On the Rectification Campaign

Comrade Gonzalo's speech at a meeting with the People's Intellectual Movement.

Proletarians of all countries, unite!


Abimael «Gonzalo» Guzmán
August 1991

Selected Works of Abimael «Gonzalo» Guzmán
Switzerland, 2022

Reproduced by
The Red Flag

This speech was delivered by Comrade Gonzalo at a meeting with directors of the People‘s Intellectual Movement, a generated organization of the Communist Party of Peru for the Party work among academics, scientists and artists. It was published as an official document of the Central Committee of the Party under the title «On the Rectification Campaign Based on the Study of the Document ‹Elections, No! People‘s War, Yes!›», dated May 1990. The Party document «Elections, No! People‘s War, Yes!», which was the central document of the rectification campaign in question, is partially included in these Selected Works under the title «On Four Fundamental Questions of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism».



Pay attention to analysis and synthesis — these are two aspects of a contradiction and synthesis is the main one. Analysis allows us to break down and set elements apart in order to achieve a better understanding, but this is only one aspect. It is not, nor can it ever be, the entire process of knowledge. It requires its other aspect — synthesis. It is synthesis which enables us to grasp the essence of knowledge. If there is no synthesis there is no qualitative leap in knowledge. Synthesis is the decisive aspect, the main aspect, the one which enables the formulation of objective laws.

Grasping this question is a problem of an ideological nature. It is an essential part of the application of the marxist theory of knowledge, of dialectical materialism. Grasping this point runs counter to bourgeois idealist ideology which strives to separate analysis from synthesis. From the standpoint of proletarian ideology, from the standpoint of marxism-leninism-maoism, these are two aspects of the same unity, but synthesis is the main aspect since it produces a higher level of knowledge, a qualitative change, a qualitative leap.

There are two classic examples of this. One is the example of the clock. In order to understand its mechanism it is first necessary to take it apart. This allows us to know its components and the functions of each one of them. But if the clock is not put together again there is no clock, only its parts. Even if they were to be placed together in a group that would only constitute a pile of pieces, never a clock.

The other example is the development of the various disciplines of natural science since the 15th century. This process historically demonstrates where lack of synthesis leads to. The great development of science enabled us to grasp various aspects of nature through studies such as mathematics, astronomy, physics, and so on. But this development, entailing the breaking apart, the analytical process of science, its differentiation into various fields, often led to metaphysical theories.

Even the 18th century, a century of great materialist scientific advance, produced metaphysical knowledge. Nevertheless, all this breaking into constituent parts, all this separation of fields of knowledge, laid the foundations for the qualitative leap. It generated the conditions, first for the appearance of Hegel‘si idealist dialectics and, later, of Marx‘s materialist dialectics.

Therefore this breaking down required synthesis, a thoroughgoing condensation. It laid the ground and the appropriate conditions for that dialectical materialism achieved by Marx and Engels, mainly by Marx. The arrival at this milestone, at the proletarian outlook, at marxist philosophy, at dialectical materialism, was a process linked to a powerful synthesis. It was in this same manner that we arrived at the central question of the proletarian outlook, at the question of the universality of contradiction, an historical qualitative leap of monumental importance.

Both examples show the need for synthesis, for the qualitative leap. Therefore let us pay special attention to analysis and to synthesis, mainly to synthesis.

From the various contributions to the debate we can see a problem arising the process of breaking down into constituent parts leads to talk about «quotations». The contributions say «quotations from the document» or, «on reading the words of Marx», or, «on grasping the quotations of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution». In this manner they fall into listing isolated quotations which are not applied to actual and current problems. In this way the lack of grasp of synthesis generates a problem: a failure to grasp the proletarian ideology as a unity — as marxism-leninism-maoism. We can see this problem even in some peoples‘ way of expressing themselves. For example, in one of the contributions the question of «marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, and the fact that, here in Peru, this ideology‘s creative application is Gonzalo thought» is barely mentioned a couple of times

It is not sufficient to grasp only the facts. Wherever there is a problem one must seek the cause. This is an ideological question and since, in the realm of ideology, the contradiction between proletarian and bourgeois ideology manifests itself, there is always resistance and bourgeois ideology reflects itself in that specific and concrete moment in time as taking precedence over the proletarian ideology. This is but part and parcel of the struggle between these two ideologies which commonly arises in those inexperienced people who themselves are still in the midst of their ideological development. This entails the need to demolish bourgeois ideology in order to build up proletarian ideology. Without demolition there can be no construction. The dead weight of tradition, of old ideas and customs, of deformities in the ideological level, constitutes an encumbrance presenting strong resistance.

