Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe: Initial Response To Workers Dreadnought On Bob Avakian’s “New Synthesis”

I normally do not allow other people to post on this blog however, have made notable exceptions in the past. This post is one such exception as it directly relates to this blog and the opinions expressed here, and readers may be interested in it. Recently Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe, Secretart of the Ceylon Communist Party (Maoist) posted on this blog, in regards to another post, and asked why I disagreed with Bob Avakian’s “new synthesis”. In response to said question, I decided to articulate my disagreements in a series of posts dedicated to the ‘new synthesis’ (available here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Com. Surendra Rupasinghe has decided to respond with an article defending Avakian’s ‘new synthesis’ albeit with caveats and has attacked this blog. I do intend to respond to Com. Surendra Rupasinghe but will let him speak uncensored here without a response so that people can mull over his arguments on their own. It was originally published on the Colombo Telegraph.

Recently, Colombo Telegraph carried a five-part critique of the “New Synthesis’ developed by Bob Avakian, Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party-USA (RCP-USA) posted by the Workers Dreadnought (WD). It carried a reference to my comments in its first posting, where I had upheld the new synthesis. This is an initial response.

The essence of the critique by WD consists of three main points: 1. That there is nothing new in the new synthesis, in that Avakian has merely repeated what had been stated before without acknowledging his sources, 2. That Avakian had not referred to any of the new developments and arguments developed by others on the topics covered by him, and 3. That Avakian has served to obfuscate and derail some of the major philosophical and theoretical principles already established as given truths.

On the contrary, Avakian has reasserted and deepened the scientific understanding of the basic principles of MLM through a radical, comprehensive and intensive critical summation of the historical experience of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (DOP) and the science of MLM, taking into account serious errors, limitations and deviations and learning lessons, while upholding the genuine path-breaking achievements, and taking into account the new dynamics and developments within the system of world imperialism and sharpening and reformulating revolutionary theory and strategy and thereby synthesizing this experience and the science of MLM on a whole new level. Bob Avakian has unfolded a path towards a new synthesis that needs to be further deepened and developed through revolutionary practice and engaging in struggle and debate.

Summing up experience, radically and critically breaking with obsolete assumptions, practices and methods and synthesizing new knowledge on a whole new basis is the critical essence of MLM. Lenin broke with the assumption held by Marx that Proletarian Revolution and Socialism 2

could only be accomplished first in the advanced capitalist countries. He broke with the assumption that once the economic base had been socialized and collectivized, the superstructure would mechanically follow, although he could not develop this theory fully. Mao also broke with the theory that Proletarian Revolution and Socialism could only be accomplished first in the advanced Capitalist Countries, and went on to give leadership to the Chinese Communist Party in waging the New Democratic Revolution and the Socialist Revolution in a semi-feudal/semi-colonial and colonial country. He also broke with the view that changes in the superstructure would mechanically follow revolutionizing the economic base. What was revealed that it was not sufficient to nationalize and collectivize private property, since it took new forms under the DOP, where people in positions of power would use that power to privately appropriate wealth, status and privilege and establish new social relations of exploitation, and that these persons formed a new class of Capitalists with its headquarters inside the Communist Party itself-at its highest levels of authority. Indeed, he refuted this theory by proving in theory and practice that class struggle would not only continue under the DOP, but would even become more complex and intense. Both Lenin and Mao rejected the ‘theory of the Productive Forces’ and showed that revolutions could and did occur in the weakest links of the chain of Imperialism, provided that the subjective forces were prepared to take advantage of such historic conjunctures, and demonstrated how such ruptures would serve to weaken imperialism and further the cause of revolution in the advanced Capitalist-Imperialist countries. Whether in the advanced countries or in the backward colonies, the line was to establish liberated base areas of the world revolution. These epochal breakthroughs would not have been possible unless the science of revolution had not been applied creatively, discarding what had become obsolete and applying what has become truth in the light of reality.

Marxism itself had been forged through a series of epistemological ruptures with the whole legacy of the anthropological humanism and spiritualized materialism of Feuerbach and the idealist metaphysics of Hegel. Epistemological ruptures refer to the intellectual process where an object is stripped of its ideological layers and reconstituted as an object of scientific inquiry through a new theoretical formulation. Marx did this for the object of History and for the philosophical method of materialist dialectics, which he then applied to the fields of Scientific Philosophy, Political Economy and Scientific Socialism. This Marxist scientific tradition was carried out by Lenin and Mao. To deny the need for such epistemological ruptures is to deny the status of MLM as a science and to reduce it to a religion. (Now, I should have noted that I learned this from reading Althusser, lest I be accused of borrowing ideas and knowledge without referring to sources)

No one could possibly argue that following the fall of China, there was no need for the deepest critical summation possible of the whole historical experience of the DOP, the ICM and MLM itself, and on this basis to reconstitute the science of MLM on a whole new basis. The fall of China seemed inexplicable. How could it happen? After all, the GPCR was waged on the basis of summing up the experience of Capitalist Restoration in the USSR and intended to prevent such restoration by advancing the revolution under the DOP. The GPCR represented the highest pinnacle of scientific understanding of the laws of the class struggle and Scientific Socialism. How then, could capitalist restoration take place? What then is the future of Communism? 3

