation of eternal matter“. We adhere to this world outlook, from there we must start, it is very clear, it is the world outlook. Here we express our condition of materialists when we say eternal matter and dialectics when we emphasize contradiction. Here then is world outlook in condensed form.

„The masses make history and ‚it is right to rebel‘“. Here we move on to the social world, to the society that is the product of the masses. Why do we put „It is right to rebel!“? Because this is a great principle established by Chairman Mao Tse-tung; he says that up until then servitude was taught, the subjugation of the masses, but it is Marx who calls the masses to rebel, establishing a turn in history. Here what we have put is that in the Chairman‘s quote „It is right to rebel!“, which is part of a more extensive quote where he expresses what I have just said, that is what is expressed there, the turn that Marxism implies of the role of the masses in society, the problem of rebellion, the negation of the submission of the masses; never before had it been raised in this way, they had always been called to submission, capitalism is a clear expression of that.

„Class struggle, dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian internationalism“. What does this part deal with? With the motor, with the contradiction in the social world, it deals with it because that contradiction expresses itself in class struggle. It establishes a connection between class struggle, dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian internationalism. Marx told us that he had not discovered the class struggle because it was done by French historians, that is true; what Marx did was to give a foundation of the basis that supported the classes and the class struggle and he drew the transcendental conclusion that the class struggle led to the dictatorship of the proletariat, but being the class, the proletariat being a single class at international level that develops in the various countries of the Earth, then we have to raise proletarian internationalism, because the class has the same interest, the same common goal, no matter if it is Peruvian, Bolivian, Japanese, North American, French or whatever, it is the same class, the same goal, the same interest, that is why we have to raise proletarian internationalism.

„The need for a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Party that firmly applies independence, autonomy and self-reliance“. Chairman Mao Tse-tung, in 1948, reiterating Lenin and Marx, speaks of the need for the Communist Party, because without a Communist Party there is no way for the proletariat to lead the revolution nor to serve the people. What we must emphasize is our Marxist-Leninist-Maoist condition, in accordance with what it says in the paragraph, it is not simply a Marxist-Leninist Party; the declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) speaks of Marxist-Leninist Parties, we cannot speak like that, we are a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Party, it is not possible to be in the case, as the RIM states, Marxist-Leninist-Mao Tse-tung Thought and have a Marxist-Leninist Party, at least we should put: Marxist-Leninist-Mao Tse-tung Thought Party, there is then always the problem of staying within Marxism-Leninism, that is why this is why we must affirm it.

As for firmly applying independence: Since Marx it has been established that the Communist Party is a Party distinct from and opposed to all the others, because it has its own class interest, opposed to, distinct from that of the other classes. because while the other classes seek property, the proletariat does not; from there derives its condition of final class in history and derives a goal, Communism; only the proletariat has that historical task, that is why we must emphasize its independence from the parties of other classes. Autonomy: a Party must decide for itself, because the Communist Party — in our case — responds to the Peruvian Revolution, as a part of and serving the World Revolution, in agreement, but for the Peruvian Revolution we must have autonomy, we cannot follow any command staff; the Chairman reiterated many times: „There is no father Party, there is no son Party, the Parties are equal and each Party must decide for itself“, for that reason what fits between Parties is the conversations to arrive at common points, in common agreement; this is very important, no command staff! That is revisionism! Self-reliance: the Party must base itself on its own forces; the main thing is, from this, to base itself on its own forces to establish its politics, that is the main thing in self-reliance, it is necessary to think well because sometimes it is reduced to a simple economic question, it is also part, but it is not the main thing, Comrades; also, of course, it means that a Party should not live on what another gives it, that is not to rely on its own efforts, but obviously this does not deny, in any way, proletarian internationalism and the fraternal help that some Parties owe to others, that is already a problem of proletarian internationalism.

„To combat imperialism, revisionism, and reaction unbreakably and implacably“. We consider that although it is said to combat imperialism and to combat revisionism, it is an unbreakable and implacable struggle, it is also necessary to combat reaction because these three: imperialism, revisionism and reaction, are unbreakably united and all three must be fought implacably. What is the point of this? To emphasize that there is also an obligation to fight reaction implacably. For example, the reactionary ideology of the Catholic Church, are we going to accept it, the semi-feudal world outlook, are we going to accept it, the feudalists, the reactionary ideas in the world or reactionary systems in the world, are we going to accept them? No. Are they linked to revisionism? Yes, it is enough to see that fetid alliance between Communists and Catholics raised by the Italian Party, a clear revisionist position. That is what we put forward. Imperialism and revisionism are not enough, also reaction, because, I repeat, is imperialism linked to revisionism? Yes, and reaction, too.

„To conquer and to defend power with the People’s War“. It is a reaffirmation that power can only be conquered with People‘s War and only through it can it be defended; I believe that it needs no further substantiation.

„Militarization of the Party and concentric construction of the Three Instruments of the Revolution“. Here it is only appropriate to put it that way, because it is the Programme and Statutes of the CPP: here we could not put „of the Communist Parties“, in any way. We are not naming other Parties, we are regulating ourselves; I think we also understand that.

„Two-line struggle as the driving force of Party development“. It is the problem that the contradiction energizes the life of the Party and this is concretized in the two-line struggle, between the proletarian line and all the other lines, especially bourgeois, which in the end is concretized in revisionism.

„Constant ideological transformation and to always put politics in command“. The ideological transformation is fundamental for all of us, for all the militants, for the whole Party, it cannot stop, it cannot end, because it is necessary to change the soul completely and utterly.

[…]

It takes place through successive leaps in step with the development of the revolution according to its stages and periods; because the definitive change, the change of soul, the new soul, will only be expressed in Communism and in the meantime, we are proclaimers of that new soul, but we are elements of a transition period between the old society and the future new society that is Communism. This should be of great importance to us. To always put politics in command, we already know, we have seen it when speaking of Maoism; if we do not put politics in command, it is not that we do not put politics or avoid it, we are putting another politics in command, that of the bourgeoisie or the petty bourgeoisie or whatever it may be.

„To serve to the people and the Proletarian World Revolution“. This is what the Chairman has taught us; every militant has to be guided by serving the people and the Proletarian World Revolution, by proletarian internationalism.

„An absolute unselfishness and a just and correct style of work“. Absolute unselfishness was taught by Chairman Mao Tse-tung, and why is absolute unselfishness demanded of us? Because we correspond to a class which has no property, which aims to sweep away private property of the means of production and which has no other interest than to arrive at Communism, to reach the final goal; as we will not see that goal, we are expressing absolute unselfishness — because we will not see that goal, Comrades — it is an expression of the destruction of particular interests as part of the class whose essence is to be extinguished as such, it is part of being Communists, that is to say, to assume the interests of the proletariat. As for the style of work, the Chairman masterfully synthesized it, telling us: „Link theory with practice, integrate with the masses and practice criticism and self-criticism“; these are the three styles of work, it is masterful.

These are what we understand by basic principles. If the Comrades analyze this, they see that it goes from the most universal which, is our world outlook to the condition of Communist, of militant, why? They are threaded. From the world outlook expressed in contradiction and eternal matter, we pass to the social world in which we move, the Party; from there we establish the principle of masses and rebellion; having posed the problem of masses, we pass to the problem of class struggle, which is the contradiction of society, because the masses are grouped in classes and these struggles and they do it for the dictatorship of the proletariat as a consequence of the whole process of class struggle, it is the inevitable consequence, and that poses us the dictatorship of the proletariat; established this, from what guides the proletariat as an international class, we pass to the Party which is its highest organization, the first social organization; from Party we pass to what the Party fights: imperialism, revisionism, reaction; then we pass to how the Party conquers power, because it is the center or the central task of the revolution; from there we pass to how the Party organizes itself to fulfill the task that corresponds to it: militarization and concentric construction; then how the Party develops: two-line struggle; and from there already, we have seen world outlook, seen the question of society, seen the question of the proletariat, seen the problem of the Party, seen how it fights, seen its tasks, seen how it is organized, how it develops, we pass to the problem of the constant ideological transformation and put politics in command as a guide of the Party and of the militancy; here already enters the problem of militancy, also of the Party? Obviously; to end with serving the people and the Proletarian World Revolution and absolute unselfishness and style of work. In that way they are ordered. I think it is good to point it out because they could ask them and why are they put like that? That is the reason Comrades: it goes from world outlook to militancy. Some things you could ask: But why do you put world outlook first, it seems to us that it is fundamental? But in other places it is not put, but we see that the current need demands to put it, that is our condition because it is not usual, there is none. It is convenient for us because we insist that the Programme and Statutes are in accordance with what the Party needs, this Party; the established examples serve us as an example to solve our own problem: it always remains the application to our reality.

„The Communist Party of Peru has Communism as its final goal; given that the current Peruvian society is oppressed and exploited by imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism, and semi-feudalism, the revolution has first a democratic stage, then a second socialist one that will later develop successive cultural revolutions. Presently with the People’s War the Party develops the democratic revolution, having as its immediate goal to seize Power countrywide.“ In this paragraph we had to necessarily put Communism as the final goal and this must be emphasized, because if we did not put it, we would not be a Communist Party. If in thinking about that goal we have to see what the current reality is, this must also be emphasized: current Peruvian society is oppressed and exploited; oppressed refers to the political domination exercised, that is expressed by the word oppressed and oppression which is its noun and exploited refers to exploitation, to how surplus value is generated, how profits are generated which are devoured by the exploiting classes, it is an economic expression; oppression refers to politics and exploitation, to economic basis, that is what it refers to. And who oppresses and exploits us? it says oppressed and exploited — by whom? By imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and its semi-feudalism, that is the present situation of the country, of Peruvian society, we already know: imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism, semi-feudalism. That is why the Peruvian Revolution has stages, which is the other thing we should emphasize: a democratic stage, a second socialist stage and later to develop successive cultural revolutions, which in our understanding are a third stage, but I think this requires another explanation and it is how to see the revolution; the night before last, we were asking some Comrades how we saw the dynamic process of this, it is at a certain moment that the cultural revolution will become a stage, that is what we think, but we do not need to put it here in the Programme. We should also emphasize that we are in a People‘s War, with it the Party is developing the democratic revolution and that the immediate goal is to culminate it by conquering power throughout the country. These things must be analyzed, highlighted and seen part by part; think Comrades, that it is a Programme, that it is synthesized, condensed, because that is how it should be, but in explaining, we must explain this problem.

[…]

Next comes the GENERAL PROGRAMME OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION; because that is what the previous paragraph says in its final part „Because of this we raise the following objectives“, why? Because we are currently in the stage of the democratic revolution which, no matter how armed it is developed, continues to be democratic, and if we wage war it is because it is the only way to carry it forward, it does not change, it has nothing to do with the Programme, but it should be emphasized. From there then we move on to:

GENERAL PROGRAMME OF THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION

With 14 points.

„1. Demolition of the Peruvian State, the dictatorship of the exploiters led by the big bourgeoisie, and of the armed forces and forces of repression that sustain it and of all its his bureaucratic apparatus.“

What are we talking about here? The demolition of the Peruvian State, that is the question, that is the key, here is everything: „demolition of the Peruvian State“. We have taken there the words of Marx, do you remember when he speaks of the Paris Commune? He says that he showed that it was necessary to demolish, very expressive word, from there we have taken it, it is a very precise concept as well as expressive. It can be read as follows: demolition of the Peruvian State, of the armed and repressive forces that sustain it and of all its bureaucratic apparatus. Of course, otherwise there would be no demolition because in order to demolish the State it is necessary to demolish two things fundamentally: one, the armed forces which are the backbone of the State and the repressive apparatus linked to this system, and the bureaucratic apparatus; these are the two fundamental parts of the State, of which the demolition of the armed and repressive forces is the main one because they are the backbone, here it says: „that sustain it“. That is the thesis established from Marx to Chairman Mao Tse-tung.

The phrase that says „dictatorship of the exploiters led by the big bourgeoisie“ aims to emphasize that the Peruvian State is a dictatorship; is it of classes, that is obvious, otherwise it would not be a dictatorship, or could there be dictatorship without classes, could there be? There could not, that is why it is enough to put dictatorship. That is what we must emphasize. But also, „of the exploiters“, yes, because the dictatorship, which is a political problem, is sustained on an economic base which it defends, and that base is the Peruvian State, it is one of exploitation, that is what we must understand that it is a dictatorship because it defends a system of exploitation which is its base and it defends it with blood and fire. That dictatorship is directed by the big bourgeoisie and thus the problem is clear because who else directs the dictatorship in Peru, the big bourgeoisie? That is the reason why they are set up as they are.

We were asked a question, if there would not be a problem here by putting exploiters, if this would not clash with the Erfurt Programme, which is the Programme of the Social-Democratic Party of Germany of 1891 analyzed by Engels; we have re-read the Programme, or Engels‘ criticism of the Erfurt Programme, and it has no contraposition with that term, why? Because what Engels criticizes in that Programme is that it says „domination of the capitalists and big landowners“ and he says that an economic problem cannot be explained from a political point of view, that is what he says. To understand this, what does it mean? If one remembers what is in „Anti-Dühring“ on the problem of violence, Engels himself, revised by Marx: „There are those who make say the property of domination, that is to say of violence, consequently property is nothing but simply dispossession, seizure by force“. Engels there, in „Anti-Dühring“, explained to us that exploitation is an economic phenomenon, that is to say social relations of exploitation and that to defend it, to maintain it, there is the State which is organized violence as Engels himself taught it; then, when he criticizes what they proposed as a project of the Erfurt Programme and they say „domination of the capitalists and big landowners“, he gives margin, consequently, that way of proposing, to derive property from violence, which is incorrect. That is the essence of the position of the just critique that Engels makes. But the problem is that he says there, in addition, he says „individual capitalists“, so he says; then Engels says that this is another error because society — he is talking about Germany — more and more has trusts, monopolies, joint stock companies and there it is not individual property and in addition, he says, individual property is also that of the small producer, consequently it leads to a second error. Another situation that could be linked to what we are discussing is what Engels says in that critique almost in the final part, when he states that production and he says: the rest is individual and he says again that it should not be individual, the system of production sinks more and more the middle strata, the small producers, etc. Consequently, what Engels is criticizing is to give property a root based on violence, which is Dühring’s idea, which is what Dühring is criticized for.

That the national bourgeoisie or the national bourgeoisie are also exploiters, it is true, but nobody can say that the national bourgeoisie exercises dictatorship here, in Peru, today, or does it exercise it, obviously not.

Consequently point 1 of the Programme proposed in the problem of the demolition of the old State, that is to say of the Peruvian State, that is and it is specified that it is a dictatorship, it is good to point out, but that this dictatorship is of exploiters to point out the base it defends, that is what moves us. And there is no room for confusion with the national bourgeoisie, because it is not part of the dictatorship and also because the problem of the specification of the economic overthrow that we destroyed comes in the subsequent parts and was clarified in point 5; nobody could maintain that the national bourgeoisie is part of the dictatorship led by the big bourgeoisie, that is the crux of this. We do not pretend to explain an economic problem.

[…]

To point out here individual property on any side, except when we speak of the peasantry and the land which is another thing, there is therefore no form of confusion.

„2. To sweep away all imperialist oppression, mainly Yankee, and that of Soviet social-imperialism and of any imperialist power or superpower. In general to confiscate their monopolies, companies, banks and all forms of their property including the external debt.“

It is the problem of the first mountain, of imperialism, and it is well separated what is oppression because it exercises it, it oppresses us; Lenin tells us that the nations are oppressed by imperialism, these are Lenin‘s own words. Here we must see very clearly that imperialist oppression is mainly Yankee, but not only, it is also Soviet social-imperialism which, I repeat, is penetrating more into our country and dangerously so; and of any imperialist power or country, China for example. China is going to invest in mines, they have also discovered that they already need raw materials, it is very well then, they are already demonstrating their entrails; if this is understood, it answers that question of what is China, if this is understood, it is understood that it is China, the current China I mean. „[…] any imperialist power or superpower“: Japan, England, France, Spain; Why say Spain? Think about it, Spain is going to invest about 3.000.000.000 dollars in Argentina and here it also has investments: a big one, for example, is an investment in high security prisons for Peru. The problem of those markets that Mr. President is inaugurating are of Jewish capitals that could not be used because there was a difference, a dispute about their value. In other words, we do not accept any domination, any oppression, but we emphasize two: the Yankee and the Soviet, mainly the Yankee because that is the country that mainly dominates and exploits here, that imperialism.

The other part refers to the economic question. How was it proposed to „in general confiscatetheir monopolies, companies, banks and all forms of their property“, because there can be many forms, patents for example, royalties, in short, many more will be generated by international economic relations; it remains open here because it is a very clear and very broad term, a legal term already well defined since Roman times, nothing escapes this term. Why are we including the foreign debt here? Because of the importance it is taking on; the debt of the oppressed nations is fabulous and it is a bloodletting or death that this foreign debt implies, but the problem of the foreign debt can only be solved by confiscating it, denying that right, there is no other way, because it is a form of property, in this case, based on credit, that is why we are rescuing this point. The debt we have is growing every day, it must be around 17.000.000.000 dollars. That is the reason.

Point 3 refers to the second mountain, in the order of weight it has; here they are listed in the order of weight, of power they have: economic, political, military or whatever power they have. Here is the problem of:

„3. To destroy bureaucratic capitalism, individual as well as State owned; to confiscate all their properties, goods and economic rights to benefit of New State, as well as those belonging to imperialism.“

This is the second mountain: bureaucratic capitalism. We must destroy — destroy is a broad term — demolish it economically, politically, ideologically, as much as possible. Ideologically, for example […] We already know well from the Chairman, that a class can lose economic and political power but maintain its ideological power, it disturbs, which is obviously a serious problem. Why do we put „individual as well as State owned“? Here there is not much confusion either because it speaks of bureaucratic capitalism; we agree and we fight against saying private property and State property, because both are forms of private property: the individual is a form of private property, the State is the one managed by the State as a whole, but both are private, the old State manages this way, to put it private would be to fall into an error. „Non-State“ is not very expressive for us, but there is no margin for confusion because here it is said to destroy bureaucratic capitalism and nothing escapes it; and after all, a society, a monopoly have individual owners, of course that is so, so we have no problems either, because — I repeat — „bureaucratic capitalism“ has been specified.

„[…] to confiscate all their properties, goods and economic rights to benefit the new State“. Why this? It is key to pass to the second revolution uninterruptedly. But here we have added it „as well as those beloning to imperialism“, not in order to reiterate, because both pass to the new State, they are the economic means for the new economy.

„4. Liquidation of semi-feudal property and everything subsisting on it, confiscating the land to give it to the peasantry, mainly poor, applying the principle of ‚Land to the tiller‘.“

It refers to the third mountain. It is listed third, because that mountain is weaker, because we put „all subsistent modality of the same“, because it is, Lenin taught us that there are a thousand and one forms in which feudalism is clothed and others can appear or be specified: the question remains open and we do not tie our hands. That this land is confiscated is understandable, to give it to the peasantry is what he says […]; what we emphasize is „mainly poor“, as that is very understandable and necessary, because read this by the peasantry, the poor will easily identify himself, he will say mainly for me, that is what we are aiming at; we could have simply put peasantry, but no, the Chairman tells us: „At the end of the day, if we talk about peasantry, we talk about the poor“, that tells us, remember „A Single Spark…“, by […], was in Junín, the investigation.

The principle „land to the tiller“ is an old principle, one that is still fully valid. Chairman Mao reiterated it in the point of the Programme when he deals with the problem of land, and this is good to emphasize because here in Peru they talk a lot of nonsense, they talk about „land and liberation“, this is not the problem, it is simply „land to the tiller“, you will have seen the Vietnam Programme, do you remember, with other words it says the same thing, both the program of ‘30 and ‘67 — the one of the South — says the same thing. It is an old situation that every democratic revolution raises; if one thinks well about this, one cannot say that the „demand of the democratic revolution is the problem of the land“, no Comrades, how could we say that, and the problem of imperialism, and the problem of bureaucratic capitalism, that is, in the treatment of what we are seeing, I believe we are giving answers to multiple questions.

„5. Respect the property and rights of the national bourgeoisie, or middle bourgeoisie, in the countryside as well as in the city.“

Here we move on to another question; it is the problem that characterizes the democratic revolution, what classes it destroys: democratic revolution that does not respect the property and rights of the national bourgeoisie ceases to be national and becomes socialist. National or middle bourgeoisie, to make it clearer, because national is sometimes confused with native, many confuse national with native and that is an error; in the Marxist language, of Maoism, national bourgeoisie is the middle one and that occurs both in the countryside and in the city, in the countryside it is rural bourgeoisie — that once again solves the problem of the rich peasant and the entanglement we have seen here. This clarifies, makes more precise the democratic character of the revolution and at the same time reiterates what we have always maintained; they are saying that we have changed our line, that now we respect the rights of the national bourgeoisie and I ask myself, what Party document is there where we do not, […] which one?, None; so the „wise man“, senderologist is a poor ignorant devil who only chimes according to what he is paid.

Thus, points 2, 3, 4, and 5 define, precisely the democratic character, what mountains are to be demolished, and the respect for the property and rights of the bourgeoisie. The word is also broad — respect — it does not say that we guarantee them, it does not say anything other than respect and that is how it should remain, why, because out of necessity we can restrict those rights, even today, particularly in the countryside when there is a lack of land, but that does not need to be said here, how are we going to put „I respect you, but I take away from you“, how to put it, then, Comrades; we know that because Chairman Mao himself says it.

„6. Fight for the setting-up of the People’s Republic of Peru, as a United Front of classes based on the worker-peasant alliance led by the proletariat headed by its Communist Party; as a mold for the New Democracy that carries forward a New Economy, a New Politics, and a New Culture.“

Point 6 poses the problem of the new State, the new State that we are already forging, but it is not necessary here to begin to specify „people‘s committees, support bases and new democratic people‘s republic in formation“, there is no need, we are setting the goal, the perspective; the other things we know, we do not need to write them in the Programme. Here the front of classes is emphasized, but its basis is emphasized — „worker-peasant alliance“ — and the leadership of the new State we are building „led by the proletariat“ — but not simply so, it is not enough, we must be clear: „headed by its Communist Party“. The Programmes that have been made do not say so, it is convenient for us to say that; besides, a long time has passed, I believe, since the Programme of the CPCh of ‘28 to date, things are already more defined and especially if we are „the revolution“, how do they say, „the most authentic“. It is evident that „the Shining Path is the movement with the greatest total revolutionary support in the world“, Aguirre, that is what comrades say and what Don Francisco Morales Bermudez, former President of Peru, Major General and other peasants say, that is what he says, „it is evident that the Shining Path is the movement with the greatest total revolutionary support in the world“, that is good, that is very good, you are already understanding, you are already understanding; there is no other, Comrades, which one, which one? Get out! The M-16, the FARC, the revolution in Nicaragua, , please! I have just read your Programme, it is very clear, isn‘t it, which one, then, the great revolution of Haiti of the RIM, please, it is a bad joke, or the revolution in South Africa, please! Another bad joke then, because that’s how it is then, the RIM equals us with and even puts us at the tail, first is the revolution in South Africa; yes, I say, yes, for the imbeciles. They are clumsy and they are undermining the International Communist Movement (ICM), that is what is clear Comrades: to bread, bread and wine, wine, as they say. So it is convenient to specify this: it is the Communist Party, so let them know it, and we do not hesitate to say it, of course, it is necessary.

