In a message dated 5/5/02 11:39:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>
> Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
> >
> >
> > The Socialist Party I belong to here was originally Maoist, but they
> > ditched that mostly, in order to create a new socialist movement which
> > addressed the concerns of ordinary Dutch people and is relevant to their
> > concerns.
>
> This is either amusing or tragic, considering that one of Mao's more
> important essays (in so far as one can wrench it to entirely different
> contexts*) is entititled "Be Concerned with the Well-Being of the
> Masses, Pay Attention to Methods of Work." I am aware, however, that the
> first step western "Maoist" groups took in becoming "Maoist" was to
> reject Mao's fundamental principle: that general theory must be focused
> on the actual conditions of each nation. Hence, for example, the bizarre
> attempts in the '70s to form "United Fronts," forgetting or not seeing
> that (a) the United Front of the CPC was in response to a foreign
> invasion and (b) that in any case all its principles presupposed a large
> peasantry.
>
> Carrol
>
Even more to the point, and more bitterly ironic here, is the failure of most
Maoist parties and organizations (other than Mao's own while he was alive) to
truly use the mass line. "Addressing the concerns of the ordinary Dutch
people" is EXACTLY what a true Maoist party should be doing there (while ALSO
trying to educate the Dutch masses about the necessity of social revolution).
"To link oneself with the masses, one must act in accordance with the needs
and wishes of the masses. All work done for the masses must start from their
needs and not from the desire of any individual, however well-intentioned. It
often happens that objectively the masses need a certain change, but
subjectively they are not yet conscious of the need, not yet willing or
determined to make the change. In such cases, we should wait patiently. We
should not make the change until, through our work, most of the masses have
become conscious of the need and are willing and determined to carry it out.
Otherwise we shall isolate ourselves from the masses. Unless they are
conscious and willing, any kind of work that requires their participation
will turn out to be a mere formality and will fail. ...There are two
principles here: one is the actual needs of the masses rather than what we
fancy they need, and the other is the wishes of the masses, who must make up
their own minds instead of our making up their minds for them."
--Mao Zedong, "The United Front in Cultural Work" (October 30,
1944), "Selected Works", vol. III, pp. 236-37. [Quoted above, however, is the
version in the "Red Book", p. 125.]
On the other hand, while I know little about it, it seems doubtful that the
Socialist Party in Holland can be considered a revolutionary party. The mass
line without sincere work toward revolution is mere opportunist revisionism.
With regard to Carrol's comments, I am not entirely sure if he is saying that
all the principles OF MAOISM require a large peasantry, or if he is saying
that all the principles of forming UNITED FRONTS require a large peasantry.
Either way, he is quite wrong. There is nothing about the mass line, for
example, that requires that it only be implemented in countries where there
is a large peasantry, or indeed where there is a peasantry at all. The same
goes for united fronts of classes (and also for other kinds of united fronts,
such as bringing together different groups in common struggle, groups who
formerly concentrated on only one or two issues).
--Scott Harrison