The fall of China brought out an array of negative tendencies that had to be combated and overcome through the most rigorous reassertion and creative application of the MLM. This is beside the concerted onslaught directed by Imperialism and Reaction as to the death of Communism, which also had to be refuted in both theory and practice. One negative tendency was defeatism and capitulation, caving into the imperialist onslaught that Communism is not possible, that it was a terrible Utopia. The other was to give play to voluntarism and “Left” adventurism, denying the possibility of the science of revolution and the role of revolutionary theory. Guevarism and all forms of putchism and insurrectionism replaced scientific revolution- as it did in Sri Lanka at the cost of two generations of revolutionaries. Yet another tendency was to lie in the slumber of a teleological destiny as to the inevitability of Communism-something destined by Nature and History. This view was also joined by an apocalyptic vision of the general crisis of imperialism leading to its inevitable downfall, or that world war 3 had to take place for there to be a leap in the world revolution. These were- and are- real tendencies that eroded the science of revolution and the cause of Communism from within.

Genuine Communist revolutionaries had genuine and agonizing questions. Why had not Mao taken steps to found a new International? Why did he remain silent when Chinese foreign policy went to the extent of extolling the virtues of the Shah of Iran. Why did he remain silent when Chou-En-Lai congratulated Madame Sirimavo Bandaranaike for having decimated the youth uprising of 1971 and even offered economic and financial assistance to prop up her regime? Why had not Mao refuted the “Three Worlds Theory and Line” openly and publicly, instead of leaving us to grope in the dark and providing various revisionist and opportunist forces to advance, as they did in Sri Lanka-funded by the Chinese Embassy? The question is all the more vexed and agonizing given that Mao had supported the “ Spring Thunder of Naxalbari, supported the cause of the National Liberation struggle of Palestine and supported the Afro-American struggle for national liberation, even while entertaining Nixon. Mao was an outstanding proletarian internationalist, yet he made these serious errors or went along with them. It is in such a decisive subjective conjuncture in the ICM- in the context of the concerted and sustained assault on Communism by world Imperialism and Reaction, in the context of all kinds of opportunist and revisionist tendencies sprouting within the ranks of the revolution, when burning questions agonized genuine revolutionaries, when the future of Communism was at stake, that Bob Avakian rose to the task of excavating, reasserting and synthesizing the science of MLM to a whole new level by critically summing up the historical experience of the DOP from the Paris Commune, the October Revolution and the construction of Socialism in the Soviet Union to the GPCR, and MLM itself, taking into account the new dynamics and developments in the system of world imperialism and drawing the necessary theoretical and strategic implications for advancing the world revolution, by re-envisioning Communism and the cause of emancipating humankind on a whole new, vibrant and enlightened basis.

“Conquer the World” by Bob Avakian was truly world conquering in its analytical precision, philosophical depth, scope of vision, theoretical rigor and lucidity, historical impact and practical significance. It was like spring rain following a ‘winter of discontent’. The “Immortal Contributions of Mao Tse Tung” came to the defense of MLM like an inexhaustible multi-barrel rocket launcher. No one had summed up experience, drawn lessons and raised the science of revolution to new heights as had Avakian through his contributions at the most decisive hour for our generation. His analyses and evaluations of the work of other scientists and artists, even of 4

comedians and sports personalities, of art, literature and religion, his exposure of every line and agenda put out by the ruling class in the US, the analysis of the power structure, the drawing up of the philosophical basis of proletarian internationalism, the line and strategy on the National Question and the United Front, relying on the ‘real’ proletariat, his call for unleashing individual creativity and initiative under the DOP, his grappling with the concept of ‘ a solid core with elasticity- all to enrich the science of MLM, proletarian revolution and Communism in the most living and vibrant way – and this is hardly an inclusive array of his contributions. Furthermore, his leadership had provided the basis for the flowering of an incredible array of creative contributions, such as by Andrea Skybreak ( Evolution) Raymond Lotta (America in Decline, China and Mao). Under his leadership, the RCP-USA newspaper, Revolution has reached the far reaches of trenches of combat in the US and across the world.

Bob Avakian had led the Revolutionary Union (RU), the precursor to the RCP-USA, through major two-line struggles against various opportunist and revisionist trends within the RU and the Revolutionary movement in the US, published as the “Red Papers”. To my knowledge, the RCP was formed on the basis of the revolutionary communist principles established by the RU and the line and principles forged in the defense of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism (MLM) following the capitalist restoration in China. In this sense, the RCP-USA was forged in a decisive protracted two-line struggle against revisionist and opportunist lines and tendencies in confronting the major issues dealing with the world revolution, the US revolution as a subordinate component, and the goal and vision of Communism. This two-line struggle was an indispensible part of the theoretical-ideological and practical-organizational struggle to forge the RCP-USA on the scientific principles of MLM.

The Workers Dreadnought author accuses Avakian for not having produced anything like Bettleheims volumes on the Class Struggles in the USSR. This is pure academic and sectarian nonsense. The RCP-USA has publicized the work of the “Gang of Four” on the major issues and class struggles (including the two volume work on political economy) during the GPCR as no other party. It has publicized the historic and epochal achievements of the Chinese Revolution, of Mao and Chiang Ching and other heroic leaders as no other party. The WD author claims that Avakian is infected by nationalism, in spite of his avowed internationalism. This is really ridiculous, given his contributions towards raising internationalism not simply as an extension of a duty, but as the essence of the ideology and politics of the communist revolution and the mission of emancipating humankind. His refutation of the revisionist lines put out by both Comrade Venue and by the Communist Party of Nepal, and the contributions in forming the RIM, are hallmarks of internationalism.

