US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Marxist-Leninist Theory and Practice
12 Jan 2001
The two line struggle developed in 1995 after the infamous SIN chief Vladimiro Montesinos faked an "interview" on video tape which ostensibly "proved" that Chairman Gonzolo, President of the PCP(SL), who had been imprisoned in solitary confinement for over three years already, had called for an end to the peoples war.
See also:
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Gonzalo is a fascist!
15 Jan 2001
what you want, maoists? I think you want to be the new "Führer" of the world. Mao, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler killed millions of people, because of their thoughts, religion and so on.
Fuck you!

For socialism and freedom and democracy!!!

We need no leader!
you are/...
15 Jan 2001
You are the facist.
Ohh majdor
15 Jan 2001
You are the one who wants to kill dissidents.
You cant dispute the millions and millions killed by your "holy" leaders!
piss of! we need no "Führer"- blah blah!
More Childishness From The Maoist Nursery
16 Jan 2001

First things first. The IMC is a news source for activists struggling against Corporate Globalization and corporate exploitation in general. It is not an arena for theological pissing contests between microscopic organizations vying for the role of "vanguard of the proletariat". While some of the groups mentioned, in particular Sendero Luminoso(Shining Path), may aspire to the status of guerrilla insurgency, this status is a confession of political weakness and marginality, not strength.

Nothing could underline this weakness and pollitical triviality more than the above piece. That anyone could imagine that the bickering between the RCP and its fraternal maoist micro-organisms would interest a significant portion of the IMC readership is mind boggling. It would be hardly worth reading much less responding to were it not for the danger that some unwitting soul might actually mistake it for a marxist analysis.

In the interest of saving time and avoiding tedium I'll strive for brevity. The "two line struggle" as presented above is an absurdity that will be found no where in Marx's writings. Nor, for that matter, will you find this formulation in Lenin (though he says much that is equally absurd). This particular jewel of vulgarization is Chairman Mao's contribution to the con game of vanguardism.

It's certainly true that Marx said that all social institutions and groups contain contradictions and that these contradictions have a class character. But Marx never asserted that all such contradictions could be reduced to a single " pair of contradictions"(sic). Marx didn't like opposition to his point of view but he also didn't go around denouncing his opponents as counter revolutionaries.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks did prepare the ground for this sort nonsense with their assaults on all non Bolshevik revolutionaries. In the end their sheer bloody mindedness rebounded against them when they were liquidated by Stalin. Here you find the true origins of the "two-lines" scam.

The "two line struggle" has nothing to do with any real class analysis. Rather, it is a club that competing factions can brandish at one another in the power struggles which naturally arise in any political leadership dedicated to the conquest of power. If there are only two lines then by definition all other positions can be liquidated by lumping them on one side or the other. Never mind that the individual proponents may say that they are not in agreement with whatever political label has been slapped on them. It doesn't matter what their professed opinions are. The two line struggle dictates that they are objectively on one side or the other.

To sum up, those who do not agree with whatever lunacy is spouted by the dominate faction are "objectively" counter revolutionary, bourgeois, etc. Mao made great use of this fable during the purges of the "Cultural Revolution", which came hard on the heels of the "hundred flowers" campaign.

One last thought. Complaining that Bob Avakian and Co. are undemocratic begs a question. Did you notice this before or only after you fell out with him?