From Kommunistisk Politik
No. 16, August 4, 2001
There are some people who have been "wondering" why the APK whole-heartedly supports the struggle and "People's War" being waged by e.g. the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the Communist Party of the Philippines, which ideologically adhere to both Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought. But there is no reason for wonder, and the APK has not changed its position.
The APK supports the revolutionary struggles, which are really attacking imperialism and reaction and are being waged by the working class and the peoples everywhere in the world on the basis of the Marxist-Leninist position that imperialism and reaction never give up power voluntarily, but can only be removed from power by an armed revolution.
Where Maoist parties, as in Nepal and the Philippines, are heading this revolutionary struggle, and have obtained considerable progress, it would be not only sectarian, but also positively reactionary, not to support them.
The developments in Nepal, one of the poorest and most backward countries in the world, with a small working class and a huge and very poor rural population, show that the organization of the People's War and the armed uprising, joined with the mobilisation of the workers and students, and the creation of a national front consisting of progressive forces against the fascist clique of Gyanendra and Koirala, is both right and necessary. It is not on these questions that there exist decisive differences between the Marxist-Leninist and Maoist point of view. Nor do they exist in relation to the concrete, strategic objective of the struggle in Nepal: the establishment of a so-called New Democracy (a variant of people's democracy and a progressive form of government with the working class in alliance with other progressive forces, but not yet the dictatorship of the proletariat), the abolishment of the reactionary and illegitimate monarchy, which is in the pocket of imperialism, and the establishment of a republic and the adoption of a new constitution.
It is the position of the APK that declared Communist parties have to be assessed concretely, that is, according to their general line, their actions, strategy and tactics, first and foremost regarding the struggle in their own countries.
A lot of declared "Marxist-Leninist" parties have proved to be disguised revisionists, and many declared Maoist parties, including the ones in the developed, capitalist and imperialist countries, as was the case in Denmark with the now defunct Communist Workers' Party of Denmark (KAP), ended up abandoning and betraying the revolutionary struggle. To the APK, parties making great sacrifices and winning the position as the leader of the struggle of their countries and peoples, are parties of the revolution, no matter the ideological and political differences and disagreements that might exist. Therefore, the APK is pleased with their victories, and therefore we show solidarity with them in hard times, too.
All this does not change the general position of the APK towards Maoism, which we regard as a variant of modern revisionism, and which at the end will not lead to the creation of socialist societies under the dictatorship of the proletariat. The development of Mao Zedong's China, during and after him, is the proof of this thesis. The fundamentally not Marxist-Leninist character of Maoism, its character of first and foremost being a national liberation ideology and theory, and its lacking ability of creating a truly socialist society under the dictatorship of the proletariat, was not revealed until a prolonged, historical process clarified the matter – and the battle on the assessment of Maoism has not ended yet.
Click here to return to the Denmark Index