The WD author has not produced anything new by his critique. He simply carries out a grudge against Avakian, it seems. His futile attempt to downgrade the contributions of Avakian reveals an inability and unwillingness to apply MLM to critically engage with the new synthesis and to develop it. More fundamentally, he refers to the failure of the GPCR in preventing the Capitalist Restoration and questions the whole analysis of the coup led by Deng Tsiao Peng and his gang to seize power. Well, he should provide us with a better analysis. To claim that the GPCR failed is serious. The GPCR was an epochal breakthrough in the theory and practice of the DOP representing the highest pinnacle of mass conscious revolution yet aimed at preventing Capitalist Restoration, beating back the counter revolution, defending and advancing the revolution, 5

combating revisionism and revolutionizing all of society and seeding the birth of the new Communist human being. The GPCR succeeded in preventing capitalist restoration for over a decade. It proved that Socialism had to defended against both internal and external (Imperialist) class enemies, who were in league together. It demonstrated that the proletariat and its vanguard Communist Party had the duty and the possibility to wage all-round revolutionary class struggle even in a single country, but that there would be objective and subjective limits to this possibility, and that the final victory of Communism is only possible on a world scale, where successful revolutions in the advanced imperialist-Capitalist countries would change the balance of power in favor of Socialism. To deny all these path-breaking and truly emancipating historic achievements by claiming that the GPCR was a failure is to dabble in idealist metaphysics based on a linear and mechanical view of the dynamics of the world revolution and the path to Communism.

To deny the need for an epistemological rupture with a whole legacy of errors, limitations and deviations precisely in order to defend, apply and advance the genuine scientific essence and the real historic achievements of our class so far is to deny the science of MLM itself. It is to treat MLM as a dead dogma. Everything that needs to be said has already been said, everything that needs to re-discovered and discovered anew is already on the table. Everything that needs to be reworked and re-thought has already been done. This is to turn Communism into a new religion and MLM into a Bible. Everything new comes through after waging bitter and unrelenting struggle with the old. Even in our own party, there were comrades that stubbornly rejected the new synthesis. How dare you criticize Stalin or Mao? Even Marx and Lenin? How dare you question the validity of the United Front Against Fascism. How arrogant it is to think that anyone can do better or advance beyond these immortals? And so on. The question is not whether anyone can go beyond the immortals. The question is that their immortality lies in their being human and their life and existence being driven by contradictions and conflicts, and yes necessary limitations that future generations must overcome precisely by honoring their immortality. It is time we applied materialist dialectics to MLM and advance both MLM and the scientific philosophy and method of materialist dialectics itself to ever ascending new heights and summits of experience and knowledge.

The disintegration of the RIM was due to the prevalence of revisionist and opportunist trends within it. There were theories and lines bordering on Lin Piaoism that viewed the Third World as the arena of protracted people’s war ( storm centers of the world revolution) that would finally encircle and overcome the citadels of world imperialism. A linear and mechanical view that denied the possibility of revolution in the advanced Imperialist/capitalist countries. Then there was the wholesale capitulation by the then Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), which turned against the RIM. Then there was the renegade, Mike Ely, who was ousted from the party who did his work to undermine the leadership of Avakian and the RIM. No doubt, there were tendencies towards over-centralisation and forms of elitism that eroded the RIM from within. Bob Avakian and the RCP-USA played a vanguard role in bringing about the unity of the Maoist forces following the fall of China and in forming and sustaining the RIM. It is simply unfair and untrue to blame the new synthesis for the collapse of the RIM. Rather than gloat about this negative development, we should seriously analyse the causes that led to the disintegration with the aim and dedication to build it on new foundations and principles. 6

It is not that we do not have differences with some of Avakians conceptions. For example, we do not believe that Communism is the end of antagonistic contradiction. Irreconcilable antagonism and violent struggle will prevail eternally and absolutely. One will split into two and it will not always be polite. But, the economic basis for such contradiction and class struggle may have given place to a whole new basis in the struggle for survival. However, these are secondary differences that should be struggled over and never constitute barricades in forming internationalist unity. In fact, we think that the whole series of questions that Avakian raises in terms of what Communism society would look like in the context of a truly globalized world without borders and states, where the real diversity of cultures would flourish freely and provide individual freedom to engage in Hip-Hop and whatever, where there would be abundance, yet unevenness, and where there would still be the need for some degree and form of centralization- that is to really engage in a living and liberating dream of freedom.

We feel strongly that the criticisms raised by WD are not a sufficient basis, whether we agree or not, to abandon our responsibility to initiate the process of building a new Maoist International Center. The WD author has not provided any evidence that the differences he had identified are fundamental to forging international unity. To place these differences over and above the need and responsibility to build a new Maoist International is to capitulate to imperialism and reaction. Let us engage in spirited debate and principled struggle over these issues even as we forge unity to build a new Maoist International Center.

This is by no means an exhaustive evaluation of the contributions by Comrade Avakian. I am sure I have not even approached ingesting the whole of the new synthesis. But, I felt compelled to respond to the rather slick and facile critique offered by the WD author, who has contributed nothing new, except carry out a diatribe, and certainly by the seriousness of the question itself.