Therein lies the need for a profound effort in the direction of transformation. Human beings are practical beings, not contemplative entities, particularly so when acting upon reality in order to change it in the service of the proletariat and the people. Hence humanity is capable of overcoming the old and obsolete ideology and of embracing the proletarian ideology, the only ideology able to comprehend and transform the world in the service of the class and the oppressed peoples.

Very well. But, when studying, this contradiction is an issue of analysis and synthesis. From the standpoint of knowledge this is the driving force which generates a qualitative leap. In the absence of a correct handling of this contradiction problems will arise in the handling of the proletarian ideology. Therein, at this level, lies the root cause of the failure to take position for marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, as universal truth, as the outlook uniting the communists of the whole world and, specifically, the failure to take position mainly for Gonzalo thought here in Peru for this, our Peruvian revolution. Taking up positions based on isolated quotations on the international situation or on the national political situation, on the questions of the Party and its three instruments, or on work among the masses, and so on, reveals a failure to conceive marxism as a unity. When studying, to restrict oneself to the analysis and to fail in the handling of the synthesis as the main factor, constitutes a problem of a bourgeois ideological character involving failure to carry out a qualitative leap. Taking position for marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, as guide and center, is the axis upon which everything depends. It is this position, the one which generates comprehension and the elucidating of the objective law, the grasping of which makes possible the changing of everything — nature, society and ideas.

One must always learn this lesson well. Limiting oneself merely to analysis leads to metaphysics. Undertaking synthesis leads to dialectical materialism. In studying the document this outlook enables us to arrive at marxism. Arriving at marxism leads us to leninism, and leninism to maoism. Of all these three, maoism is the main one. Moreover, maoism leads us to Gonzalo thought, which is the universal truth specific to the concrete reality of Peruvian society and specific to the concrete conditions of the class struggle today.

It is synthesis which enables us to understand the document and to understand its marxist character. To grasp the way in which the Party understands marxism today while basing itself on the marxist-meninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought thesis which holds that maoism is the new and higher stage of marxism.

All of us, communists, fighters and masses, must forge ourselves in the proletarian ideology — marxism-leninism-maoism, Gonzalo thought.


The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is the greatest achievement of Chairman Mao and it constitutes an enormous contribution to the proletarian world revolution. This revolution served to solve one of the outstanding problems of socialism — the continuation of the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat in its inexorable march towards communism. This question has been resolved for all time and communists already know the answer to the problem — we shall continue the revolution under the conditions of socialist society by means of proletarian cultural revolutions. In perspective, the gist of the question is to change the soul, to transform ideological outlook. The issue is to make of marxism-leninism-maoism a living reality. Only thus can capitalist restoration be avoided and the march to communism be advanced.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is a fundamental question of maoism. If we do not understand maoism correctly as the new, third and higher stage of marxism, it is impossible to understand anything. Therein lies the question in all its simplicity. We know very well that to be a marxist today means to be a marxist-leninist-maoist, mainly a maoist. The theoretical foundations of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution are rooted in Marx himself who pointed out that in the transition from capitalism to communism there is a need for a permanent revolution throughout a period of proletarian dictatorship, an indispensable and necessary permanent revolution understood as a series of successive great leaps. This theory is also rooted in Lenin who himself conceived and promoted the cultural revolution. But it fell to Chairman Mao to resolve this great unfinished task of the continuation of the revolution. He directed, realized and developed this revolution as the greatest political event witnessed by humanity. Despite many and very great struggles the issue was not settled until 1966 when the proletariat and the people of China found the way under the personal directorship of Chairman Mao Zedong at the helm of the glorious Communist Party of China, and in so doing shook the world.

