Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 02:47:42 EST
Subject: M-G: NEUE EINHEIT on 'RIM'  (Segment 3 of 3)


The Development of Our Organization's Position Concerning the 'RIM'
______________________Article Segment 3 of 3________________________ 


Rolf Martens knows the organization. He himself took part in a 
conference in that December 1986/January 1987, at which the matters 
were brought up in detail, including the evaluation of the declaration 
of 1980 as a most incomplete one on the one hand, but, after all, a 
quite acceptable one, and of the declaration of 1984 as a not 
acceptable one. Rolf Martens knows these evaluations, took part in the 
discussion and neither then nor later demanded that we give our opinion 
about RIM. Neither in his so-called paper of criticism of September 
1990, this is mentioned by a single word. Therefore, his utterances in 
this question are nothing but demagogy and later covering-up of his 
behaviour in 1990. In 1996/7 he feigns something, basing on the  fact 
that the internal relations of our organization could not be known to 
the outer observer and reader of his writings.

The PCP which anyhow signed the RIM-declaration and belongs to its 
decisive upholders, for a long time was given prominence by Rolf 
Martens as an exemplary organisation, even as a decisive one on a 
global scale. Conversely, our organization is disparaged by him, 
because we do not publicly condemn this declaration, although he knows 
that we refuse it. This underlines his infamy recorded by us already in 
other context. 

Maybe our organization then did not scrutinize all aspects of the 
matter; also one may bring forward things possibly missed by us - but 
anyhow Rolf Martens is the last to fabricate such reproaches against us 
from that. 


   In general

The experiences in the relations between the parties and organizations 
as well as within our organization, as illustrated just by one example, 
should make us pensive. We probably have to assume, that reaction 
employs great energies to split the organizations apart. In all of the 
organizations there are people fighting who really want revolution, but 
we also have to assume that by mistakes as well as by conscious 
sabotage connections are prevented, discussions are prevented, that 
reaction always considers it as one of its primary tasks to lead the 
organizations into an infertile, wasting, splitting squabbling by this 
or that method instead of a propellant debate in which at the same time 
unity is emphasized. 
Mao Zedong, for instance, following the law of development, never grew 
tired of stressing the splitting of the previously unified, and, in 
politics, the two-line struggle. But he also knew  another fundamental 
sentence without which the revolutionary communist party never could 
have achieved its victories: "Unite to win still greater victories!" 
Without a maximum striving for unity and joining together of the forces 
in order to advance against the true center of reaction there can be no 
question of a really revolutionary work. 

The questions of the cooperation of revolutionary organizations and of 
their ideological debate naturally are important for every 
organization. In no way we are dealing with this as of secondary 
importance. But in doing so one has to consider the facts in full 
extent. This is why we attach importance to these additional 
obervations about the then circumstances and about the libelings of 
Rolf Martens. The question why we did not immediately give our opinion 
on the then declarations will occasionally pose itself again; we hope 
to have answered it by this contribution.


   The main approach of our organization

We also want to explain here, however, why dealing with the RIM 
subsequently didn't need to be to the fore for us at any rate. For our 
organization it has always been essential to have the connection to the 
situation in our country and to the fundamental changes of the last 
decades which stand in the closest tying together with it, that is to 
say to the material development taking place here. We directed our 
primary attention to keeping pace with it by theoretical realization. 
Such a connection is a most important source of strength.

We had to clarify questions which resulted from practice, from the 
connection to our concrete reality. This was primary as compared to a 
debate with international forces which, in our opninion, themselves had 
gone into unacceptable combinations and had presented us with faites 
accomplies. Most of the affiliated parties were out of reach. At most, 
one could have tried to send them a letter via RIM to which the answer 
would have remained completely uncertain. 

As it is known the RIM played off the war led by the PCP within its 
country as a decisive point and practically put it on top of its whole 
propaganda. It was obvious that our organization would have 
difficulties to evaluate this struggle as it naturally had only few 
information about it at its disposal. Only now several questions about 
it could be clarified.

The further course of development has shown that the basic way of our 
organization to concentrate upon the analysis of  the really important 
questions was correct. For example there are some fundamentals of Klaus 
Sender's analysis of Mariategui, being based on essential components as 
presented by him in "Leninism and Civilization" .


   In conclusion

Though one always can say afterwards that something or other could have 
been done better, it must be stressed that our organization rejects 
possible reproaches that we did not give our opinion about this or 
that. On the contrary, our organization instead refers to what it has 
achieved since then.

In the middle of the eighties comrade Klaus Sender could explain within 
our organization that it is necessary to start a criticism also of the 
foundations of Leninism and subsequently also of Marxism and to clearly 
criticize some insufficient positions, and, of course, to prove this in 
detail, to let the new experiences leave their mark on the discussion 
which had turned out from the development.  



For an organization like the KPD/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) it is impossible to 
deal with all questions simultaneously. It was correct that we had to 
throw ourselves into those primary questions which are of the foremost 
concern for us, and not to seek a debate in which it was not even clear 
if we would reach the addresses at all, at the same time paying the 
price of shelving other vital tasks. 

Also the discussion we have to undertake today, on which we have to 
concentrate today, should be about grasping the new international 
development of today, about taking up the fruitful tasks of forging 
together the international working class and all progressive forces of 
the world, about analyzing the situation of today, also about 
recognizing what in former "classical" understandings has been proved 
as very relative or wrong, and in doing so to clear the way for 
mastering the tasks of the 21st century.


Editorial staff of NEUE EINHEIT
                                           concluded january 29, 1998 
_____________________________________________________________________
                           neue  einheit
           Zeitschrift fuer Politik, Oekonomie und Kultur
_____________________________________________________________________
          copyright 1997 Verlag NEUE EINHEIT (Inh.H.Dicke)
            Koernebachstr.50, D-44143 Dortmund, Germany 
                  or D-10973 Berlin, Postfach 309, 
          Phone:   +49-231-838932    resp. +49-30-6937470







     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---