42 thoughts on “Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe: Initial Response To Workers Dreadnought On Bob Avakian’s “New Synthesis”

  1. I think it’s worth echoing here what comrade JMP had to say on the reddit sub-reddit /r/communism about Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe’s rejoinder (sorry comrade for stealing your comment, but I thought it important that your thoughts end up in the actual comment thread of the article and no just on reddit), and point out that that Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe doesn’t present any kind of an actual response to the arguments against the “New Synthesis” that you so well outlined in five different posts. All that Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe really has to say about your critique of the NS is that it is wrong, and the extent of his explanation about why you are supposedly “wrong” is a mere rephrasing of the original claims about the NS by Avakian and his followers that you have already taken down..

    I’d also like to echo JMP again and say that Com. Surendra Ajit Rupasinghe’s article also read as quite ironic on the question non-dogmatism in that he himself seems to be quite dogmatically certain (according to the actual definition of the term) about the correctness of the New Synthesis.

    That said, I do have quite a bit of respect for the Ceylon Communist Party (Maoist), despite myself not being a Maoist, and I have been quite saddened to read that they (or at least a faction within them) seem to be heading down the same road as the CPI (MLM) and RCG of Colombia.

  2. Yup, they should print t-shirts with his face and the caption “Bob Avakian is the Best!” People would enjoy it since the masses of the world are very familiar with Bob and his work.

  3. Rupasinghe,In some respects I appreciate your defence of Avakian.Today forces like Kasama or Mike Ely virtually relegate him to a non-Leninist,while Bettleheim’s evaluation reflects the New Left trend.True there were gross errors but remember it was Comrade Mao who defended Stalin as being 70% correct.Without the help of Soviet Russia Socialist China would never have come about.Can we ever forget Stalin’s contribution in World War 2 and his defence of the 1st Socialist Society.During the G.P.C.R.sufficient debate did not exist and Mao’s personality cult was over eulogized but introducion of factions or a multi-party system may well have destroyed the base and superstructure of a Socialist Society.In that light Avakian is much more progressive over forces like Kasama etc.I think it isimportant to respect the contribution sof Grover Furr on Stalin and also the writings of Joseph Ball.Infact we need to attack Avakian as not defending Comrades like Lenin,Stalin and Mao sufficiently.

    I greatly admire Avakian’s writings in defence of the gang of 4 and on the Immortal contribution of Comrade Mao.To me his greatest work is on the need for dissent within a Socialist Society itself.I also support his criticism of the multi-party system.

  4. Rupasinghe,I agree with the points you have made opposing the attacks of the New Left and defending the Socialist one-partystate.If we challenge the mistakes of Comrades like Mao and Stalin from a ‘New Left’perspective we are going against the very foundation sof Marxism-Leninism itself.I aprecciate very much that WD posted this article.It wasa very good gesture.

    I go to the extent of defending Comrade Mao’s foreign policy during the his meeting and peaceful co-existence with U.S A was purely tactical.Infact the 3 worlds theory was a creation of Deng Xiaoping and Mao opposed it.I disagree with Avakian’s criticism of the C.C.P.’s forein policy as class -collaborationist.

    Personally I think Avakian,whatever his errors is far more progresive than Kasama or L.L.C.O.

  5. I wish to further state that however much I praise Avakian’s contributions on dissent within Socialist Society and defending achievements and Contribution of Mao I am critical of his contribution towards the mass line.Infact some kind of a personality cult has been built around him.The R.C.P.does not have major organisational structures amongst the working class and on important questions Avakian opposed the correct trends of the International Communist Movement.

    The very formation of R.I.M.was defective as it was not an appropriate stage to form a Communist International.Infact remember even the C C.P in the Socialist era deffered it’s formation.A certain level of develolment of Communist parties has to take place and an effective laison and mutual exchange has to take place bewteen the various Communist parties of the world.In several countries the party has not even been re-organised.On this aspect I rever the writings of the late Com.Harbhajan Sohi of India on the correct line of ICM,who defended the fact that the 3world’s theory was an innovation of Deng Xiapoping and Mao defended the proletarian line tooth and nail.He established relations with Nixon and U.S.A for pure tactical reasons.I agree he erred when it came to Chile etc.

    What destroyed the R.I.M was the very defects in it’s formation.Remember C.P.I.(M.L.)Peoples War group of India and the Communist Party of Phillipines did not join it.There was insufficient development of Communist parties.

  6. Thanks for all the comments. Mainly, I gather that there are two streams that unite with my position, but argue differently on some points. On the question of Com. Stalin and his contributions, our party stands firmly with Mao’s stand, but only argue that this stand needed to be developed philosophically, ideologically and theoretically, on the basis of a more profound, scientific formulation of proletarian internationalism, which Avakian has done. We stand unwaveringly on Mao’s own stand that defending the legacy of Stalin is a question of defending Marxism-Leninism itslef. This provides the basis to analyse Mao’s limitations and errors on applying this principle more consistently, and more fundamentally, to engage in a rational-critical epistomoligical rupture with the theoretical-ideological roots of these deviations, and achieve a higher plane of scientific theory.
    I feel that the crtiques about cultism around Bob Avakian need to be discussed, since it has become a focus of some sharp disagreements within the ICM. There is a difference between projecting and defending international vanguard communist leadership at crucial conjunctures and resorting to hype! Unfortunately, the RCP-USA and Com. Avakian have still not responded to these critiques in a serious manner- Or I may have missed it. However, these are secondary issues. The primary question is the scientific basis of the new synthesis and the burning need of the hour to raise two-line struggle to build the ICM on that basis. I am truly encouraged by the debate and discussion around these issues and thank all friends and comrades for their comments.