For us this event has even more vital importance today since the trumpeted «defeat of socialism» is connected with the way in which socialism develops and how the proletarian dictatorship is defended. This failure is the failure of revisionism, not the failure of socialism. It is revisionism which has continued its sinister road of capitalist restoration, sinking into the mire of its final bankruptcy. The revisionists, in the Soviet Union since 1956 with Khrushchevii down to the infamous Gorbacheviii, and in China with Deng Xiaopingiv from 1976 to the present, usurped the dictatorship of the proletariat, restored capitalism and destroyed socialism. Revisionism is the political direction of restoration, the negative aspect of the process of restoration and counter-restoration which the class necessarily goes through until it definitively installs itself in power.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is the most positive and greatest contribution in this world-wide process of struggle between revolution and counter-revolution, of restoration and counter-restoration within the development of socialism. The fact that it only lasted until 1976 and the fact that the counter-revolutionary revisionist coup of Deng Xiaoping and the subsequent capitalist restoration took place does not in the least negate the Cultural Revolution nor its necessity. Moreover, this restoration confirms the words of Chairman Mao: in the struggle between capitalism and socialism, in the life-and-death struggle between restoration and counter-restoration, in the antagonistic struggle between bourgeoisie and proletariat, the question of who will defeat whom is not yet settled., and that the class struggle would continue until final victory, until the achievement of communism.

That the cultural revolution unfolded from 1966 until 1976 is an incontrovertible fact, a reality; the whole world saw it happen. Therefore, the proletarian cultural revolution is a settled issue. Marx in 1848 said that political power would be conquered by violence, but he did not live to see this nor was he instrumental in the unfolding of this process. Nevertheless he gave us the solution — the proletariat had to conquer power by means of revolutionary violence and had to apply the proletarian dictatorship. In the same manner Chairman Mao has provided the solution for the continuation of the revolution under the conditions of the proletarian dictatorship. Moreover, he had the opportunity of applying this solution in practice. Therefore, we already know what to do as we have historical experience.

Without detracting from the Paris Commune of 1871, an event which marked the first milestone in the process of the conquest of political power for the proletariat, let us remember that Marx himself understood that the Commune was bound to fail since it lacked a Communist Party to direct it. Nevertheless, he said that we could not allow the morale of the class to be debased, nor did it matter how many leaders may fall. He defended and supported this struggle. Despite its importance as the first milestone the Paris Commune cannot be compared with the unfolding of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution which is a milestone of a far higher quality. Besides, the Paris Commune only lasted two months while the cultural revolution spanned more than ten years, was directed by Chairman Mao and the Communist Party of China and mobilized hundreds of millions of people. Between these two milestones there is the October Revolution directed by Lenin, the creator of the first dictatorship of the proletariat and of the first socialist country on Earth, and the Chinese democratic revolution directed by Chairman Mao, which achieved victory in 1949. Of these four great and glorious milestones in the process of the conquest of power and of the building of socialism, the highest and most highly developed milestone to date is the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

In our Party, the Communist Party of Peru, the general political line establishes the fact that the Peruvian revolution in its march towards communism spans three revolutions: the democratic, the socialist and the cultural revolution (not just one but many), and that all of these, from the very first one, would constitute one single uninterrupted march towards communism. Especially today me must grasp this point very well since now, 25 years since the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, we can see our future in this revolution. Moreover, let us bear very much in mind the fact that it was in the process of this revolution that maoism illuminated the world and became the new third and higher stage of marxism: marxism-leninism-maoism. Let us celebrate the 25th Anniversary of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution!

The document, «Elections, No! People‘s War, Yes!», deals with the contributions laid down by Chairman Mao for the process of the cultural revolution. Therefore, it points out for us the central issues for celebrating the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

The contributions that have been expressed here have grasped the cultural revolution and its essence, but we must be able to understand it within the parameters of our tasks. Let us get used to studying in order to apply, in order to obtain practical conclusions from current affairs. This leads us on to a third question.


The political practice of the proletariat is to grasp documents, policies or Party directives in order to apply them to the political moment. We always undertake study with a view to its application and in order to resolve actual problems. Otherwise we would fall into bookish studies, into mere parroting, and that is a bourgeois, idealist and metaphysical method.

Therefore, let us analyze the current class struggle in the light of the four sections of the document. Let us ponder the ideas we perceive today and the ideas that the Central Committee must decide upon.