Then this „as a mold for the New Democracy“ with the triple content, I think it clearly specifies and the affiliation with which Chairman Mao has established, with Maoism; there is its content, there is nothing more to explain in content. As a new State, everything is complete, so what is missing, what is missing, are the three issues.

„7. Develop the People’s War that, through a revolutionary Army of a new type under the absolute control of the Party, destroys the old Power a piece at a time, mainly their armed forces and other repressive forces. This serves to build the New Power for the proletariat and the people.“

It is how to carry out this revolution. How to do it? With the People‘sWwar, there is no other way; with what instrument, the revolutionary Army of a new type but under the absolute leadership of the Party. Again, the Party, of course, because that is how it is, so let the other classes not dream that they will have leadership in the Army, let them not dream, it is good that we are in a front of classes, but that does not mean they will command the Army; if the Party does not have absolute leadership we cannot carry forward the first revolution, culminate it properly nor pass on to the second.

What are the objectives of this People‘s War with this Army, to destroy by parts the old power, mainly what, its armed and repressive forces? Yes, then, we are not like Vietnam or Nicaragua, no then Comrades, we are going to demolish the army, we are not going to convert it into a „new national army“, we are not for that, it is not the case of the USSR when Lenin was in power, it is not the case, it was another circumstance, another necessity.

„8. To complete the formation of the Peruvian nation, truly unifying the country to defend it from all reactionary and imperialist aggression, safeguarding the rights of the minorities.“

Point 8 is about the Peruvian nation — we must pay close attention to this point. The Union of Struggle of Spain, which does not even know why it fights, says that we do not understand the national problem and we cannot understand it — it says — because Mariátegui never understood it; that is how this imbecile has the shamelessness to speak, a junta of revisionist poltroons whom the RIM consents to and calls to join together with others to form the Communist Party of Spain in an organism that is not of the RIM, whose criticisms against the Party it accepts, it accommodates, it uses. Why does it raise it like that? because the Peruvian nation is a nation in formation and that national formation is being gestated in long years, they are centuries, and it cannot be disintegrated in Quechua nation, in Aymara nation, or nations by dozens of selvicolas.

[…]

In formation, what corresponds is to culminate the formation of the Peruvian nation, that is either we disintegrate, or there is no Peruvian nation in the concrete. It also says, really unifying the country, because it is not unified, only we will be able to do it, both to complete the formation of the nation and to really unify the country. It also says, to defend it from all imperialist and reactionary aggression, very important; there is our „anti-patriotism“. Whoever speaks of the Peruvian nation, whoever speaks of the Peruvian nation, takes it as already consecrated, as established, and in this way they are following a fascist like Victor Andres Belaunde, because he began with the refutation that the Peruvian nation already exists, in his „famous refutation“ of the „Seven Essays“, a refutation in dreams, an empty shell, he could never refute anything, cCmrades, it has a profound content and it has reality. I reiterate: we are a nation in formation, the country is not unified, we have to unify it, what for, to defend it, we have to defend it, why? It is going to be attacked or is exposed to aggressions at different times, imperialist or reactionary.

[…]

And the final part says, safeguarding the rights of the minorities, of course, because unifying the nation, unifying the country, there are minority differences that must be safeguarded; they demand that it is necessary to satisfy; for example, are we going to prohibit the Quechua language, how are we going to do it Comrades, are we going to prohibit the Aymara language or the multitude of Selvic languages? We could not Comrades, we could not: that is what it is referring to.

That is the way in which we can see the national problem, the problem of the Peruvian nation.

Point 9 is the problem of the proletariat, yes, because it is the class whose interests we are raising and serving until the end, until it fulfills its historic goal, that is what it refers to, the proletariat.

„9. To serve the development of the Peruvian proletariat as part of the international working class, and the formation and strengthening of real Communist Parties and their unification in a revived International Communist Movement guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; all as a function of the proletariat fulfilling its great historical mission as the final class.“

We believe that this is how we should pose the problem of the proletariat, here there is no room for eight hours, unemployment, here there is no room, this is a problem of a Concrete Programme, because here we are posing the supreme interests of the class. Specifying, „to serve the development of the Peruvian proletariat“, of course, to develop its class consciousness, its political capacity, its capacity for leadership, that is what is meant, to give shape to its class interests, to lead, to assume power whether by leading the democratic revolution or the dictatorship of the proletariat or the cultural revolutions. That the Peruvian proletariat we conceive it as part of the international working class because it cannot separate itself from the class which is only one in the world, I reiterate.

It also says, to the formation and strengthening of real Communist Parties, of course, that is what we serve, let them jump, then; in the Programmes we have not seen it this way, and we should put this way because that is how we are, then. „[…] their unification in a revived International Communist Movement“, of course, that is what we serve because it is a necessity of the international proletariat, but guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; therefore it is interesting what Morales Bermudez says, there it is then, let them check, which Åarty raises this way, ours then and it is an obligation to do so, can we be branded as nationalists? No; I can already see the frowns of some when they read point 8, ah, nationalism came out of them!, they will say and when they read point 9, internationalism came out of them!, that‘s how they will say: head butts to one side, head butts to the other, I see them, and we are going to send a lot of hepabionta, by tons, good for the liver, of course, Comrades, everyone knows how to scrub, the other thing, are principles: „all as a function of the proletariat fulfilling its great historical mission as the final class“, of course, what better way to serve the proletariat, could we replace it — I repeat — for eight hours? Obviously not Comrades, it is a demand, but not the supreme demand of the class.

„10. To defend the freedoms, rights, benefits, and conquests that the working class and the masses have achieved at the cost of their own blood, recognizing them and guaranteeing their authentic enforcement in a ‚Declaration of the Rights of the People‘. To observe, particularly, the freedom of religious conscience, but in its widest sense, of believing as not to believe. Also to combat all arrangements harmful to the people‘s interest, especially any form of unpaid work or personal burden and the overwhelming taxes imposed on the masses.“

Point 10 refers to the rights of the people, that is what it refers to, I think it is quite understandable. Let us take the fundamental: „rights of the people“, much is said and spread in the world about human rights, it is raised by imperialist countries, it is raised by the bourgeoisie in concrete terms, it is a bourgeois position, as Marx said, it is in „The Holy Family“, there I raise this problem; he said: „To raise human rights, what is it? To raise bourgeois right, it is the position of the bourgeoisie“; that is why Engels speaks of „democratic rights and obligations“ and in that way, he says, the bourgeois character is removed, there is no trace of bourgeois […], he says. Why we raise people‘s rights? Because that is how Lenin taught us, he taught us that way. This is a fundamental document that the revolution, the Party in particular, will have to make.

Good. To defend the liberties, rights, benefits and conquests of the class and the masses: liberties, we understand; rights, we understand; benefits we also understand (social benefits for example) and conquests, of course, we have to end with conquests, let us suppose, the Summer timetable that the State employees have here — because its name is not State bureaucracy, it is State employees; bureaucracy is the upper layer, it is the one in charge, that is it; the others are workers but not workers, obviously — that is what it refers to. How to respect them, how to recognize them? Through the „Declaration of the Rights of the People“; that is why we say this is the problem of the rights of the people, of the big bourgeois? No, of the people alone. What is the people, it is a concept that historically is defined according to the stage and the period of the revolution, it is enough to put people; the Chairman has taught us what the people are, this concept comes from Marx, from Marx comes the problem of the people.

To respect, particularly, the freedom of religious conscience, but in its full extent, both to believe and not to believe, seems to us to be very pertinent, especially if they want to oppose us with the Church, here we are not respecting or keeping the rights of the sacrosanct Roman and Japanese apostolic church, no, that is not our problem, here we are not respecting the rights of the hierarchy that is part of the oppression, as Lenin said: Army, police, judges, prisons and priests, the same thing, part of the same thing, of oppression; here what we are, and we have the obligation, is to guarantee the freedom of religious conscience and we have restricted it, it is not freedom of conscience but religious freedom, because that must be highlighted, there are those who want to believe in a potsherd or whatever, that is why, the opium of the people — Marx said it — was vented as the relations of exploitation change and the new relations of production require a long way for that. But in its full extent it implies both believing and not believing; just as some have the right not to believe, we have the right to Atheism; in other words, that is the full form of freedom of religious conscience.

Likewise, we must fight against any disposition harmful to the people‘s interests, because many laws, many actions are harmful to the interests and rights of the people, we must fight against them, especially — what? — any form of unpaid work or personal burden; unpaid work cannot be allowed and why do we say personal burden, because it is very broad. The personal burden is strictly of feudal root, the bourgeoisie itself only accepts two personal burdens: 1) taxes and 2) compulsory military service, it accepts nothing else; how many personal burdens can they invent? Many, then it is enough to put personal burden, broad. And the burdensome taxes that fall on the masses, yes; we have not wanted to put, yet, the problem of progressive taxes which is the thesis of Marx, that is the thesis of Engels, it is the thesis of Lenin, it is the thesis of the Chairman, that is a question of specifying, because if there are no taxes the State cannot be economically solvent, but it has to be progressive and it is specified in many ways; we must remember, in Russia Lenin showed various forms according to the needs of the revolution, it is better to leave it open.

Then we enter in point 11 to the protection of special layers of the population by special condition that he has them. Hence we put:

„11. Real equality for women […]“

Only the revolution alone will give it, understood, then we are for the emancipation of women but that is part of the whole revolution and it is part of the emancipation of the proletariat; therefore, Comrades, wait until Communism, it will undoubtedly come, that is what the thesis says, it is no barbarity, according to Marxism the emancipation of women is part of the emancipation of the proletariat, that is when there will be full equality before life, they will be leaps that will be made; That is how it is, desire is one thing, reality is another, the other is not seeing reality, that is what Marxism says, a decree is not enough, we could give a decree, right? Full legal equality, equality before life, but it is not going to be true, Comrades, that is the fact. Lenin distinguished that well, he said: „One thing is equality before the law, to guarantee the equality of man and woman, and another thing equality before life“, of course and from there he said that the problem is that women fight for their own emancipation and they can only do it within the emancipation of the proletariat, there is no other way to do it.

„[…] a better future for the youth […]“

Obvious. What, then, is the future for the youth in this rotten society?

„[…] protection for the mothers and the children […]“

Understandable, Comrades, I don’t see what you are going to refute here.

„[…] respect and support for the elderly.“

Also, don‘t we see how they treat even the retired, even the police forces themselves, what role do the elderly play here? They also deserve respect and support.

„12. A New Culture as a combat weapon to solidify the nation, that serves the people‘s masses and is guided by the scientific ideology of the proletariat. Special importance to education will be given.“

Point 12 refers to the New Culture. Yes, it is the way in which we are concretizing what the Chairman says about the New Culture, that is what we are aiming at. What are we emphasizing, its condition as a weapon to concretize nationality, yes, it is indispensable. That the culture of nationality that we must shape is not the corruption of people‘s music as it is done in the huaynos, it is not that corruption, destroying precisely its deep cultural roots that will shape our nationality, we do not agree with that corruption; it is not those pantomime functions of political task that the United Left does, that is not promoting people‘s culture; to have huacos in your house is not to be nationalist, it is not to have national spirit for that reason, it is not true, to be a collector of antiques does not necessarily express national spirit, why, do you think that Mujica Gallo has national spirit? And I think he has a very valuable historical collection, don’t you think that the Osmas have a national spirit for having a very large collection of art from the Viceroyalty? No, Comrades, not that, Comrades. We must generate a New Culture to make nationality concrete, it is necessary because we are a nation in formation.

That serves the popular masses and is guided by the scientific ideology of the proletariat. Why here we have called it scientific, to emphasize that character that has to go against superstition, false ideologies, against idealism. Because we are not considering a proletarian culture, that corresponds to the second moment; we are talking about a national culture (consequently anti-imperialist), democratic (therefore anti-feudal, it is expressed in that it serves the people‘s masses) and cannot, that culture, but be guided by the ideology of the proletariat that we have said that this ideology is scientific, and here it corresponds to bring out that character for the above mentioned: it goes against superstition, with all that is putrefied in ideology because if it does not have that guide there is no New Culture. Compare it with that of Vietnam: „national, democratic“, but what ideology guides it, it does not say.

Give special importance to education, understandable I think. It will be necessary to explain, express, concretize how this education is, because now everybody is in the new education and they are repeating a set of imperialist theses or catholic criteria, rotten of the church like the famous „conscientization“, Frere‘s stupidity; what was that based on? On Christian imperialism, that thesis is of feudal origin, we are not going to allow that, the new education is well qualified, well specified: education and work, that is the thesis of Marxism, that is the thesis of Marx, that is what we will have to forge.

„13. To support the struggles of the international proletariat, of the oppressed nations, and of the peoples of the world; fighting against the superpowers, the United States and Soviet Union, imperialism in general, and international reaction and revisionism of all types, conceiving the Peruvian Revolution as part of the Proletarian World Revolution.“

Here is expressed the connection of proletarian internationalism, serving the World Revolution; we believe it is understandable, it is enough to highlight the parts separated by semicolons. Struggles of the international proletariat, the class, the oppressed nations and the peoples of the world, this is how it has to be. Against the superpowers, because it is the period in which we are, the United States and the Soviet Union, that is why it must be emphasized; imperialism in general, of course, whatever imperialism it may be: the Japanese because they consider it. The Japanese imperialists consider that the Andean Pact area is a complement to their economy, are their Japanese companies not involved everywhere, there are Teng‘s sons, now they are going to invest as well; the French, not to mention the Germans are scrubbing and scrubbing all the time; all that research, that research, who pays for it, well, imperialism, particularly the Europeans, that is where the senderologists like Gonzales come from. International reaction — of course — and revisionism of all kinds, superpowers, half-powers, impotent or whatever, of all kinds. Conceiving the Peruvian Revolution as part of the Proletarian World Revolution.

Point 14 is the problem of the revolution as a unity, of its stages and its continuation and culmination, that is very necessary, I believe the debate shows it:

„14. To struggle tenaciously and heroically for the complete victory of the democratic revolution nationwide and after completing this stage, at once, without pause, to begin the socialist revolution so that, together with the international proletariat, the oppressed nations and the peoples of the world, through cultural revolutions, will continue the march of humanity towards its final goal, Communism.“

I think it is extremely necessary, mainly today, to emphasize the permanent revolution; to emphasize, in second place, the complete and utter triumph of the democratic revolution in the whole country, they will not even take away a little piece from us, that generates serious problems; to move on to socialism for and together with the international proletariat, the oppressed nations and the peoples of the world, through cultural revolutions, to continue the march of humanity towards the final goal, Communism — why do we say continue the march of humanity? Because we enter together or nobody enters at all.

Both points 13 and 14 express the link between the Peruvian Revolution and the World Revolution, an unavoidable interrelation not only on principle, but even the triumph of the democratic revolution — as the Chairman conceived — has to do with the world situation, with the world circumstances, and the development of the revolution requires that the revolution takes place in other countries, in other nations, and together we fight for Communism and enter it.

Those are the issues of the Program. Then it says:

„But considering that the democratic revolution in the country crosses a period characterized by:

1) Deepening of the general crisis of Peruvian society, mainly of bureaucratic capitalism;

2) Greater reactionarization of the State, today with an Aprista government, fascist and corporativist, headed by the genocidal García Pérez;

3) Sharpening of the class struggle, with the masses accepting more and more the need for combating and resisting;

4) The People’s War developing vigorously and growing; and,

5) The people’s need for a People’s Republic built according to the principles of New Democracy.“

Why raise this issue? Chairman Mao tells us: „We must have a General Programme, but according to the period of the revolution we must establish a Concrete Programme“; consequently, we must specify the period and 5 notes are proposed to characterize it. You will remember — we said — there is a relation between characteristics 1 and 3, between 2 and 4, because they form contradictions — you will remember — and all these contradictions lead to point 5: „The people’s need for a People’s Republic built according to the principles of New Democracy.“ The period is indispensable to specify it, without it there is no Concrete Programme; I think that will be that already dealt with even in the preparatory report, Comrades, we do not need to endorse.

„We must apply a Concrete Programme […]“ […] From the beginning what have we told you, it is a Concrete Programme „for this period, with the following specific objectives“. We have proposed that this Concrete Programme be established, sanctioned after the debate of the General Programme and of the period in order to have contributions that specify the application of the problems according to the conditions of the Regions or Zones; that is why here we put Concrete Programme, suspensive points.

We have proposed that the Statutes be seen later, because it will be the strictly organizational part, even though it will also have to start from affirmations of principle, obviously; that is why we put suspensive dots […].

Well Comrades, […]: „We must apply a Concrete Programme“ and then, under that title: Concrete Programme, is that clear, Comrades= I think we all understand […].

Well, that’s all we can say about Programme and Statutes.
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - On Chairman Mao' s thesis "three worlds delineate themselves"

[Prepared for the Internet based on the intervention of Chairman Gonzalo at the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru by the Peru People’s Movement to serve the reorganization of the Communist Party of Peru in Peru and abroad.]

World Revolution – Strategy and Tactics

„Chairman Mao again emphasizes the importance of the world revolution as a unity.“

„Weight of the masses, oppressed nations, decomposition of imperialism, where does it all lead? Three worlds are delineated. Yes, Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s thesis; it has nothing to do with the rotten, revisionist theory of Teng’s three worlds.“

Why? Marx has already told us this problem, that the world revolution must be conceived as unity; more, he insisted that Communism is entered together, implying that we must all carry out revolution- by this I do not mean to imply that he said in unison. I think there are many things about this that we can imagine, but they are situations, those related to Communism, that we are not able to specify. Why? We must always keep in mind what Engels said, he tells us, when he spoke in „Anti-Dühring“, „we can think many things about how Communism is going to be and say such a thing is going to be ‚a‘, such a thing is going to be ‚b‘, such a thing is going to be ‚c‘, but rest assured that when Communism arrives it will shape its realities and it will not give a damn about everything we have thought“, this is how he told us. On this we must seriously reflect on what Engels says. Why? Because it [Communism] is a world without classes and we move in a world of classes, do you understand what that implies? Our mind is organized according to classes and thinks within the framework of class society, it does not fit, we do not understand, we cannot point to, we cannot concretely specify what a world without classes will be like. Our great flags have told us signs, elements, situations, they are just and correct, but concrete things, very difficult.

Lenin had to act at a juncture in which the revolution could only be made in one country and in only one, the USSR. It is a greatness in him, to have established that thesis, to have laid the foundations for the moment to be fulfilled, and it is the merit of Stalin for having materialized it. There’s no need to be narrow minded Comrades, we must recognize. Once again, much is said about Comrade Stalin but little is understood what he has accomplished, can’t you see?

Was Lenin not willing to go and command the revolution in Germany, knowing that there was no head capable of leading it? Of course he knew perfectly well. But he came to understand that the revolution could only take place in the USSR and that it was only possible to do that. But he never abandoned world revolution, rather he conceived the Bolshevik, Soviet revolution as part of the world revolution and that it should serve world revolution and he saw it as a nexus, therefore, to raise up the oppressed nations and unify the two great movements, this is how he thought.

Lenin says that the revolution is not going to purely and simply take place in the advanced countries, that is foolish. It must be combined with the revolution in the backward countries, because that is how imperialism will sink. He established lines, concrete lines in the long term, masterfully. If one reads Lenin carefully, one can see that he turns his eyes to the backward countries, not because he didn’t want revolution within the heart of imperialism, no, that is not the problem, but rather that he sees the reality and the perspective of the world.

Chairman Mao, in another circumstance where the revolution was already developing, it passed in our opinion – what we believe – to the problem of stalemate and the question of the strategy of world revolution has entered, the strategic offensive of world revolution, that’s what we believe.

So the Chairman had already foresaw all those things, therefore I believe he thought about the revolution as a unity. Hence, he comes to propose China as the base to serve world revolution, hence his grand effort to train cadres to wage people’s war, mainly in backward countries. And he reiterates that „we all enter Communism or no one enters“, it is a quote from the Chairman, he reaffirms it himself. But within the reaffirmation, within him it is already a reality that is palpitating, it is a concrete perspective that is given, that is opened, that is what the Chairman has.

Revolution is the Main Trend as the Decomposition of Imperialism is Greater Every Day

For this, where does Chairman Mao start?: „Revolution is the main trend as the decomposition of imperialism is greater every day, the role of the most immense masses year after year that make and will make felt its irrepressible transforming force“ and in the great truth, reiterated by him, that „we all enter communism or no one enters“; That is why he focuses again on seeing the world revolution as a unity, but I insist, already feasible, as a concrete perspective.

In Marx it is as a principle and in Lenin as a necessity to promote it: for the Chairman, the problem is that this situation has already opened up and within that we are going to develop it.

The revolution, the main trend in history, yes. It is the main trend in the world, historically and politically. This is what we must emphasize, that it’s not simply that it is the historical perspective but that it is political, it is already the order of the day, that is, and that is why we have to struggle. This is combined with the period of 50 to 100 years, if not then why did the Chairman ask us? A masterful calculation: 50 to 100 years, because in that period imperialism and reaction must be wiped from the face of the earth and that is then the world revolution.

Atomic War — What to Oppose Atomic War With? Oppose it with People’s War

It is „the period that begins to fight against Yankee imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism, paper tigers that contend for world hegemony“, of course, another key question from the Chairman.

It is well arranged, the military principle is well arranged: world revolution, trend, weight of the masses, the period of 50 to 100 years. He is specifying and it is masterful. It is unfortunate that he is not seen in that way. Hegemony, of course, two then, there are two who can develop or unravel a world war – Yankee imperialism or Soviet social imperialism – paper tigers says the Chairman! They are not to be feared, they can be pierced through! This is how he taught, a quote from the Chairman.

„Atomic war“. What to oppose atomic war with?: „First it must be condemned and then prepared in advance to be opposed with People’s War.“ Everything that the Chairman has proposed is balanced.