    Com. Surendra

  7. This is in response to some of the comments raised in this discussion. I have upheld Mao as a great proletarian internationalist and pointed out to two examples that even when China was involved in a diplomatic and tactical move to ‘nuetralize’ or minimise the antagonism with US imperialism, in order to confront the mortal threat posed by Soviet Social Imperialism, Mao publicly upheld the struggle of the Afro-American nation and of the Palestine nation and called for their victory. My concern was that when Chou En Lai/Deng Tsiao Peng camp of Capitalist Roaders were touting the Three World’s Theory, including in the UN, and causing great damage and confusion such as splitting Communist parties as they did to our party and praising the Shah of Iran and went to the exdtent of congratulating and aiding the Sirimavo bandaranaike government in slaughtering some 17,000 youths who had been led into an abortive armed insurrection in 1971 by a Guevarist, pro-Soviet renegade faction that had been expelled from our party and other such abominable betrayals, why Mao could not have called for an international conference of the genuine Communist parties to discuss these issues of principle, these violations of proletarian internationalism, or found the means to directly and openly denounce these policies. The argument that Mao himself had been reduced to a minority in the Central Committee and encircled by the Revisionists need to be studied deeply and the lessons summed. In this sense, and in consideration of the entire body of critical summations of the historical experience of the WPSR and the DOP embodied in the new synthesis, and the clarion call to radically rupture with a whole negative legacy of deviations, weaknesses, errors and limitations as the correct way to firmly uphold and build on the immeasurable positive achievements as the basis to raise the science of MLM to a qualitatively new and higher threshold, that I had upheld the Contributions of Com. Bob Avakian.

    The RIm was an urgent and timely response to the grave set-back following the loss of red China in the context of the concerted and sustained assault on Communism and MLM by world imperialism, including Soviet Social imperialism and all stripes of reactionaries and revisionsits. The RCP-USA initiated serious, sutained and intense discussion and struggle with the various Communist parties and organisations, including from Chile, Iran, Turkey, Peru, India and all the signatories to the 1984 Declaration, including our own party as preparations for forming the RIM. The Ceylon Communist Party (Maoist) was a founding member of the RIM and of COCOMPOSA. Our late beloved leader. Com. Shan had the privilege of working closely with Comrade Avakian and other comrades of the RCP-USA in forming the RIM. The Declaration and the RIM formed the principled basis to build the international unity of the Maoist forces at a crucial conjuncture. The CORIM comrades did a great service to strengthen Communist parties and in forming new ones. Our own party benefitted immensely from this contribution when we were facing difficult and complex issues and problems, without which we would have lost anchor and been cast adrift. The RIM was undermined by various revisionist and opportunist trends, some of whom have completely betrayed and capitulated.

    Whatever the summations, there is an urgent need to build the international unity of the genuine Maoist forces. It is not a metter of reaching a particular quantum, although that is important, but what is decisive is to consolidate international unity based on a correct ideological, political and organisational line based on the science of MLM.

    On the question of mass line, it refers to the line of relying on the masses and mass revolutionary class struggle as the motor force of history. It refers to the need to constantly deepen roots with the masses, to gather their views, concerns and revolutionary class interests and to concentrate these into correct lines and policies and then to arm and guide the masses with this scientific understanding, and again to review and sum up these policies and lines based on new expereicne and raise both revolutionary theory and practice to a higher organised level. My understanding is that the RCP-USA primarily relies on the works and writings of its charman, Com. Bob Avakian for this purpose of raising the level of scientific understanding, grasping and applying the correct-ideological line based on applying and advacning the revolutionary critical essence of MLM in a spiral way, with critical summations, ruptures and leaps in theory and practice. Primarily, but not exclusively, since the party takes great effort to popularise the works of other important writers such as Sunsara, Skybreak, Carl Dix. Raymond Lotta and others. The Revolution newspaper functions as a powerful weapon in applying the mass and class line on all crucial questions of the world revolution, the science of MLM and broadly on questions of philosophy, science, literature, music, art etc. The mass line requires that the masses are trained and educated to rule over society and also that they may exercise the right to criticize and question their leaders and policies and lines. I feel that any criticism of the practice of the mass line of the RCP-USA should be for more serious and systematic. The forming of a cult around leaders is always a problem. The proletarait, masses of people and progressive thinkers value, respect and even adulate great leaders such as Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. Leaders-such as Bob Avakian, who has a universal grasp of reality, a thoroughgoing and rigorous grasp of philosophy, history, politics, strategy, economics, organisational line and practice and so on and are able to critically apply, deepen and advance the science of MLM in a living way are also held in such high esteem and even veneration. The way to ensure that such respect, trust and veneration does nopt descend into a cult is precisely to educate, arm and mobilize the masses and cadres to grasp and apply the living, critical essence of MLM so that they can constantly evaluate their leaders and strugle over questions of line, principles and policies.

    I appreciate that workers dreadnought has afforded the space to carry out this discussion. Also thanks to Robert, Thakor and others for their comments.