In the first section — «Crucial Elections for the Reactionaries» — what is the document pointing at? The document shows us the international and the domestic context. On the question of the international class struggle, let us keep in mind that today we have the rise of a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive of international scope. Let us recall the Party‘s position of 1985 when regarding Gorbachev‘s perestroikav — we held that we were facing a «new counter-revolutionary revisionist offensive headed mainly by Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping». And later, in May 1990, in the document we are presently studying, we said that we were facing «a recently intensified offensive in convergence with the offensive unleashed by imperialism against marxism, an offensive characterized by renewed shouts about a supposed and trumpeted ‹obsolescence of Marxism, therefore in this case the collusion and the struggle, and here mainly the collusion implicit in this sinister onslaught, is aimed at marxism-leninism-maoism». In synthesis, we are dealing with a convergent offensive of imperialism and revisionism in collusion and in contention with one another. The events which have occurred since have confirmed that this has been, is, and continues to be, the case. But would it not be correct to consider that we are going through a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive? Why do we say this? Because everyone is attacking the revolution, the democratic revolution, the socialist revolution, attacking revolutionary violence, the people‘s war. They are attacking the Communist Party, socialism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and they are attacking the goal, communism. They say that the facts have demonstrated that socialism is no longer valid, that socialism does not exist, that it has failed. But we must remind them that in the 1950s there was a socialist camp, that the victory of the Chinese revolution meant a momentous change in the correlation of forces in the world and that there never had been in history a social system capable of changing so deeply and so rapidly the rotten capitalist and feudal structures that existed in the Union of Socialist Council Republics or in China. We must remind them, too, that socialism in the Union of Socialist Council Republics unfolded under Lenin and under Comrade Stalin until the usurpation of power by the revisionist Khrushchev, and that the situation in China was similar, where socialism lasted until 1976 when, after the death of Chairman Mao, Deng Xiaoping carried out a counter-revolutionary revisionist State coup. And we must remind them, also, that if we are to count from 1848 when Marx and Engels, who were only but two people, wrote the immortal «Manifesto of the Communist Party», laying down the fundamentals of scientific socialism and then, from 1917 when this socialism was first implemented, we can see that socialism is young, it has had but a short life and today it continues to exist as an experience. It lives on in the communists and the revolutionaries of the world, it lives as an ideology and as a praxis. Also, it lives in us, the communists and revolutionaries of Peru.

Therefore we are talking about a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive aimed at averting the revolution as the main historical and political trend in today‘s world. And who are those aiming their spears against the revolution? It is jointly the imperialists and the revisionists. Nevertheless, of the two, U.S. imperialism is the main element as leader of the offensive since it aims to establish itself as the sole superpower in its struggle for hegemony against the other, Russian, superpower and the other imperialist powers. This offensive is developed mainly by U.S. imperialism in its role as main aspirant to world hegemony. Also, it is a generalized offensive because, besides coming from imperialism, revisionism and world reaction, it also occurs at all levels: ideological, political and economic, although the political level is the main one.

We must ponder this very seriously, analyze it and grasp it well, like we ought to do with everything else: the question is to understand reality in order to elucidate the objective law governing it and by grasping this law, to be capable of transforming reality in order to serve the proletariat and the peoples of the world.

Here it is appropriate to make a note — this is not a final offensive. We must differentiate correctly. It is a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive. In general terms, one speaks of a final offensive when dealing with the last stage of the strategic offensive of the revolution. Politically and militarily speaking, this offensive undergoes three moments or stages — of course, with politics being the main aspect and always leading the military one — the strategic defensive, the strategic stalemate and the strategic offensive. Our position is that we find ourselves at the stage of the strategic offensive of the world revolution. However, we do not hold that we are in the final offensive. Besides, we consider that the strategic offensive of the world revolution develops within a protracted process, not within a short one, and moreover, in the midst of great zigzag movements and even retreats. Therefore, what we now are dealing with is not an issue of the revolution but of the counter-revolution. We are dealing with a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive aimed at averting the development of the proletarian world revolution.

