To all comrades... [Archive]

RevSocPH

25th July 2011, 19:33

Red greetings from the Philippines!

The revolutionary left movement in the Philippines has been the scene of several splits and divisions. From the monolithic force of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) it has been divided into several factions, antagonistic and wary of each other.

The first split started in 1992, when then CPP head Armando Liwanag (Joma Sison, CPP founder) issued a paper titled "Reaffirm Our Basic Principles and Rectify Our Errors", which spearheaded the "Second Great Rectification Movement" which aimed to cleanse the Party of deviationists and "counter-revolutionaries". Those who went by the paper came to be known as "Reaffirmists", or RA's.

But not all CPP cadres abided by the "Reaffirm" document. Several Party regional committees, such as the Manila-Rizal Regional Committee, Visayas Commission, Central Mindanao Regional Committee and some Party departments - the United Front Commission, National Peasant Secretariat and the Home Bureau and International Liaison Department rejected the "Reaffirm" document and the 10th CPP Central Committee Plenum which approved "Reaffirm". They became known as the Rejectionists, or RJ's.

In 1997, another split occured within the CPP, this time in the Central Luzon area where three (3) Party leaders in the area were tagged as "revisionists" and for promoting "factionalism". As a result, this gave rise to the Marxist-Leninist Party of the Philippines (MLPP), and the army Rebolusyonaryong Hukbo ng Bayan (RHB, Revolutionary Army of the People), in which I belong to.

I hope to learn from other proletarian revolutionaries here their experiences and by so doing, would be able to help the advancement of the proletarian revolution in the Philippines, which is being continually vulgarized by the Maoist CPP.

RevSocPH

29th July 2011, 16:14

Hi all,

Thanks for welcoming me. Although I am not as of yet a full member of the party, I am doing organizing work for their legal youth and student mass organization.

I will possibly post on a separate thread a much more comprehensive look at the MLPP, the CPP and the current state of the struggle in the Philippines. But let me provide you here a not-so-short overview of the MLPP and our similarities and differences with the CPP and its Rejectionist breakaway factions. :)

First, on the analysis of Philippine society. The MLPP sees the Philippines as a neo-colonial semi-feudal state. Remnants of feudal oppression and capitalist exploitation exist side by side, and this characteristics of the Philippine mode of production has been the result of Spanish and American conquests.

The Philippine mode of production is the synthesis of the semi-feudal mode in the last century of Spanish colonial rule with the monopoly capitalist mode of the United States when they came in 1898.

According to Marx: "Conquests may lead to either of three results. The conquering nation may impose its own mode of production upon the conquered people (this was done, for example, by the English in Ireland during this century, and to some extent in India); or it may refrain from interfering in the old mode of production and be content with tribute (e.g., the Turks and Romans); or interaction may take place between the two, giving rise to a new system as a synthesis (this occurred partly in the Germanic conquests). In any case it is the mode of production – whether that of the conquering nation or of the conquered or the new system brought about by a merging of the two – that determines the new mode of distribution employed."

That is the supporting quote from Marx on how the MLPP analyzes and sees the Philippine mode of production.

Now for the CPP's analysis, they categorize the mode of production as semi-feudal as well, but what differs it ours is that they consider it as a transitional mode of production, whereas we consider it as the mode of production itself, the social system itself.

The structure of Philippine society as semi-feudal, for the CPP is determined by the impinging of the monopoly capitalist mode into the feudal mode, started when the US came to colonize the Philippines. Whereas we in the MLPP believes that it is not the mere impingement of US monopoly capitalism but it actually synthesized with the semi-feudal mode to give rise to a new system. Semi-feudalism for the CPP started with US colonial rule, but for us it started in the last century of Spanish colonial domination, in which US imperialism synthesized with when they came.

Second, on the advancement of the revolutionary struggle. Both the MLPP and the CPP adhere to the "National-Democratic" line of struggle, which have both a legal political struggle and an armed struggle component.

The National-Democratic struggle is the first stage of the proletarian revolution, the next is the Socialist revolution where the socialist construction of Philippine society shall commence upon the victory of the National-Democratic struggle.