    Com. Surendra

  8. This is my third attempt to make a response. Somehow, each time it got deleted. Hope it works this time. Thanks to thoise who have commented, particularly to Robert and Thakor. I will certainly read the documents/interview by Com. Avakian. Thanks also to Workers Dreadnought for allowing space for the discussion.
    First, Four main points raised by Thakor: On Mao, Stalin, RIM and Mass Line.
    I had stated that I consider Mao to be an outstanding proletarian internationalist. I had refered to the fact that, even when making tactical compromises and diplomatic moves to minimise the threat posed by US imperialism in order to take on the mortal threat being posed by Soviet Social Imperialism at the time, Mao hailed the struggle of the Afro-American nation within the US and called for the victory of the Palestinian national liberation struggle. JUust two examples. My concern was that when the Chou-En-Lai / Deng-Tsiao-Peng Capitalist roaders were causing great damage and confusion, including formenting and supporting splits within Communist parties-as they did to our party, and when Chou-En-Lai congratulated Madame Sirimavo Bandaranaike, then Prime Minister of Sri Lanka for having slaughtered some 17,000 youth who had been misled by a renegade Guevarist-pro-Soviet clique who had been expelled from our party and even offered financial and economic aid to her Comprador-Bureaucratic regime, when the Shah of Iran and haile Sellassie of Ethiopia were being praised as progressive forces and so on, why Mao failed to expose and denounce this treacherous line and educate the genuine communist forces by convening an international conference. The explanation that Mao had been encircled by the Capitalist Roaders in the central committee and reduced to a minority needs to be studied, since this asserts the need for an international center where such lines and policies could be debated, struggled over-and defeated!.
    It is in the context of a legacy of deviations, errors, weaknesses and limitations confronted in the history of the WPSR and the theory and practice of the DOP, that a whole new critical summation of this entire historical expereince was required, as the basis for reaffirming and building on the epochal achievements gained in the first, initial stage of the world proletarian socialist revolution and the universal struggle for Communism. Such a summation was needed to learn the lessons involved and to raise the science of MLM itself to a new threshold. This historical experience and this science had to be investigated and researched through deep, critical and rigorous theoretical study and empirical analysis, in all the continents of Marxism- philosophy (dialectical and historical materialism) , political economy and scientific socialism, to bring forth a new synthesis.The new synthesis was required to forge a correct ideological, political and organisational general line for rebuilding the international communist movement on solid scientific, proletarian internationalist foundations, based on applying MLM to new conditions and challenges faced by communist parties, brought about by new global developments in the system of imperialism, including neo-liberalism. The DOP, Socialism and goal and vision of Communism itself had to be revisited and recast. This is how I view the universal significance of the new synthesis produced by Com. Avakian, which is a new and higher crystallization and distillation of the living, critical essense of MLM and which grows out of confronting the theoretical and practical probelms in waging proletarian revolutionary struggle worldwide under the concrete conditions of leading the revolution in the US.

    Mao had upheld the legacy of Stalin as upholding the immortal legacy of Marxism-Leninism itself in the context of the great, decisive international struggle against modern revisionism headquartered in Moscow. He made a critical evaluation of the contributions of Stalin and the theory and practice of the DOP in the Soviet Union and made the radical rupture and the leap in the science of revolution in the form of the theory and line of continuing the revolution under the DOP and Socialism, resulting in the highest peak of mass conscious revolution yet, in the form of the Great proletarian Cultural Revolution. However, Avakian deepened the critical evaluation and summation of the historical experience of the DOP and the WPSR,and shed new light and insight on how to correctly analyse and uphold this legacy, including that of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, on a solid scientific basis.

    The RIM was an urgent and timely response to the grave set-back caused due to the fall of red China, the acute demoralisation caused by Enver Hoxa and capitulation and disintegration of communist forces internationally, in the context of the need to defend MLM and Communism against the sustained and concerted assault waged by world imperialism, including soviet social imperialism and reactionaries and revisionists of all stripes. The RIM served in regrouping the Maoist forces internationally and setting the foundation for turning the set-back into an advance. The RCP-USA initiated all-round, sustained and intense discussion with all the various communist parties which upheld Mao-Tse-Tung Thought- at that time. the Joint Declaration of 1984 remains a historic document that laid the basis to build the principled unity of the genuine Maoist forces. The CORIM played a crucial role in strengthening and guiding existing communist parties and in the formation of new ones, and in the formation of COCOMPOSA. The Ceylon Communist Party (Maoist) is truly proud to have been founding members of both organisations.We have truly benefitted from the interventions of the RIM and CORIM, without which we would have lost anchor and cast adrift. We also take responsibility for our failure to do our utmost to build our own party and make our highest contribution to building the RIM and COCOMPOSA. Our party has undergone a protracted process of internal disintegration, but some of us are now engaged seriously in rebuilding the CCP(M) on new foundations. The RIM has gone into crisis due to the various revisionist and opportunist trends that worked tio undermine it-some of whom have completed their revisionist betrayal. Whatever the case may be, and this would require far deeper summation, there is the need to build the international unity of the genuine Maoist forces internationally. Here, the correcness of the ideological, political and organisational line is decisive.