Another question: Regardless of all their cannons and hellfire and the unleashing of their heaviest economic blows, their mudslinging and wild attacks, as always without a valid argument, they are doomed, they are already defeated. If we are conscious that in revolutions there are restorations and even regressions, we should not be surprised at the existence of a generalized counter-revolutionary offensive. Moreover, we must correctly characterize it in order to handle and defeat it. The attacks against marxism have always been a prelude for its further development and advance. Let us remember our thesis of 1979: as far as we know today, 15,000,000,000 years of the process of matter in movement lead towards the inexorable march of communism. This is the reality, so let us grasp this law well and carry it forward. Our aim, communism, is not an idea outside the material process. It is a part of it, it originates from this process and constitutes its perspective. There is no other class with the historical perspective of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie was once a revolutionary class but it has already become historically obsolete and it is wildly clawing and hissing as wounded beasts do. This rabid behavior is the price of its destruction. It feels itself sinking, it knows itself to be an unburied corpse, but although its grave is already open and waiting, it resists its burial at the hands of the proletariat. This last monster engendered by the bourgeoisie, imperialism, the oppressor of the people of the world, must be swept off the face of the Earth together with revisionism and world reaction. Our role, the role of the proletariat and the people, is to bury it. It is the necessary task in our historical perspective. We must always have this absolute conviction — we shall smash the bourgeoisie and bury imperialism and all its partners and running dogs!

Regarding the political situation at the domestic level this first part of the document deals with so-called «legitimization». This is a thesis of U.S. imperialism, a tenet of their low-intensity warfare, of their counter-insurgency war. In several Party events since our Congress we have dealt with its meaning. This is something of interest for us and therefore we ask ourselves this question: how is it going at the present moment? There is no such legitimization. Besides the character of elections in Peru as a reactionary farce, the votes harvested by Fujimorivi do not give him any legitimacy. On the contrary, given that the percentage of non-voters (27%) was higher than the percentage who voted (24.6%) for Cambio 90vii in the first round and very far from the 50%+1 needed to assume the presidency in accordance with their own constitution. In the second round and with the support of the APRAviii, the United Leftix and Socialist Leftx, he only achieved a simple majority (not 50%+1 of all registered voters). Moreover, because of his deeds against the people and because of the character of the regime over which he presides, Fujimori appears even less legitimate. He is a representative of the big bourgeoisie, mainly the comprador bourgeoisie, and of all the landowners, as well as being the most servile pro-U.S. imperialist ruler up to date, the most rabid enemy of the people‘s war. In synthesis, he is genocidal and a Quisling.xi

Therefore, the process of his «delegitimization», his utter unmasking, develops explosively. The people feel that there is no right or reason for so much evil, for so much oppression and the people‘s war helps along this process. The systematic violation of their human rights, the genocidal policies that Fujimori follows in the footsteps of Belaúndexii and Garcíaxiii — can this be denied in reality? The people feel these policies, they are forced to endure them. The reappearance of mass graves, the slaughter of the sons and daughters of the people, the vile murder, with absolute impunity, of the fighters and their families, the war without prisoners — can they hide it from the people who suffer it?. Can they hide the heinous crimes against the families and the masses who were marching peacefully, armed solely with their flags and slogans, in the squares and streets of Lima and the shantytowns to commemorate the 5th Anniversary of the Day of Heroism.xiv Can they conceal the massacre at San Gabriel and the subsequent congratulations of Fujimori to the assassins? The protest against the assassination of a university student and two humble children for the sole crime of wearing rucksacks, can that be overlooked in silence that the murderers may be again protected? The genocide of indigenous communities, the transformation of peasant communities into cannon-fodder for the genocidal armed forces, the carte blanche given to the «patrols»xv to commit all sorts of crimes, can that legitimize Fujimori‘s government? The most brutal cut in salaries, the most infamous neglect of education and the people‘s health (being recognized as the government of cholera), the most systematic negation of the rights and benefits achieved by the proletariat and the people, the ceaseless and growing repression of the masses, the introduction of land mortgages, usury and the new concentration of land ownership in order to expropriate the poor peasantry, the hunger of millions thrown into the most stark poverty, the deep recession of the Peruvian economy which reduces the income of the masses to what it was decades ago, the destruction of national production and the greatest jumble sale of the country resources to the imperialists, and so on, and so forth. Can all this make Fujimori‘s regime legitimate?. No, it has served only to utterly unmask it in less than a year.