On the legal political struggle, the MLPP organizes, primarily the Filipino proletariat, as the main force and leader of the national-democratic struggle thru trade union organizing. But because the proletarian class is relatively small in the Philippines other progressive and democratic classes are also organized - youth, women, fisherfolk, farm workers, the urban poor, etc. - to be in union with the proletariat in waging the struggle. The role of the legal mass organizations in the struggle is more on open and legal means. We see it as a crucial element along with the armed struggle.

While the CPP's legal mass organizations refused to work with the RJ's and the social-democratic groups, the MLPP has been open to more tactical alliances with them in legal struggles. There are also ongoing efforts in establishing a revolutionary united front with the RJ underground parties as well as the social-democrats.

The CPP also maintains legal mass organizations but treats them as a matter of propaganda. Because of their absolute reliance on the armed strength of the peasant army on the countryside, those organizations are more like channels for recruitment and deployment to New People's Army units, which is also the reason that the fascist AFP (Armed Forces of the Philippines) have an easy time killing or capturing their leaders (we also have a share of harassments from the fascists). They outwardly proclaim their alignment to the CPP and the NPA with disregard to security, whereas we do not do the same with the MLPP and the RHB. We only reveal our ties to prospective Party recruits and are more cautious in doing so.

On the armed struggle, both the MLPP and the CPP believe in the armed struggle, only differing in terms of when to wage it. For the MLPP, there is no revolutionary situation that merits armed struggle as of to date, but it is the principal means of smashing the reactionary state apparatus in the moment that the revolutionary situation arises.

The RHB's current role is to organize mass bases in the countryside for legal and underground organizations of the Party. It maintains an active defense policy against the AFP and the NPA (yes, the NPA's attack us). It also helps in maintaining peace and order in the base areas and penalizing criminal elements, as well as helping out in the communities they operate, and to also protect the people against harassments from the AFP and local warlords.

For us in the MLPP-RHB, the revolutionary struggle does not rely on the legal or armed struggle alone, but with both. Basically, the weight of importance on each of the forms of struggle depend on the conditions such as political maturity, mass awareness and the existence of a revolutionary situation. Army recruitment depends on the needs and exigencies of the situation. While we look up to Mao and his teachings in armed struggle, we do not see it as something universal that can be applied to any country.

The CPP-NPA's armed struggle is based on the agrarian revolution, which is mostly peasant-based despite their affirmations on "proletarian leadership" of the national-democratic revolution. They adhere to the PPW (Protracted People's War) of Mao and the strength of the revolution relies on the strength of the People's Army, because for them, the Revolution is war, and war is the Revolution. Revolutionary situation is always ripe and always in existence.

Now on the question of the CPP vulgarizing the revolution, they dogmatically applied the Maoist formula into the Philippine setting without taking into account the material conditions after the EDSA revolt in 1986. In launching the Second Great Rectification Movement in 1992 which reaffirmed Maoist orthodoxy and not taking into account the different positions of Party leaders and members, resulted into the split of 1992 between the RAs and RJs.

That happened again in 1997, and until now the CPP acts as if no changes happened in the last decade and continues to do so, and because of lack of clarity in their programme, it has been always in the danger of splitting again due to the support of the CPP for Manuel Villar, a capitalist politician in the Philippines, in the last Philippine Presidential elections of 2010.

Since then, a two-line struggle has developed between the CPP leaders based in the Netherlands and the CPP leaders in the Philippines, the former mostly in favor of parliamentary, electoral and legal struggles and the latter in favor of absolute reliance in armed struggle.

But despite all the deaths or capture of their organizers and the political blunders it committed, the CPP remains a force in the Philippine revolutionary left today, but it has been slowly degenerating. The MLPP, on the other hand, continues to gradually grow. The AFP's intelligence admits that "if there is one insurgent group that would be the next great threat, it would be the MLPP".

And that is the reason our organizers in both the legal and underground arms are continually harassed, arrested without warrant and tortured. ###