The Oppressed Nations

Now, the problem of the oppressed nations. Are they or are they not the ones that house the immense masses of the Earth? 2/3 or 70%, immense masses more or less in quantity. At the end of the day, I think that is not the problem because some situations can change, yes, because the revolution is not straight, it is in zigzags, but that does not deny that the oppressed nations hold the immense masses of the Earth. Moreover, the growth of the masses is immensely greater than the increase of the oppressors in the oppressing nations, of the oppressive countries, of imperialisms, even considering that they themselves oppress their own peoples. Just look at the growth rates, which is 70% of new children born in the backward world and that will continue to increase more and more. For me, in good time, of course, because the weight of the masses in history has begun to express itself more and more and that is fundamental, if the masses make history and this is a very great truth, then the weight of the masses will decide the revolution in the world. And where is that weight, then? In the oppressed nations. There I don’t think there is much to discuss, if these are material realities, facts; do we close our eyes? That would be foolish.

The Economic and Political Relations that are Unfolding by the Process of the Decomposition of Imperialism

„As well as the economic and political relations that are developing due to the decomposition of imperialism.“ Very important. One of the problems we have had is how to define this moment, this period in which we are developing. Where have we found the question? In the Chairman himself — decomposition of imperialism is greater every day — within his own positions, he raises this. Who can deny the greater decomposition of imperialism every day, is it not sinking more and more? It is decomposing, it is rotting. If some can claim that they produce more, what the hell does it matter, is that the problem? On the contrary, if they produce more, what they are showing is that there are all the means to satisfy basic needs.

Already in the 2nd World War, what was said at the end of it? It would be enough to work four hours and all the fundamental needs of humanity could be satisfied. Well, the jump that has been made from 1950 to 1975 has doubled production from 900 to 50 and production from 900 to 50 is equal to all of humanity since its inception, can you imagine? That is showing us that the times of the expropriation of the exploiters is approaching and they are going to be destroyed, that is why they are decomposing.

Some say Lenin was wrong because we see that they have more rockets, more weapons, but is that not an expression of weakness throughout the world? Throughout history it has always been an expression of weakness. What Marxism says is that imperialism slows down all the capacity of the existing means of production, it does not say that they do not produce. That’s what Hoxha never understood in his miserable life. They have confused and some repeat, they don’t understand the problem, I think that’s it. It is the decomposition of imperialism and its increasing artillery, a sign of weakness and not of strength. Review any history or look at history thoroughly and it will be understood, any military history proves it.

Weight of the masses, oppressed nations, decomposition of imperialism, where does all this lead? Three worlds are delineated. Yes, Chairman Mao Tse-tung’s thesis; it has nothing to do with the rotten, revisionist theory of Teng’s three worlds which is something else because it is a front to serve imperialism, to side with the superpowers, or to want to be a power in turn which it is already dreaming of.

Why does (revisionist China) want to arm itself to the teeth, why does it want to be a military power? It can already be seen, the same path! Not being able to develop and strengthen the economic force because they are restoring capitalism more and more, now they want to use the immense masses, of billions of men, as cannon fodder, they want to use it by enhancing military power to become a power and fight for world domination, also scheming like others like Germany, like Japan, that from the clash of the two superpowers must emerge another power or another dominant superpower. Wasn’t that Japan’s nefarious bastard dream of the 1930s, isn’t it Germany’s black dream, isn’t Teng’s black dream?

And it is not a problem of tactics, which Avakian even goes as far to say „I think it is a situation of a use of tactics“, that seems stupid to me. It is a strategy, it is a global understanding of where the weight of the masses are on earth, it is the problem of the relations between imperialism and oppressed nations, that is the problem. It is the problem that can only be understood in the current international situation starting from the international economic relations of imperialism, that is Lenin’s thesis. But – when he raises and says, what is the essence of my position? It is that there are oppressive nations, or he says: „oppressive peoples, oppressed peoples“, well some do not like it to be peoples, go and argue with Lenin, he has laid it out that way, he put it that way – but then he specifies it himself and it has already remained as imperialists and oppressed nations.

It also seems to me that it would be a mistake to say Lenin was wrong. Why, do we know what he meant? I believe that many things comrades, in Marx, in Lenin, in the Chairman, we do not understand, I believe. One must be sincere, every time one returns and picks up a text from any of those greats, one finds new things, or is it not so? It seems to me a stupid vanity to believe that we already understand everything. I say to myself, do we understand everything Lenin said? I don’t think so. Everything the Chairman has said? It seems to me that it is not necessary to have bastard arrogance, they are arrogant of flying horses, of people who believe that genius comes from heaven. We have to understand many things, there are many things to comprehend.

Chairman Mao Lays the Foundation for Developing the Strategy and Tactics of World Revolution

It seems to us that the Chairman is thus laying the foundations for developing the strategy and tactics of World Revolution and this is obviously necessary. But there we have a problem, do we know everything that the Chairman has said, all his writings, could the Chairman’s debates on how to conceive and make revolution be aired and published, could he proclaim it, do you think he could? How is he going to propose? What he could propose are the political criteria of orientation, other debates had to be reserved for a while, it seems to me that this is elementary to understand.

For the rest, are there witnesses? I believe that there are and they exist because there is a meeting of the Chairman with Japanese where he tells them: „There is a first world that is the United States and the Soviet Union, there is a second world, Japan for example and there is a third where there is China.“ These men exist, they have not died, they are witnesses to what the Chairman has said. Why come then to say that it is not a thesis of the Chairman and that it is an erroneous thesis, have they been able to demonstrate such?

The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, dared years ago to throw itself against the three worlds and what did it have to do? First, throw themselves against Chairman Mao based on the supposed Avakianite criteria- of Avakian. He had to throw himself against what? Against the thesis of the Chairman that in the year 1946 between the USSR and the United States there is an intermediate band, an intermediate strip in which there were capitalist countries, even imperialist countries could occur and oppressed nations, he had to go against that. Could it be denied that there was in 1946, at the end of the war with the hegemony of the United States, that there was an intermediate strip?

That is stupid, it is not seeing reality, that is not knowing history, you cannot judge 1946 by 1988. And you cannot see that this happened? Of course, it happened that way, there was a strip. If he talks so much that the war is approaching, the world war, precisely why is it? Because that strip is covered, it is already taken over, and there is the risk they have to face.

But Comrades, for years you have been using the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, we must stop the war, well where the hell is the war? The world war, where is it? Why don’t they propose instead to develop the democratic revolution, socialist revolution, to define Maoism, because they don’t propose that, why do they not propose opposing it with the People’s War and waging World People’s War against the world war that they cackle about so much, or is it that they hope that the world war will lead to the revolution? No Comrades, the only thing the world war will be able to do is stir the revolution, but the triumph does not come from the 3rd World War, it comes from the People’s War in which we free ourselves, which liberates the Communists and peoples of the earth, from there it will come, in great periods of decades and waves. Those who do not understand this have not read history, nor have had the pleasure of passing high school.

We consider that all this has been said by Chairman Mao Tse-tung, of course he had to see it, even for the third world. Mr. Snow in an interview from 1970 asked the Chairman: „What do you think of the third world, Chairman?“ And he responded with that way that he had, smiling, „that which concerns your president so much“, he did not say more, there it was, of course there it was, it did not go any further. But at the United Nations, Chiao Kuan-hua reported that the Chairman proposed „three worlds are delineated“, those are the words verbatim, in quotation marks, those are the Chairman’s words.

And there are quotes, the quote from 1957 on Suez also demonstrates that the Chairman was raising and that there was this situation that the United States was different from France and England, that there were three interests and two contradictions, that was evident: Egypt, oppressed. The United States wanted to control the Suez Canal. England and France wanted to defend their interests there. That is evident: could the power of the United States be compared with that of France and England? Obviously, England is at the tail end of the United States, France is the one that later, today, is developing as a power with its own atomic weapon but 1957 was not like that and was the problem of De Gaulle.

Well, the Chairman then has given us a whole vision of world revolution, he has raised key questions, milestones and he has raised strategy and tactics of the world revolution that unfortunately is not known. It can be said, then how it is affirmed, Comrades, it is enough to grasp such and such elements for one to see that he speaks of revolution as a unity, why does he speak of Communism, why does he speak of 50 to 100 years, why is a new period proposed? Why does it arise that war must be fought with the People’s War, why do we talk about it, why does the weight of the third world, the oppressed nations, be proposed, why does it propose „three worlds are delineated“? (here is the Maoist synthesis on World Revolution, our note). I think one cannot be so foolish to simply say: glass, ashtray, glasses and it’s over, one must say objects, admitting; so you have to generalize, think what are they then, where does that lead, instruments for the use of a human being, you have to draw the conclusion; and why don’t they want to draw them? Because it collides and they want to propose a strategy totally out of square from Marxism-Leninism, mainly Maoism, that is.
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - On the Document "Concerning Gonzalo Thought"

[Speech by Chairman Gonzalo at the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru, 1988-89.
„Concerning Gonzalo Thought“ has is an introductory part, although it is not expressed, it is an introduction and then there are five problems.]

Let‘s look at this introductory part. It says: „All revolutions, in their process of development, through the struggle of the proletariat as the leading class and, above all, the struggle of the Communist Party that raises their unrenounceable class interests, give rise to a group of great leaders and mainly one who represents and leads it, a Great Leader with acknowledged authority and influence. In our reality this has taken shape, on account of historical necessity and coincidence, in Chairman Gonzalo, Great Leader of the Party and the revolution.“

It refers to great leaders and if we take into account what Lenin established in „‚Left-Wing‘ Communism: An Infatile Disorder“ in relation to masses, Party and great leaders; but it is not as the Comrades say that this is the thesis of Lenin, it is not so Comrades, they have not read Lenin well, it is necessary to read Lenin well, to know him well. If you think carefully, here is specified the problem of revolution, ruling class (proletariat) and Party, the three things he is specifying; that is what must be taken into account. We recommend Comrades, we must read well, study and think, striving for the greatest objectivity in order to understand what the document says, not what one has in one‘s head; that what one has in one‘s head disturbs, understandable, but we have the need, the obligation to be objective, we must combat subjectivism, it is very important, therefore, pay attention to that, Comrades. There are three questions that are invoked: revolution, proletarian ruling class and Party, the action of the three, that is what it says; these three questions generate great leaders.

Every process of whatever type, also a literary type, has great leaders, has heads, and these bosses do not arise in great numbers and it takes time for their forging; Lenin insisted on this, but this already comes from Marx and is further developed by the Chairman. It is a handful of great leadersthat a revolution generates in decades, what is generated in a greater quantity are leaders, an even greater quantity of cadres and a whole mass of militants.

In our Party we have established many years ago a relationship between masses, cadres and leaders with a proportion; that proportion given the great growth of the Party, of combatants and masses that work more closely with us has unbalanced that proportion and from there derives the need to worry a lot about increasing militancy but without forgetting a good selection, which is possible because having more access to the masses, there will be more candidates on which to select militants; we need to form cadres, these documents contribute to that formation and also to increase the number of leaders.

Comrades, think about the following: in ‘76 we calculated more or less the need, then, of about 75 leaders to make the Party march, but the Party today is many times bigger than it was in ‘76; and then think that we have an Army and think that we have New Power, please copy what I am saying, I do not believe that you have a great memory; Comrades, some here believe that what is said is for nothing, then they do not know what to broadcast or they broadcast nonsense and they do it late and badly; we are in Congress and the attention must be very high, we are all tired, understandable, but it does not count, the obligation counts; well, excuse this intermission but it is necessary, Comrades if you compare that in ‘76 we needed 75 leaders, how many will we need today, do you understand? And mainly what, we need a Central Committee with an adequate number, and a good Central Committee, well versed in Party politics; that has to make an effort to study the theory in the books or texts that the Party indicates, not in others, Comrades, because in that way we break the unitary formation that we must have; these are questions that we must think seriously. Any revolution that is seen shows that only in decades a number of great leaders are forged. If we think of the glorious Bolshevik Party, that of Lenin and Stalin, but mainly of Lenin who was its creator, its forger, think, we speak of great leaders and we have a Stalin, we have a Sverdlov, a Dzerzhinsky, a […] to highlight real great leaders, few; the Chinese Revolution is similar.

But the main thing is that a Great Leader is generated, a single head that stands out clearly, far above the others, and that is what we have to understand and it is not by the will of anyone, it is the very reality of the revolution, of the class and of the Party, which demand and promote this conformation. If we speak of a Great Leader, we have for example Marx, a notoriously outstanding Great Leader, a summit. If we speak of the great Lenin, there is another Great Leader of recognized authority and immense ascendancy; nobody could compare Stalin with all his merits and greatness, with the immensity of Lenin, nobody, and I reiterate, once again, Lenin did not have the specific position of General Secretary because there was no such thing, it was – I repeat – that the General Secretariat in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) arose precisely by Lenin‘s own proposal, and in him is also expressed a glorious summit. Or in the case of China, Chairman Mao Tse-tung; obviously none of the great leaders generated by the Chinese Revolution can equal Chairman Mao Tse-tung, none of them, and in him we also have a glorious summit.

These are the three greatest leaders of the World Revolution, because that is their dimension; that they were also Great Leaders of their Parties and of their concrete revolution is subsidiary because the main thing is that they have been Great Leaders of the World Revolution and have established for us, then, the great process of the development of Marxism, shaping Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. On another level, without pretending in any way to compare, there would be no reason, but to show that every revolution needs a head, think for example of Albania itself – I do not intend to relieve those figures but even in those revolutions there must be a head – Hoxha in Albania; Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam; Kim Il-Sung with all his rotten idea of reign, was the head, that is the problem. So it always happens, there is nothing strange about it, but it is a necessity; Engels already insisted on this and told us that even a literary movement has a head that represents it.

The problem lies in the definition of a Great Leadership with „acknowledged authority and influence“. Are they unquestionable authorities? Yes, for the red line, but that they are questioned and denied, bread and butter.

Was not the leadership of Marx denied, questioned, and even vilified by a miserable creeping servant of the Tsar like Bakunin or by an „academic scholar“, full of ideas that he could not even manage to understand, like Dühring, who said that our glorious founder Marx, said that he was a Prussian soul and of a Chinese knowledge, so did not say that individual whose name is only remembered because it is in a work by Engels? Was Lenin questioned or not? Of course; how many times did Trotsky‘s gymnastics fight against Lenin, how many times did he deny him? One should not be fooled by that gross misrepresentation which proclaims that Trotsky was a Leninist, Lenin himself described him as a Menshevik gymnast, a late Bolshevik, who jumped on the bandwagon; one of the things for which Trotsky fell silent at the death of the great Lenin, when it was necessary to select the General Secretary and, obviously, with all the limitations that Lenin himself pointed out, it was up to Stalin, who was a real and authentic Bolshevik, to exercise it, one of the things that led Trotsky to keep silent and to be mute at the Congress where the Great Leadership and the recognition as Secretary of Comrade Stalin was agreed upon was the fear that Trotsky had that the letters in which he attacked and denigrated Stalin would be taken out, we must not forget that, Comrades; and I bring this up because the Trotskyists are very much like fools and want to pull the wool over our eyes, and today they continue to do so, infecting the proletarian movement, and some believe them and repeat them; many things that are being aired today about Stalin are nothing but crude repetitions of what Trotsky said. Did not Zinoviev also attack Lenin? Did not Kamenev and several others even say that Lenin was mad when he proposed to prepare the October Revolution and even went so far as to denounce it? These are realities Comrades.

And in the case of the Great Leadership of Chairman Mao Tse-tung, the struggle was even more fierce; that struggle, as it is said in the history of the Communist Party of China (CPCh), the struggle against the 28 and a half Bolsheviks, those who had learned in Moscow and wanted simply to apply Marxism-Leninism to China strictly, mechanically; was not Chang Kuo-tao himself a student who became a Communist and believed himself called to great destinies and even dared to pressure the Central Committee to recognize him as General Secretary, thus denying Chairman Mao Tse-tung whose leadership had been recognized in the year ‘35 in Tsunyi? These are facts, Comrades; Liu Shao-shi himself, who for a time supported Chairman Mao Tse-tung, did he not become a denier of the Chairman? Or Teng Hsiao-ping, has he not even developed a personal hatred against Chairman Mao Tse-tung? And even Chou En-lai himself, in the first part, up to the year ‘35, did he not fight the ideas of the Chairman and deny Chairman Mao Tse-tung, did he not label him as a peasant and even, in an absurd criterion, did he not call him a rightist? These are things to remember. Great Leadership is recognized in the midst of intense struggles.

[…]

It can therefore never draw attention to the fact that there are problems around Great Leadership. And it is in every Party where such a problem is aired; but notwithstanding this, the objective reality itself generates great leaders and a Great Leader, mainly a Great Leader who becomes even a symbol of a revolution, or a world one in the case of a Marx, a Lenin, a Chairman Mao Tse-tung. An example can show this condition in which sometimes we do not think and do not see: the prisoners of war in the Spanish civil revolution, did they not reanimate their optimism and reanimate it by simply seeing a Lenin‘s insignia, as Marcos Aria himself says, even he says so, and he is a revisionist.

These are things that we must understand and it is time that, mainly the great leaders, we understand things because, Comrades, it is in the great leaders where especially these problems occur because there are those who believe they are called to great destinies and do not even know how to measure their capacities nor know their limitations and are not capable of seeing the objective, what they have rubbing their own noses in it; I am speaking of historical facts, Comrades, I am not speaking of eagerness, I am speaking of historical facts. The problem is not simply to have read or repeated, the problem will always be to apply and therefore to understand. We believe that this is important.

Also in this first paragraph, we must emphasize how Chairman Gonzalo has become the Great Leader of the Party and of the revolution. […] Here it is good to emphasize this point of historical necessity and coincidence, a point that is misunderstood and misrepresented; for example, the Comrades prisoners of war have made a ruckus, a jumble about this problem, when it is clear and simple, I am referring to what is called necessity and coincidence in Marxism.

Engels dealt with this point and said that the social order is governed by necessary laws. The word necessity has a clear and precise meaning, it means that it is fulfilled, that it governs, that means, independently of the individual will of people; necessity, philosophically speaking, is what has to be fulfilled, the law that has to govern, that means necessity. In social and literary processes, for example, there is a need for someone to lead a movement, to be the head of a school; if one sees, for example, the formation of the Spanish language, which is the one we speak, was concretized in a Cervantes, or can that be denied, it had to have someone to shape it, to establish its rules, to lead the management of the language, as in Italy it is Dante – not the Dante, as they say, it is just Dante – there you have an example even in the literary world. In the scientific world, contemporary physics is made up of a group of notable theoreticians, and yet it needed someone to lead it in the understanding of the macrocosm: Einstein, it is undeniable, it was necessary for someone to lead that, it is a whole different way, he takes a great step in the physical understanding of the world; or in the understanding of the microcosm a Planck who opens a new world in physical science; it was necessary, the law demanded by necessity that someone lead the movement. Or in a revolutionary struggle as they are in the examples ventilated in Marxism; the French Revolution necessarily had to have a head, for example Robespierre, so it is. Engels said, then, every movement at whatever level must have a head, but it is a general law and as such it is necessarily fulfilled.

Whereas coincidence – which is the most precise name because sometimes I use chance, which is too imprecise, however it can occur, Comrades, but the term is coincidence – coincidence, Engels said, is nothing more than how necessity comes into being in certain circumstances, specifying a character, taking shape in a person. The example of physics comes back, there it is proved, once again, how it always generates opportunely the men that the society needs to develop a field of its development (do not worry to put the names because they are sometimes complicated and difficult), if one looks at physics in the 20th Century, we have an Edington, a Sommerfeld, a Planck, we have a Schwinger, a Heisenberg, a Schrödinger, a De Broglia, a multitude of very remarkable physicists; any of them, if it had not been Einstein, would have come to establish relativity, so it is said in physics for example, if one reviews any history of physics one finds that, but chance, circumstances specified that it was Einstein.

That is how necessity is understood, as a law and chance as a concretion of that law and that is how the heads establish it, that is how the great leaders and a Great Leadership are established. The problem is simple and clear; the confusion derives on the one hand, from the lack of knowledge or from the imprecision of knowledge, from the confusion that one has, apart from the struggles in which such a situation is defined. I give you a historical example, of science, and I appeal to science because in science there are some very special conditions, however, there is also in the midst of disputes, for example, who created or discovered the infinitesimal calculus, Newton or Leibniz, a dispute for centuries and it is still being discussed, a conclusion has already been reached; in that case, for example, both discovered independently; however, the followers have fought tooth and nail to say it was Newton, others, it was Leibniz! And that one stole from the other, what is clear is that the best notation was that of Newton, that is why the one he established is used. There you have it, even in science, where apparently there should not be such contentions, but everything is contradiction.

In any human activity, consequently, wherever the axes are placed, every school, every development needs a head and a Great Leadership and around that Great Leadership there is contention, but a Great Leadership is specified by historical necessity and coincidence. And in our case, in our Party it has been specified in Chairman Gonzalo; we can like or dislike him, Comrades, I dislike the summer but it does not pay attention to me, it continues to develop, do you understand what I mean? You will say, but social laws are not like physics, oh yes? Read then what Marx says, that they are different does not mean that they are not laws, they have a specific field, but social laws are as much laws as physical laws.

Well, how is the Great Leadership specified here: „Great Leader of the Party and of the revolution.“ It is not an ambiguity, why, what are we talking about, what are we dealing with, of the Fundamental Documents of the Party, consequently of the Peruvian Revolution, that is how we have to understand what it says here; we know well that outside they will say other things, it will be their problem, not ours. The Great Leadership was established, recognized – because that is what is appropriate with a Great Leadership, to recognize it – in the Enlarged National Conference of ‘79, in struggle, where two factions contended; one, that the Great Ladership was that of Chairman Gonzalo and that this had to be recognized; another, invoking Mariátegui, I stress, invoking, is that one of the „defenders of Mariátegui“, as he himself said and expressed his thought, the Lima of the balconies and the colonies, what a way of seeing Lima! For a Communist position, it is good for a poem by Don José Gálvez but not for a Communist, and after all, those who invoked Mariátegui did not even know him and were 50 years behind; they are facts, Comrades, that is what we are talking about. Perhaps we should ask ourselves, did Mariátegui usurp or was he recognized as a Great Leader, have you ever heard that? No, and why, have you asked yourselves, he did not have time, we must never forget that the founder of the Party died less than two years after the Party was founded; that is why you will never find any document that says Mariátegui‘s Great Leadership, who was to blame? It is therefore the concrete situations that were expressed in the reality of the country.