In synthesis, in the study of the first part of the document, note:

  • The sinister, generalized counter-revolutionary offensive.

  • The growing «delegitimization» and the unmasking of Fujimori‘s government and of the rotten Peruvian State.

In the second part — «The Political Crisis Deepens and the Contradictions Sharpen» — one would have to center attention in the process of bureaucratic capitalism. Bureaucratic capitalism is a thesis of our Party. It is the specific modality, the form which capitalism assumes here, in the semi-feudal, semi-colonial backward countries such as ours. This process is related to the fact that the history of Peruvian society achieves an embryonic development of capitalism in the 18th century, that while being subjected to British imperialism it underwent a surge in the middle of the last century, and that it suffered the consequences of the war with Chile.

From 1895 bureaucratic capitalism underwent three stages or moments, a process which still continues:

1. From 1895 until 1945, with its axis in the 1920s. This is the moment of Development of Bureaucratic Capitalism.

2. From 1945 until 1980, with its axis in the decade 1968-78 (1968 saw the fascist, corporativist State coup of Velascoxvi). This is the moment of the Deepening of Bureaucratic Capitalism. The Party established that the fascist State coup had three aims: first, the deepening of bureaucratic capitalism; second, the restructuring of Peruvian society; and third, to avert the Peruvian revolution. It is obvious that they could not quite crown their objectives. They laid down the basis, but their task was not accomplished. The best and most overwhelming proof of this is the initiation of the armed struggle in 1980.

3. Therefore, the 3rd Moment begins in 1980, and it is the stage of the Destruction of Bureaucratic Capitalism. This is the stage that we are going through today.

Bureaucratic capitalism is born sick and in a critical condition and today it is in general crisis, approaching its doom. But if one notes the process of each moment of its development, in synthesis, there are in two stages. For example, in its 1st Moment, there is a prologue expressed in a preparatory stage, and then during the 1920s, another stage when foundations are laid for the development of bureaucratic capitalism. Then comes a process of collapse, the intended development is not achieved, a crisis arises, and this crisis leads to further collapse. Historical facts show this to be the case.

In the 2nd Moment, the moment of the deepening of bureaucratic capitalism, we also have a prologue or preparatory stage, then the laying down of foundations and finally the arrival of the crisis which led to a greater collapse than the one which occurred at the end of the previous moment. From 1980 onwards, we are in the 3rd Moment, the moment of the destruction of bureaucratic capitalism. We have also experienced that prologue, a long and complicated preparation of conditions which leads us into the 1990s. Today they are laying the foundations for the application of neoliberalism. They blabber about «making a revolution», but just as in the two former historical moments of bureaucratic capitalism, in this 3rd Moment the laying down of foundations will necessary lead them to another crisis which in turn will generate an even greater collapse. In order to differentiate the second from the third historical moment, let us here point out that the former relied on the State as the main economic lever, while today they are aiming to enshrine non-State activity as the main lever of the economy. It is true that history shows that the laying down of foundations produces some results, but it also shows that it generates a deeper crisis. Therefore everything today demonstrates that in the third historical moment bureaucratic capitalism is in general crisis, ideologically, politically and economically. The current critical situation has deepened since 1974 and they have been unable to overcome the crisis. Politically, the State has become more corrupt: the President rules by decree abusing the powers granted by Article 211, Paragraph 20 of their Constitution. Parliament does not comply with legislating, its primary function, and the judicial power, which is ridiculed even by Fujimori and has no budget, is every day more subjected to the executive power. Besides, the laws, among which we have the recent Penal Code, introduce fascist regulations. Daily more signs of fascism appear and there are more fascist positions espoused on the ideological level. Like their imperialist masters, weighed down by their ideology which becomes more rotten everyday and lacking in perspective, they have no other choice but to raise banners from the 18th and early 19th centuries — such as liberalism. If, on the other hand, these banners were already dirty rags by the time of the 1st World War, as has already been demonstrated, then socialism really does represents the future. Meanwhile, capitalism is a corpse, and like so many corpses, needs to be buried.

Therefore, they are sinking deeper and deeper in their general crisis, ideologically politically and economically, and every day they are more and more being demolished by the people‘s war.

