Proletarians of all countries, unite!
(AGAIN) THE DEBATE CONCERNING THE CENTRAL TASK OF EVERY REVOLUTION1
The document we are publishing below, from February 2009, was published as: “A New Debate Concerning the Central Task of Every Revolution”, and was drafted entirely by us, the Peru People’s Movement. It is a historic document, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought document, that is very useful for the current debate within the international communist movement (ICM) on various issues centered on the central task of every revolution: the seizure of Power by means of people’s war. For this, it remains fully relevant, even though the association that signed it became inactive in 2011.
The importance of the document mentioned above transcends the transient figures of that time, who have sunk into oblivion, and we are certain of its usefulness not only for our comrades in the United States, who are striving for the reconstitution of the Communist Party, but also for our comrades in other imperialist countries, who are aware of the need for the Communist Party to carry out the socialist revolution through people’s war, and even more so for our comrades in the oppressed countries; who are engaged in various situations of the struggle to the death between revolution and counterrevolution, who have been fighting to concretize the overdue principal strategic task of constitution/reconstitution of the Party to carry out the New-Democratic revolution through people’s war; as is the case, for example, with comrades in countries where wars of national resistance are currently being waged against the imperialist-Zionist war of aggression, such as Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, etc.
What corresponds to the communists in the aforementioned countries? What corresponds is to carry out the democratic revolution, using the Party and people’s war to transform those resistance wars into a revolution to sweep away imperialism, bureaucrat-capitalism, and semi-feudalism. Conditions in those countries are difficult but ideal for carrying out this long-overdue principal task and, with the Communist Party, striving to lead these struggles and transform them into a people’s war of national resistance. That is, to carry out their own revolution in the service of and as part of the world revolution. That is the only solution to the contradiction between the superpowers and imperialist powers, on the one hand, and the oppressed countries of the Third World, on the other.
Peru People’s Movement
July 2026
Proletarians of all countries, unite!
The central task of every revolution is the seizure of Power by means of revolutionary violence, which today can be nothing other than people’s war. That is why Maoism has established that, before the initiation of the people’s war, all efforts and struggles are aimed at initiating it, and once it has begun, everything must serve to develop it in order to carry the revolution through to the end, that is, to the conquest of Power in the entire country. This is true in the United States as in any other country in the world. Reality shows that a revolutionary situation exists, developing unevenly, in every country on Earth. For Comrade Avakian, there is no revolutionary situation, and his slogan does not affirm the central task of the revolution, Power, but rather is a negation, declaring, “Against Power!” Here, we affirm that this is not the task; rather, the task is to go to the masses, mobilize them, and develop their struggles to reconstitute the Party of the proletariat, as a Party of a new type capable of taking on the task of initiating and developing the people’s war, in order to initiate the people’s war.
The process of the bourgeois state’s increasing reactionary shift is part of the death throes of imperialism — amid the struggle to the death between revolution and counterrevolution in the world — and is taking place in both the imperialist countries and the oppressed countries. This process, marked by increasing curtailment of rights and liberties, for example, in the United States, is following the road of the centralization of Power in the President, in the Executive (presidential absolutism), and the growing militarization of politics, not only foreign policy but also domestic policy (an important step was taken under Reagan in the early 1980s with the militarization of the so-called “war on drugs”). This process made important advancement under Bush and is now continuing on an even greater level under Obama.
John Yoo, a former lawyer with the Bush government’s Department of Justice who, as a legal advisor, drafted the memoranda authorizing the detention of prisoners of war in Guantánamo as “illegal combatants” and the use of interrogation techniques such as “waterboarding”, has just published a book, “Crisis and Command”, in which he describes how this process is reflected in the consciousness of its own imperialist actors. In it, he examines the evolution of presidential Power in the United States, particularly the Power to wage war, up to the point reached under the Bush Jr. government. This process has not been interrupted.
In addition to this process of centralization and concentration of Power in the President, to which Mr. Yoo refers, we must consider the economic stimulus measures that have been applied since 2008. Bush and Obama have injected more than $2 trillion into the economy, which grants immense Power to the President; it permits the executive branch to intervene in industrial companies, banks, investment firms, etc., as a shareholder with greater rights and faculties than any other partner or creditor; to this we must add the initiative to centralize health care services, etc.
It is important to note that the Democratic Party’s candidate, Obama, for a vacant Senate seat in Massachusetts, lost to the Republican candidate, who based his campaign on “defending citizens” rights against the ever-increasing power of ‘Washington’”, etc. This is yet another political proof of what we are saying. This means that this process of reactionary resurgence generates a spontaneous sentiment of rejection among the population, which, in the absence of a revolutionary party to drive and channel it, is manipulated by the reactionaries themselves for their own political ends. Thus, the other political mafia that takes turns in the United States government, the Republican Party, has used its old slogan, “Against the Power of Washington!” to mobilize voters in favor of its party’s candidate. Put another way, in elections, the opposition candidate, regardless of which party he or she belongs to, will always rally around this slogan, which means “against Power” or, more precisely, “against the central government that’s in Washington”, etc., in order to win votes, promising (a simple campaign promise) to give citizens more rights as “individuals” to make decisions at the local level. A slogan rendered obsolete by the very development of the bourgeois State.