The second paragraph tells us: „Moreover, and this is the basis upon which all leadership is formed, revolutions give rise to a Thought that guides them, which is the result of the application of the universal truth of the ideology of the international proletariat to the concrete conditions of each revolution.“ What must be emphasized here in order to understand well and not to make mistakes is that a Great Leadership is based on a Guiding Thought, on an application, requiring time for a Great Leadership to be recognized. It is not as it is said that the Great Leadership sustains Gonzalo Thought, it is absurd, Comrades; on the contrary, that is what the document says very clearly, because it could not be understood in any other way; the Comrades, how do they think, believe that Thought is a washroom, that the Great Leadership sustains it, how absurd, it is sustained, it is based on a Thought, otherwise there is no Great Leadership; that is what we must see and that is clearly stated here.

Then it tells us: „[…] a Guiding Thought indispensable to reach victory and to conquer political power and, moreover, to continue the revolution and to maintain the course always towards the only, great goal: Communism“. What function does a Guiding Thought fulfill, that is what is clarified here, what is it for and it says: „indispensable to reach victory and conquer political power“, without it, do not even dream of conquering power, otherwise, take a single case, there is none, Comrades; but moreover, what is it for, „to continue the revolution and to maintain the course“. The problem of maintaining the course is fundamental! Because if it is not maintained, we deviate, and if we deviate, the revolution is slowed down, hindered, unnecessarily dilated and can lead to great defeats, which will demand new and more incessant and redoubled efforts to continue struggling and fighting for the revolution, for the conquest of power and for the goal, why, the revolution is uncontainable, but the Guiding Thought fulfills a function, a necessity.

It goes on to say: „[…] a Guiding Thought that, arriving at a qualitative leap of decisive importance for the revolutionary process which it leads, identifies itself with the name of the one who shaped it theoretically and practically“. Let us understand well, we cannot continue with the absurdity of bourgeois empiricism of the 18th Century, anti-Marxist, of separating theory from practice, it is to deny that practice is the source of knowledge. Do we not know that without practice there is no knowledge, we do not understand that, what do we understand then, nothing, is it not the starting point of differentiation between Marxism and bourgeois position, is it not perhaps the first of the theses established by Marx on Feuerbach?

[…]

They foolishly throw themselves against principles and historical realities that deny class, deny ideology, that is the ABC of Marxism. Here the remarkable thing is that a moment of „qualitative leap of decisive importance for a revolution“ is coming. What is our situation, because now Gonzalo Thought is being raised? Because we are in a qualitative, decisive leap, or a Congress, is this Congress not implying the balance of what has been done, is it not implying the establishment of the Base of Party Unity, is it not implying the laying of solid foundations for the conquest of power in the whole country, as a part of and serving of the World Revolution, do we not see the leap, are we so blind, so short-sighted, so stupid, politically speaking? Comrades, we can no longer allow in the Party such immaturity. A mature Party and the maturity of a Party is the consequence of a long historical process, it is not that of individuals; that is why they do not understand, they are confusing the maturity of the Party with their own individual immaturity, that is the concrete root that those who do not understand this problem have, it has personal roots in that aspect, it is their concreteness, their own reality that they never manage to see, why, they do not search, they do not think in depth, that is it Comrades. That is the reason why we are making this leap in the problem of Thought.

The document clearly states: „In our situation, this phenomenon specified itself first as Guiding Thought, then as Chairman Gonzalo‘s Guiding Thought, and later as Gonzalo Thought.“ Well, let us look for the Party, revolutionary, historical correlation of why these specifications were produced. Guiding Thought, 2nd National Conference when we prepared ourselves to generate a vacuum in the countryside and create New Power, that was the concrete historical foundation. The reference to Guiding Thought of Chairman Gonzalo, 1st Plenum of the Central Committee of the 3rd Conference, what was agreed there, „Great Leap“, within what plan, to conquer bases, important or not in the People‘s War? Obviously, Comrades. There you have the correlation. Gonzalo Thought, I have already said why, it is not free elucubration. Please, Comrades, always think, meditate and refer the things that are raised to the Party circumstances, to the circumstances of the People‘s War that is being carried out, to those of the Peruvian Revolution, to the needs of the class, of our people, or is it that they separate the Party from the class and the people, without this meaning that this vanguard – as some say – of the proletariat and the people, no, Comrades, the Party is the vanguard of the proletariat, it is not of the people. Here is something else more remarkable.

Let us continue, it says: „[…] because it is the Chairman who, creatively applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to the concrete conditions of Peruvian reality, has generated it; thus endowing the Party and the revolution with an indispensable weapon which is guarantee of victory.“ Is there or is there not the creative application, a little word that some do not like, is it mechanical, then, when it is simply said „application“, in some mouths! Not to say „creative“ is to propose, because of what they think, mechanical, well, prove it, prove it, it is not a problem of regurgitation, confusion, that is not the problem, it is to see the history of our Party, the problems that it is solving. Because defining Guiding Thought, Chairman Gonzalo‘s Guiding Thought and Gonzalo Thought are problems of the Party, as they see everything through the person, through their individualism, they believe that it is a personal problem and thus they subjectivize the revolution and turn it into a subjective reality, not an objective one. Comrades, it is fine for a Frondizi, for an idealist but not for a Marxist; to reduce a social problem to subjective questions may be fine for a Feuerbach, before Marx. That is what must be seen at the bottom of these things that are there; everything has its foundation, it is not a word written by chance, nor is it a word said unthinkingly, which does not express its errors because it is unthoughtful.

Well, the following paragraph says: „Gonzalo Thought has been forged through long years of intense, tenacious, and incessant struggle to uphold, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, to retake Mariátegui’s path and to develop it, to reconstitute the Party and, mainly, to initiate, maintain and develop the People’s War in Peru serving the World Revolution, and that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism be, in theory and practice, its sole command and guide.“ Here there are things that jump out that must be seriously reflected; in short, we have until August because now we only need to take a position and what we do is to give foundations because the comrades need it to be able to explain because it is understandable that there must be questions. First thing to emphasize here: It „has been forged through long years“, yes, through long years, it is not forged in one day or in two years or in three years, in long years! We will give you an example: when we had a meeting with the Comrades from Spain, when we saw the problem of Guiding Thought, of the Thought that we call Gonzalo Thought, Comrade Roberto who heads the Communist Party of Spain, he already believed that he was „Roberto Thought“, they had just been founded not even six months ago and he already believed that he was „Roberto Thought“; it cannot be so, Comrades, how easy it would be, no, that way no Thought is generated anywhere on Earth, why? Everything has a process, absolutely everything, there is nothing that does not have a process, reason: because everything is contradiction and contradiction has a path, a process. Has it been intense, well, the struggles we have had, I think that proves it; tenacious, well, I think I have been persistent, otherwise we would not be talking today about Gonzalo Thought; incessant, of course, we must not falter, we must persist, continue, continue, continue, we must not get tired!

But about what things? The first thing it puts forward is to „Uphold, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism“ and it is understandable, because if we do not start from the universal ideology, what application are we going to talk about, or are we going to create – by originality – another world outlook of the proletariat? In this we are consistent with the practice taught to us by Marx, Lenin and Mao and the great Marxists that have been on Earth and that the founder himself taught us, „the only way to be free and to create, is to take the conception of the proletariat as a dogma, understanding it as such“ […]. Some people find it hard when they hear the word dogma in Marxism and I tell them that they have not read Lenin well; „our old dogma“ and the specific, „our old inapplied principles“, I think we all understand that, it is confused, because the mind repeats „Lenin has said that it is not a dogma“, but there he refers to that there is no mechanical application, we must try to understand what Lenin says in each case and in each moment, we must not be content with repeating and with superficial appreciations; we have already seen how Chairman Mao Tse-tung can only be understood if we see as a unity all that he has done, Lenin the same and Marx, the same. That was then, Comrades. Without having done that, what application would there be, it would be a ridiculous joke, I think.

It says „to retake Mariátegui‘s path and to develop it“, key: develop it. On this we have contended, Comrades, for many years in the Party; it fell to me to draft the document of the 19th Plenum of the Central Committee, in ‘66, and there it is written, „Red Flag“ No. 18 – for the collectors – there it is written that Mariátegui‘s path should never be abandoned, that it should be continued and developed; please remember how we have been fought against. Of the Party, what have the „Mariáteguists“ of the PUM said, those former Vanguardists, that we took Mariátegui not seeing that Mariátegui died on the in 1930 and that Peru had advanced a lot because we were already in the 1960s, is that not what they said? Well, Comrades, that is why the problem was to develop it; there are reasons for this — if there is time we will see when we deal with the question of Mariátegui – not to propose not to develop it is not to understand that time goes by and that new problems arise, it is to want to remain in the 1930s and, beware, Mariátegui is not a universal Thought, beware, of reconstitution of the Party and, mainly — of what? — of initiating, maintaining and developing the People‘s War. This is extremely important, this is the main thing in this reconstitution of the Party, to take up Mariátegui again, why? Because in the process of Gonzalo Thought it is the People‘s War which has driven it, which has led it to become concrete as Gonzalo Thought, I believe it is so, Comrades; any analysis, however lightly we might make of the history of the Party proves what I have recently said: the People‘s War has made us deeply understand things already known and has made us understand many new things, solve new problems and see new problems still pending solution and it also makes us understand that there are many more things that will have to be dealt with. So, in this process, one cannot but see that retaking the path of Mariátegui and developing it is not ignoring the founder. I believe that of the founder, of Mariátegui, many speak but few know about him, too few, and if they have studied him, not in depth, I say […], how wrong it is to bring things by the hair, Comrades.

Then it tells us that „It is of substantive necessity for the Party to study Gonzalo Thought.“ „Substantive necessity“ for the Party, what does this imply, of the leaders, of the cadres, of the militants and mainly of the leaders, I stress, mainly of the leaders! Because this is where the mess is expressed and this is not by chance, it has always been like this in every Party; let us remember what we have often said: the Central Committee is the eye of the storm, that is, the center of the storm, we must never forget it. But why do we need this study, „for a more just and correct understanding of the General Political Line, and mainly of the Military Line“, for that, because if we do not see the Gonzalo Thought, how are we going to manage the General Political Line and the Military Line which is its center if they are derived from that Thought? It is like taking away the river‘s source, the lagoon from where it begins to flow, or do you see a river with no beginning, maybe you imagine that rivers have no beginning — as some have only seen the Rimac, a little piece, don’t they, they think it has no beginning — nonsense, Comrades, any material fact on which your eyes rest, you always see the path, the process, the origin of something. Consequently, it is necessary to handle the line and the Military Line in particular; if we begin by denying it, if we begin by putting Mariátegui, I ask: very well, tell me now the General Political Line of Mariátegui? And you are not going to repeat the five elements, reason: because I did them, Comrades, tell me now the Military Line of Mariátegui, what is it; now tell me if with that line we are making the People‘s War. We do not meditate or think and the Chairman has told us that we have to use the head, he has told us that the head is for thinking, that is what the head is for, that is what the Chairman said, and the work of the leaders is to move the head, mainly to move the head; the Chinese Comrades said: „The leaders have to move the head but some leaders think they have to move their feet“, very expressive, very expressive what the Chinese Comrades said!

Well, when it comes to Gonzalo Thought, where to aim, there it says: „aiming at deepening the understanding of the particularities of the Peruvian Revolution, what is specific and particular“, because if we do not take the specific, we would badly manage this revolution that the Party leads; but as the Party is an entity composed of a system of organizations, it does it through its leaders, its cadres, its militants who move all the rest of the organizations. Only in this way will we „serve the Great Plan to Develop Bases, the development of the People’s War and the perspective of conquering political Power countrywide“. These are eminently practical reasons, reasons of exigency, of peremptory demands, needs of the Peruvian Revolution; as there are many narrow empiricists here, then I think they understand well if we say „practical“, they are practical reasons! Although I understand Comrades, to speak of practice demands leaving narrow empiricism, of course, because with narrow empiricism they will never handle practice from the Marxist position, never, they will do bastard empiricism, narrow, crawling, Sanchopansism they will do, yes Comrades, we must understand things well.

The other paragraph says: „We must study Gonzalo Thought, starting from the historical context that generated it“. Reason: it is the class struggle that forms us all, it is the Party that nourishes us with Marxism.

[…]
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - the Second World War is a Transcendental Fact in World History

[Speech by Chairman Gonzalo at the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru (1988-89) on the 2nd World War, the Battle of Stalingrad and the People‘s War in China.]

The 2nd World War is an event of transcendence in the history of the world, it strictly began in 1939 and ended in 1945 – sorry if I enter these expressions, I think it is necessary to at least remember them, because sometimes I think that some Comrades may not know; if I am wrong, it is preferable to take the risk than to not know. It is a world war in which on the one hand there is imperialist robbery, the dispute for world hegemony that Germany demanded for itself under Hitler; but on the other hand it is the defense of socialism and development of the revolution, yes, it is very clear and correct that the war then waged by the USSR was a great patriotic war. I insist, sometimes comrades, we fight revisionism implacably and we already want to forget certain things; it was a just war of defense, a great patriotic war, that’s how it was defined with all correctness, that’s why; and the development of the world revolution because in addition to that glorious heroic defense that cost the USSR 20.000.000 men, we have an anti-imperialist struggle that will unfold in oppressed nations, mainly in China. And why do we say mainly in China? It is good to remember that in China 60% of the Japanese army was retained for a long time; that is why we do not agree when simply talking about the western front, the eastern front, but taking everything as what was fought in Europe, and seeing the problem of the east, which is a great fighting front and a great revolutionary front, it is wrong, in our opinion, when it is tried to reduce it to the action of western imperialists and mainly the United States, this has not been the case. It is the great war of resistance of oppressed nations, like China, like Korea, like Burma, like Indonesia, the Philippines, etc., where precisely the imperialists fled like rats and it was the people of those nations who took up arms; those who were lucky enough to have a Communist Party triumphed and advanced and those who did not, at least in a transitional way escaped being colonies, for example Indonesia, which, as a result of that war, ceased to be a colony of the Netherlands.

In that war there was a sinister plan: the crusade against the USSR, and I underline the word crusade because of its medieval roots that clearly expresses its reactionary heart and because that is how it was raised by Hitler himself, as an anti-Bolshevik crusade, because the black dream they had it was to sweep the USSR off the face of the Earth; futile, a dream of glass, it crashed against the power of the dictatorship of the proletariat, with the leadership of the Party and of Comrade Stalin, of the Russian proletariat, of the Russian people. Comrades, heroic pages!: Stalingrad, the greatest warfare in cities, warfare in the streets, the one that generates the most deaths. There they fought not only house by house but room by room; they are chapters that have shook the world.

There, too, the dirty, devious game of the imperialist allies has been clearly seen: the United States, England, I am not talking about France because it was occupied — and it was in 18 days — devious that delayed the opening of the invasion of Europe by the North to strike at the heart of Germany, looking for fascist Germany to defeat the USSR. We all know, and it must be remembered, Comrades, that the fascist offensive led by the Nazis to which the Italian fascists, the Franco Spanish fascists contributed and used all the economic power of the subjugated Europe, launched a million and a half men, the cream of the crop of the German army, 75% of its air force, penetrated. But Comrade Stalin had wisely handled diplomacy greatly and with subtlety – these are things that – forgetting the German-Soviet pact was necessary – some say, but that did not save the USSR from the invasion, they do not know what they are talking about, it was one thing to buy time and another thing was that Germany would necessarily hit the USSR, reason: it could not continue advancing in the West with a powerful enemy at its back and with a fierce and very rich land of fabulous potential; yes, Comrades, that must be recognized, we must understand reality as it is because that is how we even understand what these social-imperialists and a population of more than 200.000.000 are based on today, that was inevitable.

There it is necessary to emphasize the sagacity and penetration of the Soviet intelligence service, that was intelligence service! Which they came to know on the day of the invasion; they say that it was of no use – I think these are stupid belches. What could Russia do in the face of such an attack, apply a strategic defense and that is what was done – we as Communists and already managing a People’s War understand that it is a strategic defensive — and that was what was done, together with scorched earth, to leave nothing, bare earth; and they had the audacity, the high decision to blow up monumental works like that famous dam that connects the Volga with the Don that cost so many years of effort, it was blown up! The Germans never dreamed, they thought that this work would not be blown up because it was too important and it had cost a lot of effort. Comrades, the dictatorship of the proletariat was at stake, the revolution was at stake, we cannot waste time nor can we simply allow ourselves to be hindered as Chairman Mao says, by defending inches of land, or pots; that’s how we are, then, the Communists.

They crashed at the gates of Leningrad, at the gates of Moscow, and at Stalingrad; but not only was scorched earth left behind, guerrillas and even individual men were left with a good rifle and a good amount of ammunition and their vodka for the cold, and to annihilate one of those, the Germans had to lose 40 men, that is the average Comrades. It was not therefore easy as the Germans believed; think, comrades, that this offensive is a high-quality military plan, thus, the highest and most enlightened German military leaders drew up that plan and the German school has a tradition of war many times proven: in three months they were going to conquer the USSR, in three months.

Comrade Stalin’s foresight had already taken measures since the thirties when there is the great transformation of the field and the industry, they had already transferred factories beyond the Urals, even foreseeing the possibility of leaving even Moscow, because it is true, everything was ready in case they could not ultimately defend Moscow, even if that was the decision taken, it was already planned to move the leadership and the center to the Urals; thus, the first thing that was done was to take measures for the transfer of Lenin because he could not fall into the dirty hands of the miserable children of hell, he could not fall. But the order, what was it then, Comrades? After they had penetrated to the aforementioned doors, the order was not to go back any further! You will say, and how were those plans to go to the Urals? Comrades, there is always a plan in case it fails, you never make a single plan, that is intoned, you have plans for various circumstances and even extreme ones. It is very memorable and must always be highlighted as November 7th, anniversary of the revolution, they had nowhere to celebrate it and it was already considered impossible to fulfill it; Comrade Stalin said: „to the station!“, „but there is no platform, there are no seats“, Comrade Stalin stood on a drawer and gave the speech celebrating the revolution and said: „How many were we when we conquered power, what strength did we have when we rejected the immediate imperialist aggression to the October Revolution? Few and weak! Compared to what we are today, therefore they will not defeat us, we will crush them! And we will annihilate the beast in its own den, in Berlin“, did he say that? Comrades, these are things that one must remember, just like that, Comrade Stalin cannot be prosecuted, that is why the Party says we must see the 2nd World War.

It is well known how after that came the great resistance, the breakdown of the German lines, the pocket of Stalingrad where the commanders (Germans asked Hitler for authorization to capitulate) but Hitler here, he told them, the Aryans do not retreat, the Aryans they cannot be defeated by barbarians, by Mongols, by inferiors yes, but those inferiors, barbarians, Mongols, hunted them like rats and had to surrender.

It is good to always reiterate this: Stalin, a war manager with skill and wisdom, always had the moral element in mind and made all the defeated, surrendered Nazis parade and throw their flags, their eagles, their swastikas at the foot of the Lenin mausoleum; not only a great military defeat, a great moral defeat! Nazi arrogance, pride had been sunk in the mud and trampled on, it was the greatest moral blow they received! That was the beginning of the breakdown of the Nazi army. The other resistance of the 300.000 of the heroic race that would prevent the access of the Russians to Germany, the Soviet offensive of the Red Army made it blow up into a thousand pieces and blew up 300.000 more men; Germany was undone, of course, Comrades. That is when the imperialist Westerners rush to land in Normandy why? Because the Red Army, the Communists and Communism were advancing threateningly over all of Europe, that was it; but we know well that at the beginning of May, the Red Army took over Berlin and in the Reichstag, the corporative parliament that they had, they nailed the red flag with the hammer and sickle, the photographs remain for eternal memory. Hitler committed suicide, as we well know, he was even cremated because he knew what would come if he remained, they would not forgive him; Westerners, they may have, but the USSR was not going to forgive him.

The other great front, in the East, has China as its center, where the Japanese army was mired in a sea of masses, weakened, undermined by guerrilla warfare; various oppressed nations took up arms against them; the Westerners „supported“ only to later return, it is good to remember MacArthur, the best cadet that West Point has had, that is, the United States military school, one of the highest strategists that the United States has given, he had his barracks in the Philippines, what did he do? He left saying his famous phrase „I will return!“ Yes, when they defeat the Japanese, that is the part that he did not say. So when did they return? When the Japanese were weakened, undermined by the fighting in China and in the various oppressed nations of the East. It is therefore the oppressed peoples who have resisted the Japanese beast that once again returns to its old ways. Think about this simply so that you can see what it has cost the United States, 100.000 soldiers, it is all that the 2nd World War has cost, most of them killed in the East, you see, and before the fear that having concluded the war on the European western front, and as the agreements said, the USSR would have to turn its front against Japan, before the fear that the Red Army would expand, then they had to use the atomic bomb; yes, it is clear how politics direct the war, the Japanese were going to be crushed, they could not resist, justifications that they want to give us today are justifications.

That great event of the 2nd World War shook the world already marked to men and gave good results; not everywhere yes, but it even gave mediated fruits, for example, France and Italy, reason: revisionists, allowed triumph to be snatched from them, the fruits of victory having guerrillas of 500.000 men, 300.000 men, forged in that heroic resistance of the class and the European people that must also be taken into account. Thus, the 2nd World War is an event of great significance. The prestige of the USSR rose highly on Earth, just look at the newspapers of the time, you of course were not born yet, that is the advantage of being older; I remember, Comrades, when the victory, yes, I was in the Callao, the port that you know, just here, right? How the sirens of factories and ships sounded when Germany surrendered! Because the war was already won there, the other thing was to finish it, it was a worldwide hubbub, as I also remember, as if I saw it today, how the pages of the newspapers were already raising the atomic bomb like a stick to scare the fearful wondering: there is a risk of disintegration, the earth will disintegrate? It is silly because if there had been so much risk, would scientists have dropped the atomic bomb? It makes no sense, that is not seeing the political essence that directs the war, the weapons are used based on political objectives; a bomb killed a whopping 80.000 people in Hiroshima; Nagasaki was 145.000 and yet Hiroshima is celebrated or remembered far more because it was the first time, but in Nagasaki there were 145.000, more, these are facts, then, of transcendence that are shaping the minds of people in those noisy times.
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Chairman Gonzalo’s Speech On the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru
       - Barricades, Detachments and People' s War

[Excerpts from the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru, 1988-89, concerning revolutionary violence, forms of struggle and forms of organization.]

Engels summarized of the struggle of the proletariat and came to the conclusion that the barricade has a problem: being stationary, and said that the proletariat would have to find new military forms.