    On the question of cultism and mass line.
    Great Communist leaders – such as Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao are respected, trusted and honored-and even venerated by communist revolutionaries, proletarian masses, oppressed people and progressive forces worldwide for their exceptional scientific clarity, depth of philosophical vision, ideological heights, theoretical acumen, practical-organisational skills, combined with a lifetime of dedication and committment towards advancing the goal of Communism, and the emancipation of humankind. Such leaders are loved and cherished for inspiring hope, courage of conviction and determination in the struggle for freedom. With his untiring and on-going contributions, Com. Avakian has won such a following worldwide.
    The mass line requires the understanding that the masses engaged in revolutionary class struggles are the motive force of history. It requires that the mases are trained, organised and mobilized to grasp and apply the correct lines and policies on all questions confronting the revolution and in ruling over society. It requires that the party and the leadership must have organic roots with the masses through proper forms of organisation, where the ideas, needs and aspirations, problems and conflicts and anxieties of the masses are communicated through the various organisational levels of the party to its top leadership and where these ideas distilled into correct lines and policies and taken down to the masses, and where and the true creative potential of the masses would be unleashed to advance the revolution. It is my understanding that the RCP-USA uses the writings and voices of Avakian primarily, as well as of comrades such Sunsara, Skybreak, Carl Dix, Raymond Lotta and other cadres to constantly educate, train, organise and mobilize the masses to grasp and apply the correct line and policies and to unleash their conscious creative initiative to advance revolution and revolutionize themselves. Mass line is to empower the masses to question and criticize their leaders-to learn from them as well as to teach them.
    The danger of ‘cultism’ exists where science is turned into dogma, the party turned into a church and leadership is transformed into gods- super-human beings. It arises out of arrogance and egoism, a sense of superiority and omnipotence. This would not be a vanguard communist party based on applying and advancing the science of MLM- as does the RCP-USA in fulfilling its vanguard, internationalist duties.

    Comrade Surendra
    Ceylon Communist Party (Maoist)

    1. Dear Robert,
      First of all this blog has no connection to imperialism, and the fact that you cannot actually do line struggle in a principled manner without such inappropriate name calling demonstrates the hollowness of your words. Second of all, please do not mistake my silence as defeat, but rather, business with the actual work of trying to build a revolutionary movement. It is true that I have not had the time to respond. But I will respond when I actually get the time to do so.

      1. It’s funny until you think about how some day Robert will be an old man. Bob will be dead and no one will have ever even heard of him. Everything will have been in vain and I’ll bet even BA poetry won’t be making headlines all over the place like it is today. You know who else is a genius and the only hope for all mankind? Lyndon LaRouche. The thing about him though is that a handful of people have heard of him. It’s painful to say, but Bob is the LaRouche of Communism.

      2. Again Robert, why don’t you actually try to defend the history of the “RC”P,USA with regards to colonized peoples rather than simply calling the article “petty bourgeois black nationalism”. Plus, calling it or myself by the term “petty bourgeois black nationalism” is something that shows that you are fundamentally incapable of understanding the line in the article and on the site in general (I imagine this because your brain is so addled by BOB BOB BOB BOB).

      3. Well, you win Rob. It’s pretty obvious now that Bob is greater than Marx, Lenin and Mao rolled into one. Good job. Reason always prevails over these mindless robots that just parrot their reactionary anti-Bobism all day. Bob is heavier than a mountain, from picutres he does look like he could stand to jog a bit, but when the whole American ruling class is working around the clock to take you down it is probably hard to get out much.

      4. I thought you were done talking. Are you some sort of automated message generating machine? That would explain a lot.

      5. A fun experiment is to pretend like you are somebody other than yourself and then pretend that you are reading the things that you are saying here and attempt to comprehend how this sounds to everyone else in the world. Bob Avakian is not a “long-distance” runner he is a fat guy who lives in fucking France most of the time.

      6. Good work. Case closed. Another resounding vicotry for Robert and the NEW SYNTHESIS (I wish I could type that in a larger font). GOOD LUCK WITH ALL THAT. AWESOME POINTS. THE REVISONIST ARE SURELY RUNNING SCARED. Everyone knows who Bob Avakain is, he is really smart and famous. Everyone should read BAsics and Bob’s guide to BAsketball and BAck pains. The thing about Robert is that he just gets you in the iron grip of reason and then he just clamps down. Flawless argument follows flawless argument and you are forced to see the glaring truth of Bob Avakain and his really interesting writings that are not boring and pointless at all.

      7. Robert,
        Have you ever had sex with a live women ( or man)? Maybe you are shy. You could just get some normal friends that could tell you when you are talking insane non-sense. It’s good to have people who care about you and can tell you when you are talking utter non-sense in a non-judgmental way.

    2. New synthesis is come from 2 side one is from llco ( and other is from rcpusa(AVAKIAN). Both synthesis is powerful and great . please check the llco also…

  9. There is nothing like bad spoken word. And bad spoken word about bad maoism is probably my new favourite thing. Expect a mashup with Lady Gaga in the near future. “BAd romance”

  10. Oh man! Are you serious! An institute! That’s awesome. I’m Sure it will have the top minds from every field working 100% to spread the good word! Abandon all gods, Bob has come! Wow! The base areas are going to be really excited.

  11. Considering that this sort of analysis is a pretty common place throughout the entire spectrum of the left, and isn’t all that complex or advanced (as any highschooler could come to this) I am now completely convinced that Robert must be a genuine troll.

    Let’s all give him a round of applause. You really had some of us going there for while!

    1. No Bob, you said “who else has this level of insight or depth”, so I was pointing out that there is nothing advanced about that Avakian quote. As for who else could communicate with the masses like that, try anyone with a mouth and a brain.