But, there are some comrades who claim to apply a “New synthesis of Marxism” — which, instead of distinguishing itself from the two political mafias of the imperialist big bourgeoisie (the financial oligarchy), which take turns in government and divide up seats in the Yankee House of Representatives and Senate, the federal states, etc. — goes against the main thing of Maoism, Power, and instead align themselves with one of the two bourgeois factions in rivalry.
Our comrades in the RCP-USA,2 as we have seen on numerous occasions, for example, in previous elections during the Bush Jr. administration, fell in line behind the Democratic Party mafia by failing to call for a boycott of the elections, arguing that “it would be foolish to do so.” Now, through their “wise leader,” Bob Avakian, they are promoting the following:
”…now is not yet the time, the conditions do not yet exist, to go all out to seize power, but “now IS the time to be WORKING FOR REVOLUTION—to be stepping up resistance while building a movement for revolution—to prepare for the time when it WILL be possible to go all out to seize the power. . . . but ‘hastening while awaiting” the development of a revolutionary situation and the emergence of a revolutionary people in the millions and millions. . . . But I do want to emphasize the importance of this understanding: On the one hand, without resistance, without fighting the power, it will not be possible to build a revolutionary movement; on the other hand, if that resistance is not approached, on the part of communists, with the orientation of building a movement for revolution and the goal of sweeping away this capitalist system and bringing into being a radically new society and world, then that resistance will be reduced . . . Even while others we unite with in particular struggles will proceed from different perspectives, we have to proceed in everything we do with the understanding and from the standpoint that is concentrated in the formulation: ‘Fight the Power, and Transform the People, for Revolution.’” (Bob Avakian, Resistance and Building a Movement for Revolution, UNRESOLVED CONTRADICTIONS, DRIVING FORCES FOR REVOLUTION)
What is he trying to tell us with this? That there is no revolutionary situation in the United States. That is to say, he is essentially asserting that the objective conditions are not favorable for revolution. This implies that in the United States, the overwhelming majority does not suffer from the class oppression and exploitation of the imperialist big bourgeoisie (financial oligarchy), and that this oppression is becoming more unbearable every day. Is this true? No. One need only read any bourgeois report or statistic on the situation of the masses to see how their suffering is increasing, that it is unbearable for them, and that they do not want to continue living this way. This is even more true with the unfolding of the current crisis of imperialism. And as for the other aspect that characterizes a revolutionary situation, one need only look at the process of absolute centralization taking place in the United States, which affects the very foundations of the state structure, as we briefly mentioned at the beginning of this article, to see that those at the top can no longer continue to govern as before. As Maoism teaches us, it is these two conditions that give rise to the mobilizations of the masses, their struggles, and among them the strike movement of the proletariat. And these struggles are taking place ceaselessly in the United States. It cannot be said that the proletariat does not struggle in the United States; in its own party organ, “Revolution”, there are numerous examples of these struggles. Now, how you interpret or present them is another matter. It is not, therefore, that the mobilization of the masses creates the revolutionary situation, but rather the opposite; the revolutionary situation, that is, the objective conditions of the revolution, is the cause of the mobilizations, and these are its effect (for a better understanding of all this, it is of great importance to study the document: Let’s Develop the Growing Popular Protest!, Central Committee of the PCP,3 September 1979).
So: Why does Comrade Avakian say that there is no revolutionary situation? Because, in his own words, there is not, at least not yet, “a revolutionary people in the millions and millions.” In other words, as we have just seen, he confuses the effect with the cause because he does not want to analyze the concrete reality of the revolution in the United States in the light of Maoism. Therefore, since all political strategy, tactics, and action must be based on the recognition of the revolutionary situation, he is seriously mistaken. And he establishes a tactic and a slogan that calls on the masses to follow the bourgeois road of parliamentary cretinism. It is only by recognizing the revolutionary situation, which is developing unevenly, that the proletariat, its Party, and the revolutionaries in the United States can assess the current political situation and establish their tactics.
Furthermore, Comrade Avakian, with other words, wants to tell us that the people do not “yet” want the revolution. But can a Maoist, in the 21st century, claim that the masses do not want revolution and still claim to be a Maoist? No. Because, as we have seen, the objective conditions for revolution are ripe; the issue is one of decision, that is, whether or not you want to make revolution. If you want to make revolution, you must go, in the United States as elsewhere, to the deepest and broadest masses of the proletariat and the people; live with these masses, work with them, fight with them, and mobilize them for the revolution. This is not about watering down Marxism to convince the Harvard intellectuals of how good, intelligent, and democratic we are. No, Comrade Avakian, that is not what this is about.