It was Lenin who embodied this 1) with Party, 2) with mass organizations, 3) great strategic vision: to use the conjuncture with great vision, 4) a plan of insurrection and formed a Military Center with members of the Central Committee, there was Stalin, 5) he planned how to take the city and for that he embodied the detachments, first armed detachments without weapons to lead the crowd, called to conquer weapons and to be trained. Thus he found the organic forms: the detachments and a great plan to take the city in 24 hours. He formed the Red Guard. Lenin thought that then he would have to go from the city to the countryside, he foresaw that the Whites would rise up and he foresaw that the imperialists would rush to destroy the New Power. Lenin was a man of very long and penetrating vision. The other step has already been taken by Chairman Mao.

Chairman Mao establishes the military theory of the proletariat: the People‘s War, which can and must be applied anywhere, the problem is to take into account the character of the revolution. If you go to Chairman Mao, there are laws, principles, norms, which must be specified in each country. To focus on the Party, to sustain the main character of the People‘s War as forms of struggle leads us to apply the principle that to focus on the war as the main character is good, is Marxist, as Chairman Mao says.

REVOLUTIONARY VIOLENCE

At the Enlarged National Conference of ‘79, the Party analyzed revolutionary violence from Marx, going through Lenin to Chairman Mao, reaching the conclusion that Chairman Mao Tse-tung has provided us for the first time with the true and complete military theories of the proletariat.

Taking into account the international class struggle, the class struggle in this country and the need to combat and sweep away revisionism and any position of bourgeois pacifism, we must raise, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism, taking revolutionary violence as a key issue, why? Because in the country and at world level they try to sweep away and deny revolutionary violence as well as the dictatorship of the proletariat; these are things that as Communists we should not consent to, the problem is revolutionary violence, which is nothing but the continuation of the class struggle with weapons in hand; the problem is the People‘s War, to destroy the old order and build the New Power, to shape it as the People‘s Republic of Peru and, in perspective, to concretize the dictatorship of the proletariat to serve the advance of the World Revolution.

[…]
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1988 - Outline of the history of the Party and three moments of the history of contemporary Peru

[This document is extracted from the documents of the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru (1988-89).]

PROBLEMS OF THE HISTORY OF THE PARTY (OUTLINE)

We follow the already known outline, several times sanctioned by the Party, that we have three moments in our process: that of the Constitution, Reconstitution and Leadership of the People’s War. It is within this that we take up problems. Within these three parts of the Party process, since it was founded by Mariátegui and its antecedents, we have some problems:

1. CONSTITUTION

We raise the following problems:

— Struggle for the constitution of the Party.

This point is very important. First, it must be clear our position that Mariátegui founded the Communist Party of Peru (CPP); we reject that Ravinez founded it because historically it is not so, it was Mariátegui himself who proposed the change of name to the Party and that it be called the CPP, that was his proposal, only that he died and Mariátegui’s proposal was sanctioned in a Party meeting after his death, that is the problem, but the Party was not founded by Ravinez, that is not true. To make the struggle very clear, particularly the struggle waged against Haya de la Torre and his ideas of nascent APRAism. The APRA was an alliance, initially it was even called ARPA, that is how it was called: ARPA, that was founded with 5 points and it is over, what else is the famous alliance? Well, we are only interested in Mariátegui’s struggle against Haya de la Torre‘s criteria and positions. What we want to take are problems that serve us, we do not want a history in which we inform ourselves, we want a weapon of struggle, that is why we take problems, that is the reason.

– Well, a second problem within this first question would be: the role of Mariátegui.

That is another question. It must be very clear that Mariátegui is the founder of the Party, what Mariátegui has done, what is Mariátegui’s role, especially because Mariátegui is trafficked, or not, we cannot consent, we cannot allow, then, that there is a Unified Mariáteguist Party (PUM) that traffics. Then, it is a problem of the history of Marxism in Peru, of course; beyond that, it is a problem of the new ideas in Peru, is it not, it is a problem of the class in Peru, it is not an unimportant thing, this must be very clear.

– Another problem: abandonment of the line and opportunism.

What do we want to see here? Not only that the line that Mariátegui established was done in struggle, but that his line was abandoned, it was denied and where did all this lead to: to opportunism. Scandalous examples: the bastard electioneering of ’39, the frentism of ‘45 when they said „the thesis that the elections should be used only as propaganda has expired, the program today is to win seats“, these are the textual words of the Party Secretary himself, Jorge Acosta. Why do we use this, why do we need this problem, what does abandoning a line imply, where does it lead: historically our Party shows that it leads to opportunism, does it not, that is what it is? To abandon Marxism-Leninism and its application here in Peru — because that is what Mariátegui did and in a creative way, nobody can deny it — to abandon it led to opportunism, it led to Browderism, an antecedent of contemporary revisionism. So, it is a good lesson, is it not, of course, our own history gives us great lessons.

2. RECONSTITUTION

Two problems:

– the struggle against contemporary revisionism.

– the other problem: the reconstitution of the Party. The CPP.

Why we raise these two problems: it is linked to the above. To abandon the just and correct, Marxist-Leninist position of Mariátegui and its creative application in Peru, to abandon that line led to opportunism and we sank into the mire, to get out of it we had to wage a struggle against contemporary revisionism, is it linked to the above or not? Opportunism sinks us, to save ourselves we have to fight against revisionism; it is an easy lesson to understand, isn’t it? Just as the history of the Party shows that abandoning Marxism leads us to sink, it also tells us that by taking Marxism and fighting revisionism we develop, we stand up again, we get out of the mire. That is the reason for this problem.

And the reconstitution, and why do we stress the CPP: because it must be very clear that the Party exists: and it proves it because it has opened in reality, with weapons in hand, with a vigorous People’s War, the true and real road of the democratic revolution to conquer power. This is being demonstrated here, what the Chairman says when he analyzes the experience of Russia, of the old Russia, of the Bolshevik Party and the experience of China, of the Communist Party of China (CPCh), confronting it with India; he says: „Why is it that in the old Tsarist Russia there was revolution: because there was a Party; why was one there in China: because there was a Party; why not in India, which has similar conditions as in China?: because there is no Party.“ So, this is another key problem, not only for us Communists, but to fight, then, in this country.

3. LEADERSHIP OF THE PEOPLE‘S WAR

Here, deal with three problems:

– Initiation and development of the People’s War. People’s Guerrilla Army (PGA) and New Power.

– Second problem: the Party and the current ideological dynamics. Combating revisionism as the main danger

– Third problem: the task of the Party at present: to lead the conquest of power throughout the country.

These are three problems. Well, it is threaded with the previous: we have a Party. Having the Party, what did we do, we initiated and developed the People’s War, without the Party there is no initiation and there is no People’s War; and that People’s War, what has it given us, a PGA, otherwise such a war could not have been carried out; and it has given us something else, the new Power, we are solving the central problem of the revolution, we are demolishing the old order and generating the bases of what has to be the new in a brilliant perspective towards the future, that is another problem. This must be very clear.

The second, why are we dealing with it? because the class struggle is intensifying, there is polarization, in the world the class struggle is intensifying, there is polarization, there is a great ideological struggle, it is going to develop, we are seeing how a revisionist offensive is developing once again, whether it is Albania, whether it is China as an imperialist power, whether it is the Soviet Union, an imperialist power or superpower that is competing for world hegemony; not only them, but also the imperialist powers, all imperialism, all world reaction points against Marxism, points against Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, it is pretended that it has expired. All this hits, it is what we call the current ideological dynamics and we have to face it, and there the key, what is it: to fight revisionism as the main danger, in the Party, in the country, in the world, against whoever it is, power of the tenth order, it is all the same to us, whether it is social-imperialism, it is all the same to us, whoever it is that points against Marxism. Because the partners collude and fight for world hegemony, but they help each other to crush the revolution, dreaming. So, this problem is very important. Remember what we have said about differentiation, it is necessary or not; does it have to do with the rectification campaign, of course it has to do with it. This prepares us, arms us, for what, to fulfill the task that falls to the Party; what is that task: our problem, then, is to lead the conquest of power in the whole country, to finish off the democratic revolution and uninterruptedly continue, then, to the socialist revolution and then, when the conditions are given, the great revolution or the proletarian cultural revolution will be expressed and will take place, the magnitude it has, well, who knows, and then it will take off.

So, we are aiming at problems that are weapons to fight. That is what we need, not a simple document from which someone can read, be informed, that does not interest us; what interests us is to arm ourselves with our own experience, with our own problems, to draw our own lessons, positive or negative, whatever it may be. So, that is how we understand this problem of history. On these questions we have discussed many times […]; but we want a brief, clear, understandable document, that the masses can handle, the proletariat, the people, obviously the Communists, they first of all. We think about the type of militancy we have, what do we gain with a kind of 300-page or 500-page volume, what do we gain, at least today we do not need it; perhaps tomorrow, if tomorrow the conditions allow it to be so, it will be so; but what do we need today? That is what we propose, what do we need today: that the history of the Party with its problems be, then, one more weapon of struggle, that is the idea, that is the idea that guides us to propose this type of problems, they can be these or others.

This is like „Problems of the History of the Party“, in a schematic way.

Contemporary Peru has three moments linked to the appearance of the proletariat which founds its Party to seize power through revolutionary violence.

MILITARY LINE

[…]

From the standpoint of the Military Line, contemporary Peru has three moments linked to the appearance of the proletariat that founds its Party to take Power through revolutionary violence, specifying its road, which is synthesized in the process of the Military Line of the Party.

The 1st Moment (1895 to 1945). The CPP is constituted and regarding the Military Line, Mariátegui establishes the „Indication and outline of the road“. The heroic workers’ struggles for better wages, the eight hour work day, for decent working conditions, the peasant movements of the Southern Highlands for lands and the agricultural proletarian movements, and the movements to reform the university, leads to a complex sharpening of the class struggle in which the Peruvian proletariat matures and in which Mariátegui founds the CPP on October 7th, 1928, under the banner of Marxism-Leninism.

Mariátegui indicated and outlined fundamental ideas on revolutionary violence. He said: „There is no revolution that is moderate, balanced, calm, placid.“ „Power is conquered through violence […] it is preserved only through dictatorship.“ He conceived war as being protracted in nature: „A revolution can only be fulfilled after many years. Frequently it has alternating periods of predominance by the revolutionary forces or by the counter-revolutionary forces.“ He established the relationship between politics and war, understanding that the revolution generates an Army of a new type with its own tasks different from those of the exploiters; he also understood the role of the peasantry and the vital participation of the working class in a leading role, that the revolution will come from the Andes, that „with the defeat of the big landownership feudalism, urban capitalism will lack forces to resist the growing working class“; that in order to make revolution, rifles, a Programme and doctrine are needed. He conceived the revolution as a total war in which there is a conjunction of political, social, military, economic and moral elements, and that each faction puts in tension and mobilizes all the resources that it can. He totally rejected the electoral road.

With the death of Mariátegui in April 1930, the right led by Ravines is going to usurp the leadership of the Party and the questioning and negation of Mariátegui’s road occurs. They invoke insurrection in words but degenerate into electoralism. The so-called „Constitutional Congress“ of the Party in 1942 sanctions the capitulationist tactics of „national unity“, both in internal politics as well as internationally. The Party is influenced by Browderite ideas, a predecessor of modern revisionism, where there is a clear abandonment of revolutionary violence and an electoral tactic is promoted centering on the „National Democratic Front“. Nevertheless, the red line in the Party struggled to defend the Marxist-Leninist positions, although it was bitterly combated and the internal struggles were resolved through expulsions.

The 2nd Moment (1945 to 1980). The CPP is reconstituted, and with respect to the Military Line, Chairman Gonzalo establishes the „Definition and Foundations of the Road“. This second moment has two parts: The first, in the period from 1945 to 1963, is one of „New impulses for the development of the Party and the beginnings of the struggle against revisionism“ and the second, from 1963 to 1980, is one of „Establishment of the General Political Line and reconstitution of the Party“.

In the first part of the second moment, by the mid-1950s, the struggle begins for reactivating the Party that had been left in disarray after Odría’s State coup. Afterwards, the Party commences the opening step in the struggle against revisionism. This process occurs in the midst of the repercussions of the Cuban Revolution and mainly because the unfolding of the struggle between Marxism and revisionism begins at the world level. The road to revolution begins to be discussed, the armed struggle is talked about again and in the 4th Congress of the Party in 1962, it is agreed that in Peru the so-called „two roads“ are viable: „The peaceful road and the violent one“. Also, „the revolution can follow the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside as well as from the city to the countryside“. But in spite of this empty talk, the Party in essence was hanging on to the old electoral strategy then taking the form of the so-called „National Liberation Front“. This was the revisionism of Khrushchev. At this time the political positions of Chairman Gonzalo begin to emerge, who laid the foundations of the red line which adhered to the positions of Chairman Mao in the struggle between Marxism and revisionism.

In the second part of the second moment, from 1963 to 1980, we have the „Establishment of the General Political Line and reconstitution of the Party“, this task was carried forward by Chairman Gonzalo in constituting the Red Faction of the Party in an intense struggle of more than 15 years and through three political strategies:

From 1963 to 1969 he guided the Red Faction under the political strategy of following the „Road of surrounding the cities from the countryside“. From 1969 to 1976 he led the Party with the political strategy of „Reconstitution of the Party for the People’s War“: From 1976 to 1979 there was the political strategy of „Complete the Reconstitution and Establish Foundations“ for the beginning of the armed struggle.

During the first strategic period of following the „Road of surrounding the cities from the countryside“, the Communists of Peru are profoundly stirred by the struggle between Marxism and revisionism, and Marxist positions soak into the organization. In the 1960s there is a great peasant movement that mobilized 300.000-500.000 peasants which fought for land but that did not convert into an armed struggle due to revisionist leadership; a great movement of labor strikes occurs in the working class, and the university struggle is developed to a higher level. All these events had repercussions on the Party and Chairman Gonzalo would forge the Red Faction in Ayacucho, with clear ideas that the Party must seize Power, and that it must be based on Marxist theory. He unleashes a frontal struggle against revisionism that was centered in the Soviet Union, and adheres firmly to the positions of the Communist Party of China and mainly with those of Chairman Mao. He expounds that: „The countryside is in a powerful revolutionary ferment“, „we must pay special attention to the countryside and to the poor peasants“, and that „our revolution will be from the countryside to the city“. In the 4th National Conference of January 1964, he meets with the different bases of the Party to expel revisionism and its crusty representatives Jorge del Prado, Acosta and Juan Barrio. Thus our Party is going to be one of the first in breaking and expelling revisionism from its ranks.

Chairman Gonzalo began to consolidate the Party in the Regional Committee of Ayacucho; he put the center of Party work in the countryside; in the city he organized the poor masses in the Neighborhood Federation, and reorganized the Revolutionary Student Front. But what is of transcendental importance is that despite the opposition of the new Central Leadership Chairman Gonzalo, by applying a Party Accord, launched the „Special Work“, which was the military work of the Regional Committees by giving them three functions: political, military, and logistical. Afterwards, in sharp two-line struggle against the positions of the Central Leadership that wanted to control the military work, he combated militarism, mercenarism and focism. In these circumstances the guerrillas of the Movement of the Revolutionary Left (MIR) develop, a position that expressed the struggle of our people from a petit-bourgeois outlook, which follows a militaristic line and sidesteps the Party. In spite of being out of step with the rise of the peasants, this movement showed the feasibility of armed struggle as a perspective, provided that it be led by a just and correct line under the leadership of the Party. For that reason, Chairman Gonzalo was opposed to dissolving the Party in order to tail the MIR and the National Liberation Army (ELN) in a supposed Front. At the September 1967 meeting of the Expanded Political Bureau, he expounded a Strategic Plan which contained a set of measures that the Central Committee should take for the construction of the Three Instruments, having as its main task the formation of the armed forces that was agreed upon at the 5th National Conference of 1965. This occurs in the midst of a factional struggle where most notably the Factions of „Red Fatherland“ and the right-liquidationism of Paredes contend to corner the leadership of the Party. Paredes intended to replay the tactic of tailing a faction of the big bourgeoisie, while those of „Red Fatherland“ went on to plunge into right-opportunism.

During the second political strategy of „Reconstitute the Party for the People‘s War“, Chairman Gonzalo will expound on the underlying revisionism within the Party and that it is necessary to reconstitute it on the Basis of Party Unity: Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung thought, the Thought of Mariátegui and the General Political Line. These positions were fought against by the aforementioned Factions. The mishandling of the two-line struggle by Paredes is going to lead to the fragmentation of the Party. Chairman Gonzalo understood the necessity of the reconstitution of the Party and the necessity to unleash an internal struggle to make it a reality by sweeping away revisionism, as evidenced by the editorials he wrote in „Red Flag“ of December 1967: „Develop the Internal Struggle in Depth“, and of April 1968: „Deepen and Intensify the Internal Struggle in Revolutionary Practice“. He will work tirelessly for the channeling of revolutionary violence into People’s War, for the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside, thus accomplishing the main task demanded by the Party: The construction of the revolutionary armed forces. He expounds that the indispensable foundation in this undertaking is the development of revolutionary peasant work, that without good work among the peasant masses, that is, work guided by Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought and led by the Communist Party, there cannot be a development of the armed forces nor of the People’s War. Afterward, he says that we must not only retake the continuing validity of Mariátegui’s Thought, but we must also develop it. He establishes the Agrarian Program of the Party in May of 1969. In 1972 he establishes the Strategic Plan of the Regional Committee of Ayacucho. He defeats the right-liquidationism, and in the Party two Factions remain: The Red Faction fundamentally in Ayacucho, led by Chairman Gonzalo, and the „Bolshevik“ Faction, acting primarily in Lima. The so-called „Bolsheviks“ developed a „Left“-Liquidationist Line, a form of revisionism that isolated the Party from the masses. Their conception was that it was impossible to fight under fascism, that having a correct line was enough. They had a military line that was opposed to People’s War. They were crushed in 1975 and their leaders fled.

During the third political strategy to „Complete the Reconstitution and to Establish Bases“ to initiate the armed struggle, the problem was to finish, to consider the Reconstitution of the Party as complete, and to establish foundations to begin the armed struggle. This issue will be defined in the 7th Plenum of April 1977, in which all the Party worked under the slogan of „Construction serving the armed struggle“, in struggle against the seeds of a right-opportunist line, which sustained that Velasco had carried out the agrarian reform, that there was a need to organize the peasants around the Peasant Federation of Peru and that People’s War needed to be waged for the „most profound daily demands of the masses“, forgetting about the problems of land and of Power. In the cities, they developed „workerism“, focusing the class in labor leaders and opposed to the class playing its leading role. Once these positions were crushed, Chairman Gonzalo launched the „National Plan of Construction“ in June of 1977; dozens of cadres were sent to the countryside in the interests of the strategic needs of the People’s War and to build Regional Committees taking into account the future Support Bases. In the 8th Plenum of July of 1978, he establishes the „Outline for the Armed Struggle“. In essence, he expounded that the People’s War in Peru must be developed as a unified whole in both the countryside as well as in the city, with the countryside being the main theater of armed actions, following the road of surrounding the cities from the countryside. Furthermore, it must take into account the historical social process of the country, especially the military aspect, the importance of the Highlands and mainly from the Central and Southern part in our history, the importance of the Capital, and the need to place Peru within the context of Latin America, in South America particularly, and within the international context and the World Revolution. All the Party entered into a general reorganization, placing the countryside as central to develop the main form of struggle and organization. Thus, the basis of the construction of the Three Instruments of the revolution was laid down.

In synthesis, the entire process of reconstitution left us with a Party of a new type prepared to initiate the People’s War and to lead it until the conquest of Power countrywide. In this process the historic contingent was forged, who with the ideology of the proletariat under the leadership of Chairman Gonzalo was ready to assume the conquest of Power through the People’s War.

The 3rd Moment (1980 to the present). The Party begins to lead the People’s War. Its Military Line is formed with the „Application and development of the Road“. This third moment has four milestones: 1) Definition; 2) Preparation; 3) Initiation; and 4) Development of the guerrilla war.

1) Definition. In essence, the Party takes the historic and transcendental agreement of initiating the People’s War in Peru, which was defined in the 9th Expanded Plenum of June 1979. This agreement was achieved in the midst of three intense struggles: The first was against the Right-Opportunist Line that was opposed to initiating the armed struggle, negating the revolutionary situation, that the conditions didn’t exist, and that there was „stability“. They were expelled, and the Party agreed upon a new stage and a new goal. The second struggle was against a new rightist line that considered that initiating the armed struggle was impossible, that it was a „dream“, that there was no need of taking up that agreement because it was a matter of principle. The third struggle was with the divergences within the left, one in which the nuances were discussed on how to develop the People’s War. It was established that the proletarian position was Chairman Gonzalo’s and therefore was the one which should be enforced; the entire Party made a commitment to be guided by the leadership of Chairman Gonzalo.

Concerning the construction of the armed forces, measures were taken to form military cadres, specific groups for action and to undermine the reactionary forces, aiming at soldiers. In strategy and tactics, the organic system was re-proposed.

2) Preparation. In this milestone event, the Programme of the Party is sanctioned, along with the General Political Line of the Peruvian Revolution and the Party Statutes. Problems of political strategy related to revolutionary violence, the People’s War and the Party, the Army and United Front are resolved. The following Decision is assumed: „Forge the 1st Company in Deeds! Let violence flourish realized in the initiation and development of the armed struggle; we open with lead and offer our blood to write the new chapter of the history of the Party and of our people forging the 1st Company in deeds (Peru, December 3, 1979).“

The Party prepared the armed struggle dealing with two problems: 1) Problems of Political Strategy that define both the content and the objectives of the People’s War in perspective and in the short term, as well as the guidelines that the People’s War should have, its Military Plans, the construction of the Three Instruments and their connection with the New Power; 2) The initiation of the armed struggle. This decisive and paramount question had merited the most special attention from Chairman Gonzalo, who established the „Plan of Initiation“ guided by the slogan „Initiate the armed struggle!“ that was the condensation of the main politics that had to be developed militarily. Its contents included: First, the political tasks to be fulfilled which are initiating the armed struggle, boycotting the elections, militarily promoting the armed struggle for the land and establishing the bases for the new conquests, especially the New Power. Second, forms of struggle: Guerrilla combat, sabotage, propaganda and armed agitation, and selective annihilation. Third, organizational and military forms: Armed detachments, with or without modern weapons. Fourth, a chronology, date of the initiation and duration of the Plan, and simultaneous actions for specific dates. Fifth, slogans: „Armed Struggle!“, „A Workers’ and Peasants’ Government!“, and „Down with the New Reactionary Government!“.