      As for being a black nationalist, yes I am an African Internationalist (an analysis that does take class centrally, but not in the First Worldist, class essentialist way you do) but I am not a black nationalist – however I bet you couldn’t even begin to comprehend that. Plus I find it funny that your recourse to what was written in that article was to call me a petty bourgeois black nationalist rather than actually attempt to defend the history and actions of the so-called “RC”P,USA. You probably can’t because what was written was the truth.

      As for “black nationalism” being “outdated” and “all played out” (you really do love that shit don’t you), I guess the world disagrees with you as your little faction shrinks by the day with only a handful of beleaguered international supporters while at the same time a “black nationalist” organization like the African Socialist International grows on 4 continents daily.

      Also, regarding Carl Dix there are lots of colonized people who join bullshit “left-wing” White nationalist parties and organizations, and it ain’t a sign of those groups not being “left-wing” White nationalists. For every Carl Dix in the “RC”P,USA I can show you dozens more in equally bullshit groups like the CPUSA, SP-USA, WWPSL, the FRSO(s) and not to mention any manner of Trot and anarchist formations.

      But then again, I have no idea why I am writing this, everyone else on this thread knows you are going to say (something about long live Chairman Bob and me being all played out right?)

  12. Dear Comrade Robert,

    Bob Avakian’s works have not been translated into Sinhala not Tamil. That is a momumental task that must be accomplished.

    Keep up the debate and encourage your opponents to be systematic in presenting their ideas and views. As it is, the debate remains a slanging match.

    In solidarity,


  13. You’ve done an excellect job portraying the general mindset and pattern of thinking that typifies your organization. Thank you.

  14. Robert, you live in a cartoon world. No one is reading this thread except you and ocassionaly myself when my email in-box informs me that you have published yet another mindless post. Comrade Surendra is not following your posts and is most likely embarassed to be assocaited with you, if only distantly. Please stop pretending that anyone is taking any of the things you are saying seriously. It is sad.

    1. Really? You think the Sri Lankan party is following your posts? Why do you think that? Do you not realize that you and I are the only two people still reading this thread? Ionly do it because I can’t believe that you apparently have no ide what the things you are posting sound like to everyone else.

    2. Why do you keep playing it out then? Com.Sundera is not reading these posts. WD is not reading these posts. It is just you posting one inan thing after another and me reading them to my friends and laughing as I type yet another response. You have a personality disorder Rob. It is pretty apparent. I would work on that before I went around trying to convert anybody to anything.

    3. What part of anything you have said counts as an “argument?” Is spoken word poetry an “argument?” Do you know how debate works? Do you really think that someday someone is going to come read this thread and conclude that “hey that Rob guy sure is a great debater! I’m going with Bob!” I’ve already said it, but there is no debate going on here. There is you posting inane and pointless things and me responding because its funny. Sundera is not reading this, WD is no reading this. The debate that you have apparently won exist only within the confines of your garish cartoon world.

    1. Ok. I am actually done with this. No more posts will be allowed on this string. At this point Robert is doing nothing but trolling. I do intend to respond to some of this at some point, but its not going to be any time soon. This is done.

  15. To the revolutionaries and communists everywhere, to all those who thirst for another, radically different and far better world: Let us not retreat into and retrench in the past, in whatever form—let us instead go forward boldly toward the goal of communism and the emancipation of humanity from thousands of years of tradition’s chains.

  16. The New Synthesis worked out by Comrade Bob Avakian, as Chairman of the RCP-USA, represents the most advanced crticial summation of the theory and practice of the world proletarian socialist revolution, particularly the historical experience of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, and of the science of revolution distilled and concentrated as Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, in the entire first stage of the Communist revolution begining with the Paris Commune, through the Great October Socialist Revolution and culminating in the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. This critical summation and the new synthesis represents the most advanced, conscious, radical rupture with the negative legacy of this historical experience and the errors, deviations, weaknesses and limitations in applying the science of MLM that have contributed to it, while critically appropriating and assimilating the genuine historic achievements of this experience and the immortal contributions of this science, which are overall and decisively positive, yeilding a new and higher threshold. of understanding of the science of revolution, of the theory and practice of proletarian revolution, the goal of Communism and the historic mission of emancipating humankind. It heralds a new stage in the proletarian revolution and a new wave towards Communism.

    The New Synthesis has become a line of demarcation in distinguishing MLM from all forms of Revisionism and Opportunism and provides the basis for building the international unity of the genuine Maoist forces, based on the most advanced scientific, revolutionary communist-proletarain internationalist Theory, Line, Strategy and Program for advancing the new stage of the proletarian revolution and the new wave of Communism towards a qualitatively new and higher threshold of victory.

    I have since written seven documents on the Two-Line Struggle in The RIM based on defending and applying the New Synthesis. I don’t know whether WD would oblige by posting them.

    Thanks Robert for your spirited and informed contribution, and thanks WD for posting this debate. Looking forward to your promised response.

    Cpmrade Surendra.

    1. Dear Com. Surendra,
      I will gladly post them as I think many of us would be very interested to read what parties who uphold the “new synthesis” believe about contemporary efforts to build a new Maoist coordinating centre. Please post them as a comment.


  17. New synthesis is come from 2 side one is from llco http:\\ and other is from rcpusa(AVAKIAN). Both synthesis is powerful and great . please check the llco also…LLCO has come up with idea of marxism-leninism-maoism-thirdworldism…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s