Comrade Avakian, you and your comrades in the RCP, even though there aren’t many of you, are enough to undertake this task once and for all, provided, of course, that you make up your minds to do so. The task that falls to everyone who calls themselves and considers themselves a revolutionary is to go to those deepest and most profound masses, transform themselves, and mobilize them for the revolution; building the Party of the class and, with it as the center, building the other two instruments of the revolution around it. What is required, then, is the decision by revolutionaries to prepare for the leap to initiate the people’s war.
The problem does not lie with the masses; they are always ready. As Maoism teaches us, with the masses and the party, all miracles can be achieved. Therefore, the problem is not the lack of “a revolutionary people in the millions and millions”; the problem is always ours, mainly that of the revolutionaries. The problem, therefore, is that they do not want to make the revolution, at least for now, and they speak of “resisting.” That, too, is not befitting a Maoist worthy of the name. We Maoists uphold “combat and resist!” We are transformers of reality through struggle and combat; we combat to resist and resist to combat, our center is combat. This has to do with the masses; they are always the area of contention between revolution and counterrevolution. If we win them over to the revolution, then the enemy plays into its own hands, using them against their own class interests. But, contrary to all these Marxist-Leninist-Maoist truths, you say that now is not the time for revolution, that is where we are headed, and you call on your supporters to raise the slogan: “Fight the Power, and Transform the People, for Revolution.”
So, to conclude: Comrade Avakian thus separates the daily struggle from the political struggle, the struggle for demands from the struggle for Power, and wants us to believe that there can be a political struggle that is not a struggle for Power. And by confusing a revolutionary situation with a revolutionary crisis, he goes on to propose, Fight the Power . . . ! That is an attempt to lead the people into “the struggle against the government”; that is what he does when, in other words, he adopts the bourgeois slogan “against the Power of Washington,” in any of its interpretations, which leads to “fight against officials rather than against the emperor”; in this way, the subjective factor of the revolution, the revolutionary Party, is not developed; armed detachments are not prepared as the initiators and embryos of the future revolutionary army; the masses are not driven to the outburst to initiate. Thus, in a word, the revolutionary mass movement that would allow the Party to be built as a party distinct from and opposed to all others, in order to carry out the seizure of Power, is not generated; instead, one waits for the future “revolutionary crisis” that is to come from the reaction. That is to say, despite the criticism from the PCP, which has pointed out to you since the early 1980s that “the revolution does not come from the reaction”, you continue to stubbornly hope, in defiance of reality, that the revolution will arise spontaneously from the very manifestation of Yankee reaction itself, because deep down, as has been criticized on previous occasions, you continue to view Yankee imperialism as all-powerful, you fail to see its internal struggles and contradictions, and you fail to see how its situation is worsening, its collapse, which drives the imperialist State to violence against the people in the United States and to the imperialist war of aggression.
Your slogan does not serve to educate the people in a revolutionary spirit or to mobilize them. It does not serve to educate them in revolutionary violence and the relentless struggle against revisionism. On the contrary, perhaps despite its good intentions, it reeks of parliamentary cretinism. Your slogan, despite the “pretty” words that adorn it, serves to drag the discontented masses, who spontaneously reject the system, its institutions, representatives, parties, etc., into the wake of the factions of the imperialist big bourgeoisie (the financial oligarchy), to participate in elections behind “for now” candidates from one of the two mafias, only to later, if the forces were to emerge, put forward their own candidate. We do not wish to put words in the mouth of Comrade Avakian or his party, the RCP. We refer to concrete facts and the logical consequences of these facts and of his words.
If Comrade Avakian or any of his party’s representatives believe that we are not interpreting them correctly, let them say so clearly: let them disavow, refute, and dismiss the position we are attributing to them. In that case, we will be the first to admit, with great joy and deep self-criticism, that we were wrong; in that case, we will celebrate our mistake of having misjudged your words and deeds. In that case, we will engage in self-criticism and publish in large, bold letters your disavowal of any action or statement that leads to parliamentary cretinism and fails to adopt the Maoist position of making the revolution. And if we are criticizing you now, it is not to pick a fight with you and other comrades who share your position, but because we are in favor of debate, because we are not politically weak, and because we possess the strength that Maoism gives us.
New Peru Friendship Association
U.S., February 2009
https://vnd-peru.blogspot.com/2026/07/mpp-de-nuevo-el-debate-acerca-de-la.html↩︎
Red Library: Revolutionary Communist Party, USA.↩︎
Red Library: Communist Party of Peru.↩︎