The Preparation was carried out in struggle against the rightist positions within the Party that were negating conditions, that the Party was not prepared or that the masses would not lend us support. The leader of these positions deserted and they were crushed.

3) Initiation. On May 17th, 1980, the People’s War in Peru began. It „was a defiant political blow of transcendental significance, deploying rebellious red flags and hoisting hammers and sickles, that proclaimed: ‚It is right to rebel‘ and ‚Power grows from the barrel of a gun‘. It summoned the people, especially the poor peasantry, to stand up in arms, to light the bonfire and to shake the Andes, to write the new history in the fields and hidden features of our tumultuous landscape, to tear down the rotten walls of the oppressive order, to conquer the summits, to storm the heavens with guns to open the new dawn. The beginnings were modest, almost without modern weapons. Combat was given, it was advanced and it was built from the small to the big and from the weak material and initial fire came the great turbulent fire and mighty roar that grows, sowing revolution and exploding into ever more impetuous People’s War“.

[…]
--
[The OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF THE PARTY AND THREE MOMENTS OF THE HISTORY OF CONTEMPORARY PERU, extracted from the documentation of the 1st Congress of the CPP, Marxist Congress, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought, mainly Gonzalo Thought Congress, that we publish today is in homage to the 92nd Anniversary of the founding of the CPP by J. C. Mariátegui on October 7th, 1928. This Party document is a combat weapon of Communists, combatants and masses to complete the pending task of the general reorganization of the Party in and for the People’s War in the struggle to the death against revisionism both of the revisionist and capitulationist Right-Opportunist Line (ROL) structured in the prisons with the support of the Yankee CIA-Peruvian reaction and against that structured in the Valley of the Rivers of Apurímac and Ene (VRAE), both sworn enemies of Maoism and Gonzalo Thought, of Chairman Gonzalo, of the CPP, of the Basis of Party Unity (BPU) and of the People’s War.
LONG LIVE THE 92nd ANNIVERSARY OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU!
07.10.2020
Peru People‘s Movement]
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1989 - China(Excerpt from the Summary Document of the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru)

CHINA
[Excerpt from the Summary Document of the 1st Congress of the Communist Party of Peru, 1989.]

Geographical features. 600.000 km², 1.000.000 inhabitants, the state with the largest population on Earth. From this comes the weight of China. Since the last century, China has been subjected to aggressions by Tsarist Russia, the French, the English, the Germans, the Yankees, the Japanese, etc. They all wanted to seize China because of its key position; traditional center of world contradictions. With repercussions on the whole Pacific area, great contradictions of imperialist powers were fought out there, and in the present time the contradictions between the great powers and the intermediate imperialist powers clash in China. To the south is Southeast Asia, to the north Korea, to the west Japan, which has great power dreams of ruling China. It has borders with India, another colossus with 800.000.000 inhabitants, and borders with the USSR. Consider that the Pacific basin has the largest population on earth: to the east is the U.S., California is a part of it that is undergoing great development; to the west is the USSR, there is Japan, Southeast Asia, a densely populated region, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, etc., there is also the fifth continent, Oceania.

If we look at history, we find that the Mediterranean was the sea that served the highest development of antiquity, then the Atlantic that of the modern great powers, and today it is clear that the Pacific is the ocean of the future. It is where the great powers, the great imperialist powers and the oppressed nations meet. The West is the crucial part of the basin, and that is where China is.

It is not a simple geography, which, by the way, we must also consider, because the revolution and the war are taking place on one territory. What we reject is geopolitics, which involves interpreting history starting from the geography and weight of the State. The Chinese Comrades taught us to look at geography within history and class struggle. With the victory of the Chinese Revolution led by Chairman Mao in 1949, the balance of power in the world changed and most of the world from the Pacific to the Mediterranean lived under socialism. That is why Chairman Mao later said that the wind of revolution was stronger than that of counter-revolution.

Something about the historical development process of the Cultural Revolution. China had the longest process of feudalism in human history and obviously has an ancient culture.

In 1949, the democratic revolution was victorious, and the construction of socialism began. By 1956, the Chinese had already laid the foundations for the construction of socialism, and from then on, intense internal struggles took place, which were resolved by arms. Chairman Mao defined China as a great unity and tried to push forward the development of the backward regions in particular. (China has about 56 nationalities, but 90% of the population is Han). In „The 10 Major Relationships“, he laid out how to conceive of and develop unity by having the regions help each other. The dictatorship, under the leadership of the Communist Party of China (CPCh) headed by Chairman Mao, would have to lead this process. He said the north should not be dependent on the south, the center should not be the most economically developed region, and the border area with the Soviet Union should be developed.

He conceived of China as a backward country that needed at least 50 years to develop and whose social base was the peasantry, which represented 80% of the population. Knowing that the peasantry and petty bourgeoisie were producing capitalism 24 hours a day, he began a strong push to collectivize the country toward socialism, while Liu Shao-shi in particular opposed it and tried to undermine and prevent it.

Chairman Mao advocated that the problem was to develop rural areas mainly through the immense labor power of the peasantry with the aid of mechanized means of production, the latter being improved along with agriculture.

He considered agriculture as the basis and industry as the guideline. He considered how this agricultural base should develop, taking into account that it had to support a heavy industry, whose development was vital, and a light industry, which was indispensable for the supply of a range of products for daily life. Therefore, he suggested that Chinese industry should be based on two legs: agriculture and industry.

In this way, he showed his understanding of economics from the point of view of politics, and developed a political economy whose core is the relations of exploitation or production, depending on whether there is exploitative rule or whether a country is emancipating itself.

The three flags. Chairman Mao defined: 1) The basic line of building socialism: he said that under socialism the class struggle continues and may come to a head under certain circumstances, that is, the class struggle does not stop, nor is it decided who will defeat whom, whether socialism defeats capitalism or vice versa. But Chairman Mao referred to the concrete problem of building socialism in China, where it is not decided who will win, capitalism or socialism, the bourgeoisie or the proletariat, and that a long road will be necessary, and he made it clear that the establishment of the People‘s Republic was a first step of a long road of a thousand li, that is, socialism had a long process of development ahead of it. 2) The People‘s Commune, which represented a great leap in the development of collectivization of agriculture. The People‘s Commune was not only an advance in economic terms, but aimed to give the future society a social base, because it had to develop agriculture and industry, as well as create an administrative apparatus, a New Power and a militia to support it. And 3) the Great Leap Forward, which involved a great effort by the Chinese proletariat and people to develop industry, paying attention to heavy industry. Although everyone was producing steel, it was obviously of poor quality and this meant a waste of energy. Revisionists like Teng said that „it would be more practical to buy it from the foreigners“. But Chairman Mao’s view was not to focus on immediate economic profitability, but to keep the perspective in mind, because the Great Leap was to act as a great impetus, a great push to develop the industrial process and agriculture by means of mechanization.

Chairman Mao understood China as the base of the World Revolution. He did not say the center, but he was fully aware that China was the center of the World Revolution, because it was he who showed us that the center of the revolution had undergone a shift to the East, from France to Germany in the 19th Century, then to Russia and China in the 20th Century. But the most important thing for Chairman Mao, was that this role involved a responsibility and understood it as his task to use all the power of China to serve the world revolution, to enforce the main trend of history.

In the 1960s, under Chairman Mao, China waged a great ideological struggle against revisionism, the center of which was the USSR. And it should be remembered that Chairman Mao said that if China became revisionist, it would have to be fought, and it was from this point of view that thousands of Chinese and international cadres were educated. Chairman Mao did not accept anything that Khrushchev advocated, and the latter wanted to pressure him with a low blow by breaking the Sino-Russian economic and trade agreements and withdrawing all economic aid. At the same time, there was a drought in China, and this intensified the intense struggle in the country. The dispute will be fought with the three flags. The problem was to achieve ideological progress. Therefore, Chairman Mao proposes an alignment campaign in the 1957 propaganda conference, which is a struggle of ideas to align with the Party line. Education also received his special attention, especially the education of the peasantry. He refers to it in the text „Where Do Correct Ideas Come From?“, which is a masterful outline of our world outlook, and argues that the education of the peasantry must start from the world outlook of the proletariat.

All this leads to the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR). The basic problem was the further development of socialism. Initially, it started from how to judge the problem of ideas, how the classes that lost political power retreated to the field of ideology, as in China the feudal class and the bourgeoisie had retreated in this way, as well as the imperialist ideology with which they were connected. It was a hard and intensified struggle, and as always, the revisionist right acted from ambush. For example, Peng Chen, an ossified revisionist who is still alive, with the permission of Liu Shao-chi, circulated a document on how to orient the Cultural Revolution, which in reality was intended to prevent the progress of ideological transformation and the construction of socialism. Chairman Mao published a document in which he presented: 1) the condemnation of this pamphlet, 2) revisionists are being hatched here and now, and 3) the power of the scholars must be overthrown and the power of the people, the proletariat, must be established. Thus began the GPCR and it was the Party with Chairman Mao at its head that conceived of it, promulgated it, led it and carried it out.

In 1966, the Chinese Cultural Revolution began. But what happened in that year? Based on Chairman Mao‘s positions and call, the struggle against the academic authorities took off and they fought back. Liu and Teng formed groups to defeat the youth and proletarian militants who opposed the path of the Right in the field of culture. Chairman Mao called a meeting of the Central Committee and published „My First Big Character Poster. Bombard the Headquarters!“. In it, he said that right-wing fascist gangs had tried to shake class morality and that the black headquarters should be bombed. From this came the purge of the Central Committee and the dissolution of the Party. Only the Central Committee remained, as the other levels of leadership had been infiltrated by the Right. Chairman Mao called for every Communist to prove himself as such. These events caused a great commotion: the first blows were struck at the Peking Municipal Committee, where Peng Chen and others were overthrown. On this basis, the powerful Red Guards movement developed. Millions of young people gathered in Beijing, where they were trained and exchanged experiences under the leadership of the GPCR Commission, which included Comrade Chiang Ching, and then set out to tour all parts of China.

January 1967, the January Storm of Shanghai. The reaction tried to strike a blow at the industrial center of the revolution. It cut off the lines of communication, committed acts of sabotage, etc. But the working class, led by the Communists, rebelled, overthrew the traitors and took power. A mistake of the Shanghai Communists was that they proposed to form a Commune, a form that Chairman Mao opposed, because when the same thing had been proposed in the 1950s, it had been shown to be impractical. The problem is not only to set millions of masses in motion, the central problem is the leadership of the Communist Party so that the course is maintained, because without this political leadership the dictatorship of the proletariat cannot develop in the long run towards Communism, as Marx conceived (Gotha Programme). Since the development of the Commune was not yet mature and, moreover, the Party was in a process of purification, Chairman Mao proposed that, instead of a Commune, Revolutionary Committees be formed with a three-in-one composition, consisting of: 1) Communists, outstanding representatives, 2) members of the Army called to support the GPCR, and 3) revolutionaries who had emerged from the masses. In this way, a great step is taken towards the recovery of power and its advancement.

In this way, a powerful mass movement developed with the GPCR, politically led by the Party. To this day, the world has not seen such a broad mobilization of the masses and ability of organization and leadership. The greatness of the movement was due to three circumstances: 1) the ideology, Mao Tse-tung Thought (as was said at that time), without which nothing would have been achieved, 2) the People‘s Liberation Army (PLA), which was capable of supporting the people, the working class, and 3) a great mobilization of the masses.

All this led to a powerful storm amidst the hostility of the USSR, with which there were hundreds of skirmishes on the border, and the hostility of the United States. The problem was whether China would preserve its unity and which side it would take, that of the USSR or the U.S., or whether it would continue on its own path.

The struggle went as far as armed clashes, which were exaggerated by the Western press, which, as usual, distorted the facts without the slightest knowledge of what the Chinese Communists were referring to when, for example, they developed a „movement of cutting off noses and ears“. The PLA in Canton rebelled and even arrested members of the Central Committee, among others, an extremely serious problem that showed that the revisionists were using the Army against Communism, the dictatorship of the proletariat and to support their treason. In view of this, Chairman Mao gave them 24 hours to surrender and moved airborne troops to the region. As a result, they had no choice but to submit. The revisionists ruthlessly murdered many workers, peasants, soldiers and young Red Guards.

But in the midst of this struggle, the supporters of the capitalist way were overthrown, including Chinese Khrushchev, Liu Shao-chi, and the incorrigible Teng Hsiao-ping, who in his self-criticism to save himself said that he did not believe in the masses and therefore should never have become a Party leader. And what do we see today? We see the truth of what Lenin taught: The Right and the revisionists are ready to sign anything if it will save their skin.

The revolution made great progress and Chairman Mao said: „We have found the road we have long sought; we have found the form to continue the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.“ The 9th Party Congress of 1969 followed, one of the most important in the history of the CPCh. At it, similar to the decision of the 7th Party Congress of 1943, which was deleted at the 8th Party Congress in 1956 by the work of Liu and Teng, it was stipulated anew that the Party would be guided by Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought. Teng supported the statutes that followed Liu‘s political line and essentially said that there was no longer a class struggle in China and therefore the contradiction between productive forces and relations of production should be developed. The 9th Party Congress has a great significance. It stated that the USSR was an imperialist power that also had to be fought.

The Cultural Revolution continued. The experience of our Parties shows that when the Right is fought, „Left“ radicalism always appears, demanding to take the struggle further than the situation allows; without seeing with objectivity the concrete conditions, it believes to be able to foresee the future and takes positions that go beyond the goal and possibilities. But as Lenin said, the Right and the „Left“ radicals represent bourgeois positions, the „Left“ radicalism is the Right deviation turned the other way around. The participation of the Army in the Cultural Revolution increased its weight and importance, and Lin Piao took advantage of that. However, we should be aware that Chairman Mao planned the Cultural Revolution with Lin Piao in addition to the group closest to him, formed by Chiang Ching, Kang Cheng, Chang Chun-chiao. Lin Piao launched a movement of praising Chairman Mao, aiming to turn him into a holy ghost, as Chairman Mao himself calls it in a letter to Chiang Ching. He said, many believe that I have no doubts, but I have doubts, in me is the tiger and the monkey; but I apply what Lu Hsun said, I dissect myself, and no one can imagine to what point I do it, to analyze in depth my ideas, they try to put me on a pedestal according to the criterion, the higher someone is, the easier it is to overthrow him; but I am prepared for it, I know that I can break into a thousand pieces, but the matter is not destroyed, it is only transformed. The things I tell you must not be published, he continued, because if the Right takes power, it would use it against the Left, and what a beautiful spectacle it would be if the Right and the Left raise me to defend their own ideas. At a Central Committee Plenum, Chairman Mao picked apart this campaign. After that, Lin Piao went so far as to plan the assassination of Chairman Mao. However, this devious plan was discovered and Lin Piao tried to abscond. He took a plane and piloted it toward the USSR. Had he really been a Communist, he would have stayed to face the internal struggle. But he was not, and it is as Kang Sheng said, the revolution is the best judge and no one can avoid revealing his real nature in it. The plane crashed, or was shot down, or ran out of fuel, whatever the case, the fact is that this „winged horse“ with ambitions to create a new imperial dynasty died, and it was Brezhnev who sadly announced the news to the world. Where was his leftism? There we see what Lin Piao was: a revisionist.

Thus, the Left was weakened, because during the struggle against Lin‘s „Left“ radicalism, the Right united, exhibited contrition, because the Right does not know what real self-criticism is, and played a role in the struggle against „Left“ radicalism led by the Left. The balance of power changed, a situation reflected in the 10th Party Congress of 1973, which led to the return of, among others, Teng Hsiao-ping. There is a notable difference between Chou En-lai‘s report and Wang Hung-wen‘s. The first said that the main danger was the USSR, and behind it was to support the U.S. The second followed Chairman Mao and took the position that both superpowers were dangerous enemies. Chou‘s political report said that imperialism was the epoch of proletarian revolution and Leninism corresponded to it, which aimed to say that the development of Marxism ended with Lenin. Chou has a tortuous development process: until 1935 he belonged to the group of „28½ Bolsheviks“ who wanted to follow the Soviet experience to the letter. After 1935, he joined Chairman Mao more out of personal inclination than as a follower of Mao Tse-tung Thought.

An intense struggle ensued between the Right and the Left over the continuation of the GPCR, with some trying to reverse it while others wanted it to continue. In Peking, the Tien An Men Square incident occurred in 1976. There, the Right used Chou En-lai on the occasion of his death ceremony. (It is well to remember that Kang Sheng was called an anti-revisionist fighter at his death, a qualification not accorded to Chou.) There was pandemonium in the Square and the iron fist of the working class crushed the counter-revolutionary movement. But Chairman Mao asked a question: who was behind it? The incorrigible Teng, the one who doesn‘t care if the cat is white or black as long as it catches mice. And so it was.

In 1976, the Left suffered a heavy and painful loss: the death of Chairman Mao, an immeasurable loss for the Communists and for China. The death of a Great Leader always provokes shocks. It was at this moment that the devious revisionists carried out their plan of a State coup, following a plan previously worked out by Teng, of whom no one can say that he was unaware beforehand. In this State coup led by Teng, the armed forces were used by a section of the Central Committee to arrest members of the Central Committee. Thus, these scoundrels, incapable of ideological struggle, arrested Comrade Chiang Ching and the four, similar to what Khrushchev did in 1953, the same ideas, the same way of acting, the same clan.

From 1976, the last part of the Cultural Revolution took place, with great struggles, great strikes, great clashes, and a Left whose highest representative was on the verge of death, and which also faced new, unsolved problems of socialism, of which even today we have insufficient knowledge. Besides, they themselves had weaknesses, for when Teng put on the farce of his trial, only two, Chiang Ching and Chang Chun-chiao, remained steadfast; the other two were broken, expressing their insufficient steadfastness and lack of Communist understanding and resolve. Chiang Ching, on the other hand, shouted in the judges‘ faces: I do not recognize this court because it is fascist and Teng is a fascist, „I am a being without law“, a famous saying that exposed the revisionists. By this we recognize her Communist spirit. And neither she nor Comrade Chang Chun-chiao let themselves be forced to sign the fascist verdict. Meanwhile, the „political center“ figures applauded, showing that they are nothing but a slide to the Right. Chairman Mao said that when the tiger is not in the jungle, the monkey thinks he is the king. And what happened to the so-called „Chairman“ Hua Kuo-feng? The revisionists ate him for breakfast.

Thus began in China the appropriation of the dictatorship of the proletariat using the Army, the restoration of capitalism. A series of individuals followed who played a temporary role while Teng restored capitalism through dazzle and pragmatism. With this individual, red China became black, the dictatorship of the proletariat became a fascist dictatorship, and the Communist Party became revisionist. Internationally, it applies a great power policy and aims to become a superpower in the next century. In the countryside, a regression has occurred, the Communes have been destroyed, the cooperatives have been dissolved, and it is working towards an allocation of the land that goes as far as allowing it to be leased, all this combined with the great expulsion of the peasants. One of the last battles that the Left fought was the conference on agriculture, in which Hua argued that the main problem was the mechanization of agriculture. And who opposed him was not the peasant leaders from Tachai, but Comrade Chiang Ching. From this we can see once again that the problem is not class origin, but class position. Today, the capitalist way continues to be applied in agriculture, stimulating peasants to produce capitalism 24 hours a day. In industry, the unrestricted opening of the country to imperialist investment has taken place with the establishment of free trade zones, capital export and great material incentives, as well as the promotion of private production and trade, which are advancing with giant steps. This is accompanied by the continuation of the capitalist path in industry. In financial policy: large financial centers and the banks were created for foreign trade and as intermediaries for imperialist investment. The path that Teng applied was the most direct and unrestrained way of returning to capitalism. This one has also pursued the increasing separation of the State and the Party, the breaking of their links, it has changed the structure of the Army, basing it only on arms, and in foreign policy it has applied a great power policy, a policy of give and take with the imperialist powers and superpowers, and all this since 1976.

Teng, like Gorbachev, has recently carried out a counter-revolutionary, revisionist offensive to consolidate his power, but obviously the same thing is happening to the Chinese as to the Soviets. They have severe problems. There are battles between the rulers and the warlords, with the issue being who gets the most benefit from state power. Zhao Shi-yang, for example, has large investments through his son that reach into Hong Kong. Chairman Mao has warned that as the revolution develops and the leaders are not firmly entrenched in Communism, some will begin to emerge who want to use State power for their own benefit and oppose the class and the people in this way. The State coup of 1976 ushered in the return of the warlords, a phenomenon that was already evident in China after the 1911 revolution.

In China, the situation has come to a head. Inflation, the increase in prices, especially of food, the increase in the cost of living has begun. Rural exodus started: there are 55.000.000 peasants who left the rural areas because their land property was taken away from them. New millionaires have appeared. Non-State enterprises and trading companies have proliferated. And in China, the motto propagated by Liu and Teng in the ‚50s prevails: „It is good to get rich, because bringing the wealth of imperialism here is good because it gives work.“ wages are increasingly decreasing and are subject to the so-called „free labor market“. Unemployment increases, which brings a reserve army, that is, there is all the capitalist rot and, in addition, relations with the imperialist world and great powers and the resulting dependence are strengthened. Special schools have again been set up to train the children of the rulers to become future „leaders“, a cause Chairman Mao always opposed.

Thus, the Chinese working class and people are again suffering exploitation and oppression that will continue as long as the fascist dictatorship is not overthrown and the restoration of capitalism is not reversed.

Just as we have noted that the counter-revolutionary revisionist offensive has created difficulties in the USSR, problems are also emerging in China, albeit of a different kind. Already since the death of Chairman Mao, there have been peasant uprisings in China, there has been sabotage, and guerrilla warfare has begun to develop, but these facts are kept quiet. The workers are fighting Teng‘s new regulations for enterprises, demanding the right to strike, which Chairman Mao reinstated in the constitution. The Chinese peasants find themselves once again in a situation of growing poverty, and they are tormented by hunger. Once again they have to sell their daughters, and feudal forms reappear. But don’t the working class and the people remember how it was and see how it is today? And beyond that after a Cultural Revolution? Chairman Mao already said in the GPCR that one of their reasons was that the youth had not had the experience of revolution and had to go through it. And these young people who were 14 to 20 years old in the ‘70s are now in their forties. Is it conceivable that they have forgotten the GPCR, an experience that has left an indelible mark on them? No. As a French scholar said, Chairman Mao had in mind the raising of a future generation.

