Essay:Response to Disfart
 |
Disfart, a former editor of Revolupedia, has sent a letter to us. Critiquing as for several things, including "Gonzaloism," which I will fully address here. Disfarts' critique, from top to bottom, is an infantile and erroneous attack on Chairman Gonzalo trying to undermine his contributions to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
On Chairman Gonzalo
Disfart first says this:
Although Guzman has made important contributions to Maoism, and we should support revolutionary causes in Peru,,unfortunately, it has become a cultish bastardization of Mao’s theories known as Gonzaloism.
Here we can see Disfart's Centrist Maoism, saying that Chairman Gonzalo made important contributions but also denouncing him in the next sentence, calling his theories a "cultish bastardization." Decrying them as "Gonzaloism," can't people see how this is contradictory? Disfart uses the term "Gonzaloism" purposefully in order to separate Chairman Gonzalo's undeniable contributions and put them into the category of "Gonzaloism." In fact, in this section he concedes it! Although he downplays it.
Maoism has been developed through. Gonzaloism has proven to be a sectarian ideology for calling revolutions “rightists” for simply not according themselves to Gonzaloism. The modern Gonzaloists have alienated themselves from the masses in cults like the Red Guards (USA)
"Gonzaloism" didn't denounce Sison. Sison denounced "Gonzaloism" first and the Philippine Maoists see them as a threat. So calling "Gonzaloism" sectarian is very ironic considering that you can consider Sison as a sectarian. Also, Maoists don't call Sison and Sisonites rightist for nothing, considering that he supported Brezhnevite revisionism. He condemned what he called "ultra-left dogmatists"[1] Also we don't uphold the Austin Red Guards.
but the Red Guards, with their “Gonzalo is the greatest communist” bullshit banners.
This is just making stuff up.
Calling “Jefetura” a cult ideology is not wrong. It fails to recognize that the “MASSES are the makers of history”, and not the “masses are the makers of individuals”.
Well, it's a good thing Jefatura doesn't say that!
We believe that the revolution, the Party, our class, generate leaders, a group of leaders. It has been like this in every revolution.[2]
Gonzalo here says that the "masses" generate great leaders.
Whilst I accept Guzman, Kapakkaya, and Majumdar for recognizing the Universality of Protracted People’s War, it should not force me to.Guzman should be in the midst of these, not above these other revolutionaries and dictating what they ought to do according to his rules. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao Zedong should be upheld higher than all the other Maoist revolutionaries.
Why exactly? Disfart himself has admitted that Gonzalo has made very important contributions to Maoism, so without Gonzalo there would be no Maoism (or as we see it today). Disfart's centrism, again proves contradictory. Disfart later cites the Rightist JMP, now I don't have much to say about him considering that he has been refuted over and over again so here is a list of polemics against him:
https://communistworkers.wordpress.com/2021/06/17/against-jmp-and-rcp/
We invite Disfart to come back again and engage in a more principled manner.