We believe that a fundamental aspect of party building is the struggle to affirm MLMTT and its applicability to the concrete conditions of this country, and through our practice and study of Workers Viewpoint (WV) we have arrived at serious criticisms of their party building line.
We have had differences with WV for a long time, and at first our criticisms of them were of their rightist political practice. We observed that they consistently advocated a rightist and tailist line in practice, seemingly in contradiction to their elaborate “theories.” At this first stage of understanding of WV, we did not grasp the essence of their deviation.
In this past period, as part of the process of developing our line on party building, we have struggled to deepen our understanding of WV by studying their writings, and summarizing their practice, while carefully learning from the writings of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Marx and Engels. In studying their writings we began to grasp WV’s deviation from Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought (MLMTT) when we started to observe that WV’s writings were characterized by consistent distortions and actual rewriting of passages from Lenin’s articles. We saw that WV constantly used various misquotes from Lenin to back up WV’s own points which were the opposite of what Lenin actually advocated. We realized that WV uses MLMTT not to apply it to the concrete situation but they use Marxist-Leninist words to back up their own theory’ which is the opposite of MLMTT. We recognized a consistency to WV’s distortions of Lenin and that in the place of MLMTT, WV was creating an entire system of idealist and metaphysical thought that was only seemingly M-L in its use of words and phrases. WV’s system is fundamentally incorrect and is based upon bourgeois conceptions of theory and how to grasp and develop theory, the role of experience in the theory of knowledge, and the relation of theory and practice.
We try, throughout this paper, to pinpoint the essence of WV’s deviation. We want to state clearly and emphatically that WV are not in essence dogmatists. They may give the appearance of dogmatism, with their high sounding proclamations of “theory” and rhetoric, but through careful study and examination of their writings and their practice, we have concluded that they are not making dogmatist errors.
Rather, we believe WV’s errors are actually the purposeful distortion of MLMTT and its applicability to the revolutionary movement today. WV is actively attempting to replace the theory of MLMTT with their own set of “theories,” “theoretical premises,” etc. In practice, in place of developing and applying MLMTT and a correct line and program from which strategy and tactics flow, WV has, under the guise of seeing the importance of determiningtactics, actually sought to base their practice not on MLMTT but on their own new theories.
We demonstrate in Chapter I (WVO Undermines the Theoretical Foundation of MLMTT) that under the guise of ”absolutizing” MLMTT WV is actually attempting to absolutize their own new “theories.” We show how WV by not recognizing the correct dialectical relationship between absolute and relative truths, actually can end up advocating both in an incorrect way. WV, by proclaiming MLMTT “absolute” (seemingly revering MLMTT), is declaring MLMTT completed, ossified and therefore of no ongoing relevance to today, thereby leaving it open to declaring at other times, MLMTT is “relative,” i.e. relevant only to the times past and not to today.
In Chapter II (WVO’s Deviation on the Role of Experience in the Theory of Knowledge) we demonstrate how WV, by pitting MLMTT against experience, by separating MLMTT from life, actually ensures for WV that MLMTT will not have continuing relevance to our practice in making revolution today. If MLMTT has no living and indissoluble connection with life and the experience our practice in life gives us (which is the basis of all our knowledge), MLMTT obviously will become unusable for our day to day work.
In Chapter III (WVO’s Deviation on Theory and Practice) we point out how WV, by having an incorrect stand on theory and practice, ends up negating Marxist-Leninist theory and engaging in practice in a tailist and incorrect fashion, unguided by Marxist-Leninist theory. We demonstrate how WV by failing to grasp the dialectical interrelationship between theory and practice is necessarily unable to adopt, grasp and apply MLMTT to their practice resulting in their actual attempt to replace MLMTT with their own set of theories.
In Chapter IV (WVO’s Deviation on the Nature of the Vanguard Party) we give an example of WV’s serious deviations. We demonstrate how, due to their idealist outlook they are unable to grasp the essence of Marxist-Leninist teachings on the nature of the Vanguard Party and end up turning Lenin upside down and advocating a “mass workers party.”
Throughout this paper we will quote extensively from both WV and Lenin, Mao and Stalin. This is necessary because it is important for us to grasp not only that WV has distorted Mao and Lenin, but also to grasp with what theories WV is replacing Mao and Lenin, and how WV is at variance with what Mao and Lenin are really saying. It is especially important to grasp the actual points made by Lenin, Mao and Stalin because they are all relevant and applicable today, and in that light we can see even more clearly how serious WV’s distortions of MLMTT are.
This paper does not attempt to be an overall conclusive criticism and analysis of all aspects of WV’s line and practice. In this paper we have focused mainly on their writings. We have differences with them on the national question and other issues of fundamental concern to the communist movement today. We will be going into these and other questions in the future.
We have written this paper to contribute to the struggle in the communist movement. We look forward to comments and criticisms from WV and from the entire communist movement. We believe that through open and principled struggle a correct line will triumph upon which a new party can be built.