The Chinese also have economic problems. No one can overlook Japan‘s investment in China, which is a big market because of its population. But they have not been able to carry out their entire plan and all the investments that Teng expected, because Yankee imperialism and others impose conditions and demand collateral. Besides, they have problems in renewing the weapons of their armed forces. They made a fabulous plan for the purchase of ultra-modern weapons, involving several billion dollars, but England, for example, refused to sell them Harriet vertical launchers, and so they cannot get all the weapons systems they hoped for. Besides, the modernization of the army has contributed to their further distance from the people, and thus their army is reducing. This also has to do with the formation of a professional army.

China has also had international problems and border disputes, such as several armed clashes with Vietnam and political setbacks in Kim‘s Korea, where Soviet influence is steadily increasing. It has problems in Africa, Latin America, and oppressed nations due to competition and shortage of capital. Conspicuous and unmistakable are the increase in the cost of living of the people, inflation, wage reduction and the selling off of the land of the peasants. Besides, the problem of dissidents has appeared, which seems to be almost an imitation: Sakharov in Russia, and in China it is also a physicist. There are, as we have already noted, disputes of warlords, as expressed by the deposition of Hu Yao-lang and the existence of the power groups Zhaos, Tengs, etc., disputes that undermine the armed forces themselves.

All this led to the emergence of a powerful mass movement in China, consisting first of hundreds of thousands of youth and then of workers and peasants in Peking, Shanghai and other provincial capitals, leading to the situation in Tien An Men Square, another incident in the heart of Peking. A sharp dispute between factions postponed the armed deployment of Tien An Men until Teng could reassert his influence. But in the process, it can be seen that Teng’s authority has been challenged, not recognized, by Zhao. Teng announced himself with Chou‘s adopted son, Li Peng, who, like many of them, had been trained as a bureaucrat in the Soviet Union. Teng was able to get his way with his faction and oust Zhao by relying mainly on the PLA, which he dominates because the only post he has not relinquished is that of president of the Military Commission. From this we see how the army continues to serve to usurp power and decide the struggle of interest groups, and this means that warlords are being formed, which carries a risk: the division, the breakup of China, and if that were to occur, the ambitions of imperialist powers and world powers to seize part or all of China will intensify. What would it mean if the USSR controlled China? Control of 1.100.000.000 inhabitants, control of the most central and important part of the Pacific basin. What would it mean if the U.S. controlled China? Then it would have the key to Asia and the ability to slow down the USSR from Asia, and control of all of Asia and the Pacific. For both, that would mean an escalation of the struggle for dominance. That is why Bush said that the U.S. should support the so-called democratic movement of Chinese youth, but it should not cross certain boundaries, as this would unbalance Asia. Gorbachev, for his part, expressed his „good wishes“ that he hoped the Chinese government could keep the situation under control, which is nothing but his falsehood. He is worried that perestroika is constantly having bigger problems.

In this way, because of the situation of China and the perspective of what could happen there in the future, the problem of Asia shakes the world.

What is very expressive about the Chinese movement is that groups have appeared with the name „Dare!“, derived from the quote of Chairman Mao, where he says that the whole problem is to dare, and „The Desperate“, which means to be ready for anything to overthrow the fascist dictatorship. It is also very important that posters with the slogan „The people and the people alone are the motive force!“ have appeared. In several cities, workers are marching again with Mao insignia and portraits. The workers express that things were good for them in the past and not today, as they say, „Mao was good, a dollar was a dollar, Teng may be good, but a dollar is only worth ten cents.“ This manifests the people‘s rejection and understanding of the current situation. They say „the armed forces are not for Teng to use“, „Teng is not an emperor“, and in reference to the iron fist of the working class crushing the counter-revolution, they publish drawings of a hammer smashing a small bottle (small bottle in Chinese = Teng). Then there are also forms of struggle such as risking one‘s life in resistance to the repression of the army, and that organizations were formed years ago to defend the revolution. All these facts are expressive, very expressive, and deserve our attention.

Imperialism and its imperialist media spread that a movement for the return to bourgeois democracy has formed in China. Moreover, we do not agree with the statement that „in China, as in the Eastern European countries, a return to a complete bourgeois-democratic system is being sought“, because even if it could be that in the struggle against fascism bourgeois-democratic points of view are expressed, or even that, due to their lack of understanding, the majority speaks of it, this would be only one of the interests in the struggle, the position of a single class, the bourgeoisie. And what is the interest of the classes that make up the people, especially the proletariat? Would their interest cease to be expressed only because of their lost prestige? And besides, isn’t bourgeois democracy one of the ways of the fall of revisionism, a way of the bourgeois development of revisionism? On the other hand, Chairman Mao taught in „On New Democracy“ that in China, the State was discussed for decades, and it was understood that bourgeois democracy was not the right way for China, because what corresponds to its situation is a New Democracy to move to socialism. Does this mean that no one knows the text „On New Democracy“ anymore? That would be absurd, and it would be equally absurd to say that the proletariat and the people in China have forgotten the dictatorship of the proletariat and the great experiences and lessons of the CPMR.

Chairman Mao said in 1975 that what Lenin said about the petty bourgeoisie is being fulfilled in China, namely that it produces capitalism 24 hours a day, and furthermore that the party itself produces the bourgeoisie, and that is why he calls for the study of the dictatorship of the proletariat. He said that there was a wage system in China with various persisting forms of capitalism, and that what Lenin said about the „bourgeois State without bourgeoisie“ was correct. Chairman Mao arranged for the publication of extracts of the texts of Marx, Engels and Lenin on the dictatorship of the proletariat, where it is shown in a very expressive way that the power of the bourgeoisie must be overthrown at gunpoint (Marx).

Chairman Mao also said that since 1911, when the emperor was overthrown, no one has ruled China for a long time with the exception of Chiang Kai-shek, who lasted only 20 years. He said it was possible that after his death, the rightists would take power, but their life would not be easy because the Chinese people would rise up. There was too much political education and experience in China for the treacherous Rightists to feel calm.

The article „The Struggle Between the Legist and Confucian Schools“ (the Legist school is the ideological school that fought against the old order of slaveholding society for feudal society as the new order), published in Peking Review, No. 2 of 1975, takes up Chairman Mao‘s thesis on restoration and counter-restoration. It points out that there was a long period of 250 years of struggle between slaveholding society and feudalism until the latter prevailed. When there was the first restoration, the leaders were disoriented; they did not know what to do, and it was the struggle of the masses, their revolts and war that regained power.

One wonders, „How long has Teng been in power?“ Not even a decade, and Chairman Mao spoke of 20 years. It can be more, but he will fall, because the proletariat and the people in China have gone through the school of relentless political struggle, great class struggle, hard People‘s War and unimaginable cultural revolution. Therefore, the problem for the Communists is not to simply register what the imperialist press spreads about the so-called democratic movement, and even less to claim that a complete bourgeois democracy is aimed at. In any case, the question would be who is striving for it.

Given China‘s experience, we consider this rebellion, this youth uprising, as a re-edition of the May 1919 uprising 70 years ago, when there was a great mobilization of youth and intellectuals that shook China, and two years later, in 1921, the CPCh was founded. We should remember that Chairman Mao refers to these events as the beginning of the democratic revolution in China. Thus, what we are seeing cannot be a simple coincidence, and if we add to that the fact that the proletariat and the people are drawing comparisons between what they had before and what they do not have today, between their existence when Chairman Mao was alive and today, when they are sinking into growing exploitation and oppression, we do not believe that what we are witnessing today is a mere coincidence: Chairman Mao‘s insignia, the formation of „kamikaze“ groups, people ready to die, young people ready to die in the face of a line of armored cars. All this is no mere coincidence, nor are the expressions of support for Chairman Mao in Hunan and northeastern China. It is also no coincidence that the first three sentenced to death are workers; this means that the class is fighting. Thus, all these facts, as well as the forms of mass struggle and open violence used by the Chinese people steeled in them, reveal at least that the example of the Chinese Revolution, Chairman Mao‘s way, continues to live among the people, and the youth ask themselves, „What was the Cultural Revolution like and who led it?“ That is, they are asking how to fight revisionism.

And in the midst of these immense masses, this whole great struggle, this glorious, heroic struggle, at least Communist groups are forming, if they no longer exist. Because by its claws you can recognize the tiger, and the forms of struggle and the ideas that are expressed, such as the formation of human chains to prevent the attacks on the statue of Chairman Mao or the holding up of his portrait show that there are Communists who are regrouping and that they are doing it in the utmost secrecy is understandable. The forms of struggle show other ideas: the attack of the army, the storming and the throwing of incendiary devices at the tanks are steps to take up revolutionary violence as a universal law, means to take up revolutionary violence again, means to understand the army as a support of the fascist dictatorship, and this is what is important to the communists, even if these are only simple seeds, because what interests us is that the working class exists as an economic, political and above all ideological action. Because ideology cannot be buried and will always live and develop in the spirit of the class, of the people. Chairman Mao taught us to have confidence in the masses. He said that in China there are 600.000.000 Maos and they will rise up. Well, they are already beginning to rise up. He foresaw the winding road and said that if the left loses power and the right seizes the dictatorship of the proletariat, the only way left is to wage a new guerrilla war.

In the case that a majority is in favor of bourgeois democracy, this is the target, which is not true in China today. What we Communists have to see is that the class is fighting, it is regrouping, it will bring forth its party again and this will follow Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and solve the problem and the new problems that arise with the weapons, with the people’s war. Not seeing this means parroting in one way or another what imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism claim.
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1989 - Summary Document of the Third Session of the First Congress of the Communist Party of Peru

SUMMARY DOCUMENT OF THE 3rd SESSION OF THE 1st CONGRESS
SUMMARY DOCUMENT OF THE 1st CONGRESS

1st CONGRESS OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU
(A Marxist Congress, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought Congress)

3rd SESSION

PREPARATORY SESSION

REPORT: ON THE 3rd SESSION AND THE AGENDA

GREETINGS. Receive fervent greetings, in these nine years of expansive and victorious People’s War, in the name of the Central Leadership, the leaders, cadres and militants of the Party, the combatants of the People’s Guerrilla Army (PGA), the masses of the New Power and the masses that work more closely with us.

Let us seal with great success the 1st Congress of the Party, Marxist Congress, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Congress, Gonzalo Thought.

ON THE AGENDA

The agenda should be seen within the laws of previous sessions of Congress, but it has its specific issues. We propose that it be called 3rd SESSION OF CONGRESS, bearing in mind that it is the final session of Congress. The agenda would comprise three parts:

I. THE 1st CONGRESS

1. On the People’s War.

2. Development of the Congress.

II. GREAT CULMINATION OF THE PILOT PLAN.

1. Actions.

2. Construction.

3. Rectification Campaign.

III. GREAT PLAN FOR DEVELOPING BASES AND CONQUEST OF POWER IN PERSPECTIVE.

1. Foundation, conditions and perspective in which it is given.

2. GREAT PLAN.

3. Application of the Plan to the Committees and organizations.

HOW TO DEVELOP IT

In the first part, we have to develop the Congress and culminate the pending issue: to analyze the People’s War, hence point 1. On the People’s War, let us remember that in the 1st Session we analyzed the ideological-political and in the 2nd Session the construction. For this point each base has presented a Report on the People’s War, investigation agreed in the 2nd Session, carried out at the level of the Committees of Leadership; in the Central Leadership we think that it is a good base to develop, in this it will be a study that will lead us to the subsequent drafting of a document on the people’s war Consequently, there is the fundamental material to fulfill this pending point that, although it is not the only one, it is fundamental.

2. Development of the Congress, consists of evaluating this historical milestone in its three Sessions and in its application and aiming concretely to finalize the work of the Congress, to finish off this great task.

In the second part, it is about making the balance of the plan, of the second part of the 3rd Pilot Plan Campaign.

1. Actions. We see a great leap in quality and quantity, there are more than 60.000 actions in this campaign; the 4 forms of struggle are in full development and the conquest of weapons and means, particularly modern weapons, stand out. The Party with the people’s war has stirred up the country in its deepest depths; so much so, that the reaction, stirred up, seeks how to rethink its strategy incapable of fighting us, but whatever it may be, the well directed people’s war is and will be invincible. The great leap is expressed in all the Party apparatuses and some Committees are already expressing their fundamental condition, we should feel so exhilarated by the actions of the People’s War, especially because we are entering each day more and more into the mass war.

2. Construction. It advances, particularly that of the PGA which has grown gigantically and this cannot but lead us to a growth of the Party; I stress once again that, for reasons easy to understand, for being the vanguard of the proletariat, because the best of the class enter the Party and because of the character of our society, the Party cannot grow so fast, but the Congress is strengthening it ideologically, politically and organically, therefore we already have the elements to strengthen it more and more every day. The New State has a considerable growth and the four forms of the People’s Committees and in some cases the fifth form are being expressed.

Thus, the construction is developing through the People’s War, a burning and scorching forge that is allowing us great progress in the construction of the three instruments; and, our practice demonstrates that Maoism is valid, it is clear proof of what Chairman Mao teaches us, that from the canon of rifles everything comes out.

3. Rectification Campaign. We must become more conscious that it is a specific form of handling the class struggle in the Party, the two-line struggle concretely, to make an effort to better handle this instrument because it is the one that will allow us to prevent the formation of a Right-Opportunist Line (ROL) that would be revisionist, it is also what will allow us to assume and solve new problems that we are already facing.

We ask for more firmness and sagacity in applying it, to be guided by its objectives of uniting, differentiating and leading, not to be surprised by problems in its management, especially if it is a new instrument, but let us think that it should lead us to an ideological leap qualitatively superior to the Initiation, it is a new challenge, a new challenge, to conquer power in the whole country; A leap in the first place in the Party, in all its levels starting with the ideological and, in second place, a leap that will be made in the masses starting with those who fight in the PGA, then, in the masses who are in the New Power and, finally in the broad masses, since we have to unite 90%, of course following the class criteria of which we are unshakable followers, even more so, practitioners.

And, as we know, it encloses in perspective the problem of the dictatorship of the proletariat passing, logically, through the joint dictatorship in the new democracy which has to finish off the first stage of the Peruvian Revolution with the establishment of the People’s Republic of Peru.

However, its importance does not remain only in what has been said but is linked to our condition of proletarian internationalists, that is to serve the World Revolution, especially if we see what is happening in the world today.

In the third part, we must see the GREAT PLAN TO DEVELOP BASES approved in ‘86 which began as a pilot plan, see its key location in the People’s War, since it has to do with the Bases of Support, marrow of the road to encircle the cities from the countryside, furthermore, it is linked to the conquest of power throughout the country, hence this great plan must lead us to Strategic Stalemate.

1. Foundation, conditions and perspective in which it is given. We must see that it is solidly founded in the whole Congress and in previous Party meetings such as the 4th National Conference and the 1st Plenum of the Central Committee; moreover, it is proven in the practice of more than two years, from 1986 to 1989 in the three campaigns of the Pilot Plan.

To place it in the conditions of the international and national class struggle in which it takes place, particularly in the political conditions.

At the national level, to see that the contradiction old society-new society is being expressed, to keep in mind how is the semi-feudal base of this old society on which the two imperialist superpowers act, especially the Yankee, without failing to see how social-imperialism is penetrating more, nor ignore the action of the other imperialist powers, see how the crisis of bureaucratic capitalism is deepening which, as the Party said in 1974, is born sick from this semi-feudal base of the old Peruvian society in its various degrees and from the agonizing imperialism. And to bear in mind that since 1980 it has entered its definitive destruction.

Analyze how today this old society has entered into a change of authorities, into an electoral situation that will last for a long time until the new administration is installed, be it a civilian or military regime. To see that this sharpens the contradictions in the heart of the reaction and the collusion and struggle is an everyday thing; the facts prove that what was agreed in the previous sessions of the Congress on the concretion of the period is fair and correct.

But we have to analyze more how the struggle against us is unfolding on the ideological plane; everyone is aiming against us, we must therefore see well and differentiate, as well as the role of the Church as an ideological shield, without ignoring its political role that will grow more and more, that of ignorant, plumiferous and arch-reactionary individuals like F. Guerra who, in the „Express“ of May 17, 1989, lashes out against Marx but at bottom against us, calling us fundamentalists, a fashionable chant that began with F. Iwasaki, a little historian, anthropologist or whatever; but all those who today come out to „fight us on the ideological level“, dreaming of „sweeping away Marxism, Communism and Communists“, are nothing but the big bourgeoisie, defenders of the old society, supporters of that outdated order and an ideological development of the big bourgeoisie has no perspective.

The same can be seen in the revisionists and opportunists of the United Left; those of „Unity“ are very worried because their riding on the masses is politically expiring, their cackling about Perestroika is nothing but a repetition of their masters and they confirm what we agreed in the previous sessions: that they have entered a new revisionist counter-revolutionary offensive. In „Cambio“ of June 15th they lash out against Gonzalo Thought, but the bottom line is their anti-Maoism, their revisionism about which they say nothing; against us only lies, but their „ideological combat“ lacks foundation, besides expressly distorting what we say and even twisting Chairman Mao, whom they do not conceive of as being on the same level as Marx or Lenin. Also in „Amauta“ there is, among others, an article by Winer where they fight us as fundamentalists, but what do they want to tell us? that we have a conception of religious background just like the imbecile F. Guerra, who repeats an Englishman and gets a lot of nausea and regurgitation. All this is nothing but part of the old idea that ideologies have gone out of fashion and this is not new, it is 30 years old. So, then, on the ideological level a struggle opens up against us and it could not be otherwise, but they find themselves with the most powerful truly scientific and invincible ideology, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism.

See also the political content of the struggle they wage against us pretending to contain the people’s war, but the people’s war if we apply it justly and correctly, following its principles, is invincible and they will not be able to contain it neither with tanks, bombs, nor with splinter helicopters, nor with fighter-bombers.

Pay attention to the concern they have for our advance in the masses; the reactionaries as well as the revisionists and opportunists, also the Church and see what forms they will use against the Party, against the People’s War, for example in „Unity“, „Cambio“ and „Amauta“ they call for the Mining Congress to condemn us just as their ANP (National People’s Assembly) did, In the congress of the revisionists of „Unity“, in a resolution, they call for the class to fight us and brand us as genocidal, while the Apra, on the other hand, proposes that it will generalize its repression even more; Or we see the posturing of Villanueva, Mantilla or García himself who in the face of armed strikes travel to ask them not to stop.

They are worried about our advance in the peasantry, García has stated that it is a mistake to fight those who plant coca and „Amauta“ has just discovered that those who plant coca are peasants who live off it and that if they are fought they join our ranks, almost like the previous one, but they discover it after the Pentagon has stated it in its documents. They pull their hair out when they see our advance in the poor peasantry, for example the Unified Mariáteguist Party (PUM) is discovering that the SAIS are useless, but 20 years after having defended them even under the wing of Velasco; the plumíferos in „La República“ say if the SAIS Cahuide collapses all the SAIS in Peru will collapse, the Church in Puno is also acting against us. It confirms what the Party has been raising since the ‘60s, the land problem is burning but not only productivity but the ownership of the land, the land, because it is the basic problem that moves the class struggle in the countryside; in Puno we started the land invasions and the PUM, at the tail of the APRA, asked the government to apply its restructuring, their difference was in who was leading it; the agrarian strikes of Puno and Cusco, as well as ‘74, today, with variants, have also served for the government to apply its plans and the signed minutes are proven.

But they are also discovering that the peasant patrols can be used by reaction against the People’s War and against the interests of the peasantry, forgetting that the same United Left members, together with the APRA, People‘s Action and other reactionaries, approved them in Parliament. The Congress has already issued its opinion on the peasant patrols and what specific policy we should apply, we have said that we must see their class content, who they serve and that we are against armed organizations dependent on the unions, since the armed forces are directed by the Party.

In the intellectuals the People’s War is having more and more repercussions and they are beginning to differentiate themselves and turn towards us, also reaction is going to act against them to frighten them and make them move away, they will apply greater repression than they already apply today; the revisionists, as with the masses in general, traffic with their interests and some are nothing more than false revolutionary intellectuals.

Thus, our advance in the masses, expressing ourselves more as a mass war, makes reaction and revisionism tremble and put them in serious trouble.

On the one hand there are those who are defenders of order and seek to preserve it, their political problem is to collude and fight for who will win the most positions, with different specifications: the APRA, to be the government; the FREDEMO, the old-fashioned demolitionists and the United Left, with its multiple ruptures and denominations, to present itself as „socialist“; they also have the problem of the coup always present. On the other hand, there are those who fight for the construction of the new order through People’s War.

In the economic sphere, the deepening of the crisis of bureaucratic capitalism is so evident that they themselves are seeing the economic situation and its perspective black, what the APRA is aiming at today is to use the few economic resources of the country for their electoral purposes, for that reason let us unmask all their „works“ hoaxes, since they serve to continue oppressing and exploiting the class, the peasantry, the masses of our people, whose explosiveness will grow even more.

Thus, the class struggle in the country is becoming more acute every day in the ideological-political and military aspects, but mainly in the political aspect, and the winds are blowing in our favor. All this only confirms our positions agreed in the two previous Sessions of the Congress and we must define others on new problems.

Also, we must look at the conditions of the international class struggle. We have dealt with Perestroika in part, we must continue to fight it because it is part of that sinister revisionist counter-revolutionary offensive, in this Session we will deal more with analyzing the situation in China. We will make an effort to locate the historical characteristics of China, there are one billion inhabitants today and that immense mass weighs in the world, when in 1949 the democratic revolution triumphed, the correlation of forces in the world was changed and the socialist camp that existed was enlarged, Today we hear Yankee spokesmen commenting that if the political situation in China could not be managed, military leaders would emerge again and the stalemate that they strive to maintain would be broken, this is not strange because the contradictions of the two imperialist superpowers and other imperialist powers converge there, but there is also proletariat, peasantry, people and what we are interested in seeing is that there are Communists, there is left and this is expressing itself. Seeing the geographical location of China, it is key in the Pacific Ocean where current conflicts are becoming more acute, it is the ocean of the coming century, and this is not geopolitics but political understanding. What would it mean if the USSR were to meddle in China? or the USA? or France? or Germany? or Japan? or England? It would be a serious war of prey, it would disable its European stability. Gorbachev keeps prudent silence, until today he has only expressed his concern. Bush has omitted official opinion and through his spokesmen. It would be, therefore, a new tearing apart of China.

We have to keep in mind all that Chairman Mao told us because we are Maoists and in his light analyze and take a position as Marxist-Leninist-Maoists that we are, as Communists, because it is our obligation; to see everything from a class point of view, from our invincible ideology. Chairman Mao told us that if China changed its color it would turn from red to black and fascist; he told us that since 1911 when the last dynasty was overthrown no one has been able to rule peacefully, Chiang Kai-shek at most could stay 20 years, moreover, they could not maintain the unity of China. He told us that it was very likely that at his death the right wing would usurp the power but that his life would not be peaceful. He taught us that the restoration and counter-restoration that had taken place in China between slaveholders and feudalists demanded a process of 250 years of class struggle to finally crush the restoration of slavery, a process that involved struggles and wars to regain the usurped power. He also told us that it would be a beautiful spectacle, right and left wielding it to fight each other. And, at the height of the Cultural Revolution he said we have at least 20 to 50 years of class struggle in China and what do we see today, Chairman Mao has died in 1976, not even 20 years have passed yet and what is happening, the events in China today have this background.

The class is expressing itself there, the proletariat, the Communists, the left and this is the main thing, it is clear that this is not going to be spread by the reactionary press but we have to see it, the left is expressing itself little by little until it acts as a strong erosion that goes on the offensive. Facts like the appearance of portraits of Chairman Mao in the demonstrations, it will not be a forest of red flags as we saw yesterday but it is already a sign of the action of the Communists, the fact that three wretches have thrown ink against the official portrait of Chairman Mao makes us think that it may have been a hoax of the sinister Teng to say: They have even dared to go against Chairman Mao! And this is trafficking because what they were trying to do was to take him out, but such is the strength of the communists, of the proletariat, of the people that they have not been able to do it, and they are already fighting their battles and the dimension of the struggle of the masses we must think of it in a greater perspective. In Shanghai three workers are condemned to death, is it the action of the class or not, to confront tanks of that reactionary, fascist army, with simple molotovs, the appearance of a group called Dare! Is it not perhaps what Chairman Mao has taught us that the problem of making the revolution or not is to dare? do we not know the quote, he who does not fear to die cut into a thousand pieces dares to dismantle the emperor? The forms of struggle that they are applying, the heroism with which they are facing, the fact that a banner contains a quote from the Chairma: „The people and only the people are the motive force […]“, all this is not a resonance of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, I am not saying that today there is a cultural revolution but that we must see the background of the facts, that these are part of that process of struggles and wars through which the left, the Communists will recover the power and overthrow the revisionists and once again Maoism will shine in China.

That the bourgeoisie says that it is a movement for „freedom“, for „democracy“ does not surprise us, it is their class position, that others only see the massacre at Tian An Men Square, is not to see the main thing of the struggle, that „Amauta“ or „Cambio“ chimes like the revisionists of the USSR, are they not followers of the command staff, why are they silent about this heroism that only the communists, the class, the people can give? Because of their anti-Maoism! To differentiate ourselves clearly and sharply.

Also if one looks at the USSR, the problem of the Afghans is the same as in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, they are all national struggles which are also taking place in Georgia, Armenia, in Soviet Muslim republics, although each one has its own characteristics; think about it, if the USSR loses one subjugated nation at the end of the day it will lose them all.

There are extremely serious and important situations, the problems of Eastern Europe, in Hungary they have vindicated Nagy who was sentenced and executed for commanding the struggle of 1956. In Poland, we see unbridled eagerness to develop bourgeois political molds more akin to Yankee imperialism.

In their own system between the imperialist superpowers and the western imperialist powers there are serious problems; for example, the document signed between the USSR and the FRG is a subscription of the Pereztroika, defense of the rights of man above classes, why is it signed by a Christian-fascist democrat? because those theses fit him like a glove and there the US enters into problems.

Well, we raise all this because we see that this revisionist counter-revolutionary offensive has entered into serious problems, they enter into the problem of what road to follow, what course, what is it that the masses want and need? We must look at the facts with seriousness and mainly see their perspective; the ground is beginning to tremble for those supposedly powerful masters of the Earth, „handful of sand“ as Chairman Mao teaches us and his words are indelible. They have gone too far and when the right goes too far the masses begin to react and no longer allow themselves to be fooled, this was also taught to us by the Chairman. The world, then, is neither still nor at peace, winds are blowing and storms are rising in favor of the World Revolution.

2. GREAT PLAN TO DEVELOP BASES. It is the question of how this Great Plan leads us to the strategic balance, it has a circumscribed and key moment to make the leap from guerrilla warfare to mobile warfare, even more in the moment of the period in which there is a change of authorities of the reaction to preserve the old order, but as a counterpart it has the construction of the new Power through the people’s war and this is in our hands. To think also that the Great Plan to Develop Bases leads us to harder and more complex situations but necessary for the conquest of power in the whole country.

3. […] Thus, what corresponds to all of us is to struggle arduously through the People’s War to conquer power throughout the country and to enter into the process of the construction of the conquest of power. In view of the content of the agenda that we propose we must keep in mind that this 3rd Session is within the law of the Congress that in the Permanent Committee when we were preparing this meeting we were quite worried that being this Session the one that finished off the Congress there could be problems, because always the finishes as they sanction everything in short we only think if the People’s War had to be seen and this is the main thing together with construction is base and the Congress is guide and everything if it is part of the Military Line and this is the center of the General Political Line. It also has to do with the selection of the Leadership although on this we already have agreement from the 1st Session.

We consider that the present Session is ripe, the conditions are given and it already has the advantage of two previous sessions, it is based on the brilliant and expansive People’s War, which has been gigantically strengthened, it will also be based on the immediate preparations such as the collective study of Chairman Mao’s documents, Chairman Gonzalo’s expositions and the Party’s publications; it is also based on the World Revolution which is the main trend, its success is in our hands.

In synthesis, the Central Leadership considers that the 3rd Session of the Congress implies, on the one hand, reaffirmation of everything already agreed and, on the other hand, development in the perspective of the conquest of Power.
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1989 - Special Resolution: Honor and Glory to Comrade Norah!

1. SPECIAL RESOLUTION: HONOR AND GLORY TO COMRADE NORAH!
The 1st Congress pays deep and solemn homage to Comrade Norah, member of the red faction and proven communist, great leader and imperishable example of giving one‘s life for the Party and the revolution, undaunted marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought combatant, firm and consistent anti-revisionist, the greatest heroine of the Party.

The Congress decorates her with the Order of the Hammer and Sickle, the highest Party distinction, and decides that in the future Monument to the Heroes of the People, she will be placed in a special place of the highest preference.

Peru, 29.06.1989

1st Congress
Communist Party of Peru
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1989 - Speech by Chairman Gonzalo：In Commemoration of the 40th Anniversary of the Chinese Revolution

IN COMMEMORATION OF THE 40th ANNIVERSARY OF THE CHINESE REVOLUTION

[Speech by Chairman Gonzalo at a reunion of leaders and cadres on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Chinese Revolution, 30th of September 1989.]

Points for reflection and for spurring us on to more deeply fulfill our duty as Communists.

1. THE CHINESE REVOLUTION
Clearly the Chinese Revolution has had far-reaching consequences for humanity, and this is true for several reasons. One is the sheer immense number of people who took part: 400.000.000 at first, and 800.000.000 by the time of the Cultural Revolution. It was a region of earth-shaking struggles, with a vast tradition of conflicts involving the masses of people, the peasants, whose struggles went back to the most ancient times, and wars such as the 1840 Opium War, for example. During the Cultural Revolution, in summing up China‘s long history, it was said that a hallmark of the country‘s history was the way its development was marked by many different armed struggles. This is the context that give birth to the Communist Party of China (CPCh) and Chairman Mao, the third leading light and highest peak of Marxism. All this served to create very special conditions in China, and what happened there shook the world.

Consider the democratic revolution: It is essentially a revolution, the overthrow of one class by another by means of People‘s War, of violence. This is a universal law, especially important today when some people seek to discard it as outdated. The democratic revolution in China is a model, a prototype of a revolution against imperialism, feudalism and bureaucratic capitalism. The democratic revolution inevitably leads to a second revolution, and thus the Chinese Revolution requires us to consider not only the democratic revolution, but also how it went over without pause to socialist revolution. In a country such as ours socialist revolution is not possible without first carrying out the democratic revolution. Chairman Mao showed that the socialist revolution is a continuation of the democratic revolution, and furthermore, that in the form of the cultural revolution it is a continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat based on the People‘s Army which can defend the new State founded on the broad masses. He made it clear that the task of socialist construction arises with the revolution itself, and that this process is extremely complex and protracted; furthermore, Chairman Mao said that we Communists still lacked a thorough and complete understanding of the laws of socialism and that such an understanding would take a long time to achieve. There would be sharp and violent class struggle, he said, and the confrontation between two different roads: the capitalist road and the socialist road; the question of which would win out was not settled. Of course he never doubted that in the long run socialism would triumph, but he specifically emphasized the sharp class struggle for the dictatorship of the proletariat.

He taught that socialism required relying on the broad masses, the peasants, proletariat and people, in order to develop new things and avoid the old capitalist roads that had been defeated by the revolution and that would lead away from the socialist road. Socialism would have to give rise to new forms. He made it clear that the class struggle would continue to be acute, that the center of the battle is for the dictatorship of the proletariat, which relies on the broad masses.

But furthermore, the Chinese Revolution has shown the necessity for cultural revolution, a fierce but necessary struggle to continue the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. Clearly the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR) represents a world-historic epic of revolution, a victorious high point for the Communists and revolutionaries of the world, an imperishable achievement. Although we have a whole process ahead of us, that revolution left us great lessons we are already applying, such as, for example, the point that ideological transformation is fundamental in order for our class to seize power, which today means bringing about an ideological leap in order to seize State power.

In addition to these two points, the Chinese Revolution has shown how revolution takes place within the context of a process of restoration and counter-restoration (a contradiction with two aspects). No class has ever seized power at one go; rather, each has faced the restoration of the old power and had to fight fiercely for a counter-restoration until finally that class seized power for good. The proletariat has already travelled the greater part of this road.

Thus the Chinese Revolution bids us to reflect upon the democratic revolution, the socialist revolution, the GPCR, and restorations and counter-restorations, or in essence, the permanent revolution, as Marx called the stormy march forward of our class to achieve Communism through the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Today more than ever, we proclaim that our goal is to make Communism a reality, and nothing can stop our march towards that future. This ineluctable march must go through difficult stages and processes, each stage involving new and more difficult problems, but we Communists possess the necessary strength to overcome them because we possess the most powerful ideology. We reaffirm that as Communists, this must be our final goal, no matter how great the difficulties that our class, the proletariat, must vanquish. The problems we see today, the restorations in China and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), do not negate this goal, but rather underline the length and complexity of the process of the march towards Communism. Today, when some people proclaim that Communism is finished, let us grasp the Chinese Revolution, and let our Party, as part of the World Revolution, serve its goal: Communism.

This is what we draw from the Chinese Revolution and the role of Chairman Mao.

2. MAOISM
This is the decisive question. Chairman Mao teaches that the ideological and political line decides everything, and we have but one ideology: Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism. This is not the place to outline Marxism overall, nor is it necessary; our point here is to see the ideology of the proletariat as a great reality that develops by leaps and through stages. Its first stage was Marxism, its second, Leninism, and its third stage, its higher and greater expression, is Maoism. Thus, for us Communists, Marxism is an irresistible force, living, always pushing forward, developing. Just when fools declare it dead, it develops further and refutes them resoundingly. Even in Marx‘s day such nonsense abounded, and the same was true in Lenin‘s time and today as well. It should be no surprise when these would-be buriers of Marxism trot out their lies. They aim cunning and sinister attacks at Maoism because Maoism is humanity‘s most advanced outlook.

It is exactly when the ideology of our Communist Parties reaches greater heights that it is attacked, negated and declared outmoded. But — and this is very important — all this gibberish about the so-called death of Marxism is only the prelude to a new development of Marxism, as it was in Marx‘s and Lenin‘s times. Maoism is the most advanced scientific ideology, and therefore the most advanced scientific ideology, and therefore the most transforming reality. It arose from matter and is a material expression, because the spirit is simply a form of matter. We have been given humanity‘s most advanced ideology: Maoism.

We must reaffirm our great slogan of 1979: Uphold, defend and apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism! (This slogan has been updated, because at that time we said Mao Tse-tung Thought.) Those who think they can negate it are dreaming!

Maoism is something new, and new-born things have never been easily accepted. Its authority has been established through fierce struggle, by the leadership of the proletariat in the revolution, the Communist Parties. Lenin called Marxism the tree of life and idealism a mere parasite; today, the idealism being propagated is simply a rotten parasite on Maoism, which is the living tree of life. We are convinced of the greatness of Maoism, and we owe it everything, for without it we would not even be together here. Without Maoism, there could be no People‘s War, nor could this People‘s War, nor could this People‘s War be a bright flame prevailing against wind and waves.

Maoism has the most far-reaching importance for the international proletariat and the peoples of the world. Therefore it remains a necessary task to struggle to make it the commander and guide of the World Revolution. Consider the immense power contained in Maoism, all the power with which it can arm the proletariat and the people. Chairman Mao said that in difficult times, we should consider our all-powerful ideology; we have Maoism. He was right to say that the proletariat had the most powerful atomic bomb: Mao Tse-tung Thought, as was said in those days.

Thus, let us reaffirm our Maoism, the most glorious peak.

3. THE NEW-COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY OFFENSIVE BEING CARRIED OUT BY GORBACHEV AND TENG WORLD-WIDE
Clearly they are carrying out this offensive in collusion with the blackest world reaction, imperialism, because it suits their convergent interests.

The sinister and perverse nature of Gorbachev and Teng‘s new offensive becomes clearer every day. They negate the most basic points. Thus Chinese revisionist followers of Teng put forward the idea that capitalism goes through four stages — the embryonic, primary, secondary and highest stages — and that since the 2nd World War, capitalism has reached its highest stage. They negate Lenin‘s central thesis of imperialism; furthermore, they say that capitalism is far from being outmoded, that it enjoys sufficient strength to overcome its difficulties. Articles in the international press argue that the world capitalist system, the US system, gives the lie to Marx‘s ideas, that essentially Marx was wrong in holding that under capitalism overproduction gives rise to crisis, since today such crises can be managed and therefore do not mean that the system is outmoded. At the same time they admit that a crisis of overproduction could arise, and therefore contradict themselves. The point here is that the Chinese revisionists and the imperialists are in collusion against Marxism.

Regarding the role of the Church: A Peruvian entrepreneur, a member of the big bourgeoisie tied to imperialism, mainly Yankee imperialism, says that the country‘s economy is heading inevitably towards an explosion, and that therefore, together with the Church, they are carrying out schemes designed to contain that explosion. The Community in Action charity scheme administered by Caritas is a part of these efforts to stop the revolution and to traffic in the masses‘ hunger. In China today they are calling for recognition of the Church‘s new role; they are saying that under socialism religion is not the opium of the people. This is an open negation of Marx, which they justify with the false claim that Marx‘s judgement was made before Marxism had come up with a scientific analysis of the role of religion. This, too, is an example of how revisionism coincides with reaction. We are very much clear on the role of the Church. We have put forward our views before, distinguishing between the class interests of the Church hierarchy and the religious feelings of the people; furthermore, who could ever forget the Pope‘s furious threats, when he warned us to „change your attitude“ while he blessed the reactionary armed forces? Wherever there are problems the Pope always shows up to play his counter-revolutionary role. Poland is another example fo this.

Thus revisionism‘s negation of Marxism is taking specific forms and this is leading to its own death and disintegration.

Our Party said that there would come a time to wage a great battle to defend Marxism in every sphere. This time has come; it is time to defend Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism. This means we should study revisionism thoroughly, as one studies the enemy, because we are locked in a war to the death with it. We should study it and rip out its guts so as to expose its hideous features for the world to see. We have to show how revisionism, imperialism and world reaction collude to put Marxism into question and refute it.

In the economic sphere they proclaim that capitalism has come up with a solution to its problems and therefore is not headed for collapse. They want us, the peoples of the Earth, the proletariat, to believe that capitalism is eternal. They want to pull the wool over our eyes in the political sphere as well, when these fools try and make us believe that the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is not a system headed for ruin, that the bourgeoisie is not outworn but has received a new lease on life, that the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is also eternal. Ideologically, they preach an idealism shot through with the most reactionary religion, especially Catholicism, loaded with more superstition and fraud.

Armed with Maoism, which is the peak of Marxism, with People‘s War, with the Party, mobilizing the mases, we must expose and smash all these schemes, and above all, serve the advance of the World Revolution.

4. THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU
The Communist Party of Peru (CPP) is Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought. The Communist Party and the People‘s War it leads are proof of the invincibility and vitality of Marxism, of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism, and this entails the greatest responsibility. Therefore we should develop the People‘s War in order to show the validity and power of Maoism and seize power.

The seizure of power will have far-reaching consequences because we are in a key part of Latin America at a time when this continent, in comparison with Asia and Africa, is undergoing the most severe economic, political and ideological crisis, a general crisis with no solution in sight in the coming years. This can be seen in the fact that while countries are growing at a rate of over 9% a year in Asia, at 3% in Africa and 2.5% in the backward European countries, North Africa and the Middle East, the growth rate for Latin America is 1%, and this in turn should be measured against the continent‘s high population growth rate.

Consider the role of the CPP and what the country-wide seizure of power would mean. It would change history. Facts are confirming our Party‘s analysis in this regard: for example, that the 1990s will be even worse for the reaction than the 1980s, as they themselves admit. Let‘s seriously analyze US imperialism‘s campaign which Bush claims is aimed at drugs. Peru is the main producer, Bolivia the second and Colombia the third. This much is true. But what is the US‘s aim? To escalate their counter-revolutionary war in the Andean countries which are the backbone of Latin America, especially South America. Where, along this backbone, is People‘s War raging? In Peru, under the leadership of the Party and through the actions of the masses. Therefore their campaign is aimed at us. What does this mean? It is leading to the development of the contradiction nation-imperialism, mainly US imperialism, without forgetting the other superpower and the other powers. It means a change in the contradiction. Let‘s not forget that other countries could be used in this; serious complications could arise, especially for the southern part of Peru, from Brazil‘s demand for an outlet to the Pacific through the port cities of Matarani and Ilo, or the widely-exposed policy of the Peruvian State to move away from Bolivia and closer to Chile. Yankee aggression, whether it be direct or indirect by way of puppet governments, is bringing about a war of national liberation, and despite the sacrifice and the efforts this would require, there will be a magnificent opportunity to unite 90% of the Peruvian people, at a time when the Party is calling for the country-wide seizure of power, and this will mean more favorable, though more difficult, conditions for the Peruvian Revolution. Imperialism is dreaming if it thinks it can snuff out the revolution, and while this period will be extremely difficult, complex and bloody, it will lead to the people‘s triumph and serve the emancipation of the class and the Proletarian World Revolution, and, the decisive point, it will make Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism, the commander and guide of the World Revolution.

Only through great storms, Chairman Mao said, can the world be changed. Let the Chinese Revolution spur us on to fulfill the Party‘s tasks here where it is our responsibility to do so!

Peru, 30.09.1989

Central Committee
Communist Party of Peru
——————————

——————————
Appendix 
1990 - Honor and Glory to the Proletariat and People of Peru!

HONOR AND GLORY TO THE PROLETARIAT AND PEOPLE OF PERU!
On this, the 10th anniversary of the People‘s War, we salute with revolutionary reverence the proletariat and people of Peru, especially the peasants, mainly the poor peasants. We salute the masses of people because the masses make history and they are carrying out the People‘s War, because with the fighting steel forged from their poverty and their inextinguishable shining struggle they have given rise to and developed the People‘s War, and we also salute the leaders, cadres and members of the Party, the combatants of the People‘s Guerrilla Army (PGA), the thousands upon thousands of sons and daughters of the people who are shaking and transforming the old Peruvian society to the very core, and with the devastating language of arms are building a new society for all the oppressed and exploited.

We salute the proletariat and the people, the masses, because in the heat of the People‘s War their hunger and their blood have become ennobled and have been transfigured into the ardent, unquenchable flames of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the true and all-powerful ideology of the international proletariat; because their actions sustain and advance the struggle against the new counter-revolutionary worldwide revisionist offensive being led by Gorbachev and Teng, and also make it possible to confront the all-out, evil campaign against Marxism being led by the imperialists, in collusion and contention with the revisionists; in sum, because their actions serve the unceasing and implacable combat against imperialism, revisionism and reaction around the world, making Marxism-Leninism-Maoism the commander and guide of the proletariat and peoples of the world by developing the Proletarian World Revolution.

We salute the proletariat and the people, the masses, because with their tireless, strong hands of creativity and combat they have given rise to the three instruments of the revolution; because their unbending rebel spirit and their inexhaustible widsom nourish the Communist Party of Peru (CPP), the organized vanguard of the proletariat, the leadership and guarantee of the Peruvian Revolution, the axis and center of all revolutionary organization, based on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought; because their unyielding heroism reaffirmed daily beats in the hearts of the PGA, an Army of a new type, the complete opposite of the reactionary armed forces, which under the leadership of the Party carries out the political tasks of the revolution, acts as the basis of the New State and serves the people; because their tremendous ability to transform and their powerful ability to build are what underlies, sustains and builds the new political power, the joint dictatorship based on the worker-peasant alliance led by the proletariat through its Party, the New State which for several years now has been blossoming and growing stronger every day in the people‘s committees and support bases which shine defiantly in the bright sunlight in the countryside, in the very bosom of the people.

We salute the proletariat and the people, the masses, on this 10th anniversary of the People‘s War, because without their unparalleled support in Peru there would be no People‘s War; because without their indefatigable, constant efforts and without their precious blood, the People‘s War would not be what it is, the Peruvian people‘s greatest and most far-reaching epic of transformation; because without their support it would not be, as it is, irrefutable testament to the invincibility of People‘s War, worthy proof of the vitality of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism; because without their growing contribution to the People‘s War in Peru it would not be, as it is, a hearth of hope far beyond our borders, and its future triumph a key for the development of the Proletarian World Revolution; because without the proletariat, the people, especially the poor peasants, without fully carrying out a great leap in the incorporation of the masses in the People‘s War, countrywide political power will not be seized.

For all these reasons, and because our starting point is always that the masses make history, that the masses wage the People‘s War, that this war is and has been a continuation of the class struggle with arms in hand, we salute the proletariat, the people and the masses for the great victories they have won in 10 years of People‘s War, and call on them to increasingly take their destinity into their own hands through the People‘s War led by the Party, and to Seize Power Countrywide!, Organize the Seizure of Political Power!, Forge the People‘s Democratic Republic of Peru!

LONG LIVE THE 10th ANNIVERSARY OF THE PEOPLE‘S WAR!

LONG LIVE THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF PERU!

LONG LIVE CHAIRMAN GONZALO!

GLORY TO MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM!

HONOR AND GLORY TO THE PROLETARIAT AND PEOPLE OF PERU!

Peru, May 1990

Central Committee
Communist Party of Peru
——————————