This government is in a situation that grows more difficult by the day, the most critical situation which Peruvian society has ever undergone and they will be unable to handle it. Any measures they may adopt cannot result in anything other than a transient respite and in general bankruptcy. The principal instrument of their demolition is the people‘s war based on the class struggle of the masses.

It is important to note the three historical moments of bureaucratic capitalism and their specific character, especially the character of the third. In this fashion we will understand why the three political tasks of Peruvian reaction and its masters, mainly U.S. imperialism (to reinvigorate bureaucratic capitalism, to restructure the State and to smash the people‘s war), cannot and will not be accomplished. Their accomplishment is an historical and political impossibility. Even the reactionaries themselves are saying, here the country and abroad, that Fujimori‘s government is not accomplishing a thing, that it instead goes from failure to failure. This is only a part of the truth since their difficulties are not only growing but are, of necessity, the embodiment of the bureaucratic road of the exploiters, the big bourgeoisie, the landowners and imperialism. This process is the embodiment of a law, a law which establishes that in its development bureaucratic capitalism serves the development and maturing of the revolution and that the revolution, with the development of the people‘s war, accelerates and grows more powerful, therefore bringing even closer the goal of the seizure of power in the whole country.

In this second part of the document, we must also consider the complementary local elections. Around this process an old song is been sung, venal pen-pushers are already prattling, but they can only fail by denying reality. Today, it is not only a question of the armed forces being the Grand Electors, it is a question of direct appointment of (local) authorities by the same armed forces. They will continue to act in accordance to the policies as laid down in their «Cangallo» document. The truth is already emerging. Yesterday they prattled about supposed democratic victories but today they recognize that more than 400 districts are without local authorities. Such is their democracy. On the other hand they are incapable of protecting their candidates, as in the case of those of the United Left in Ayacucho, and in Junín, where they have presented the ringleaders of the army-controlled militia as candidates.

Therefore, as is the case with these rotten systems, the elections are only an instrument for the continuation of the exploitation and the oppression of the people. That is why the tactic of the boycott sponsored by the Party is good. It develops the people‘s trend against elections and serves the development of the people‘s war.

In the third part of the document — «The Boycott Develops the People‘s Trend Against Elections and Serves the Development of the People‘s War» — we must focus upon the advances made to debunk the accusations made against us in 1989 and to stress the agreements of the 2nd Plenary Session of the Central Committee: That in 1990, the people‘s war gave us the great achievement of the open people‘s committees, and that in 1991 it gave us the strategic stalemate. Greet the strategic stalemate! That simple phrase has been sufficient to make the reactionaries and revisionists tremble and gnash their teeth. Most of them have yelled bloody murder and raised a big scandal, they have even set up ridiculous and bloody operations against us, massacring the masses, like they always do, in order to «show» that there is no such stalemate. Why? Because they are frightened since they perceive that their old order is going to perish and be buried. The words of the Party have never been proven wrong by reality. Everything we have proclaimed we have applied: We said we would initiate the armed struggle and we did so with the initiation of the armed struggle in 1980. Today we are entering the stage of the seizure of power in the whole country. We say that there is a strategic stalemate, and we specify its character. Let us point this out more clearly than ever: «A strategic stalemate and preparation of the counter-offensive means the enemy striving to recapture their lost positions in order to fortify their system and us striving to put the finishing touches for the strategic offensive by means of the Plan to Build the Conquest of Power Let us understand this clearly in order to handle it better every time. We think that this is a task we must deal with thoroughly in order to appreciate not merely what Chairman Mao teaches us in this respect, but to identify the specific way in which this manifests itself here in our country.

Also, let us highlight how the entire process of 11 years of people‘s war has brought us the 3rd Campaign to Impulse the Development of the Base Areas as a part of the Great Plan to Develop Bases with the Perspective of Building the Conquest of Power. The importance of this process is rooted in the fact that it crowns the Plan to Impulse and is therefore a link for a new plan. In synthesis, the accomplishment of this 3rd Campaign in May, June and July is something superb. Never before had the people‘s war reached so deeply nor raised its quality so highly, mainly in the countryside as well as in the cities as a complement. Every one of us must feel a deep satisfaction for having served whole-heartedly for such a transcendental task, regardless of the level of our participation. A few bricks joined together with others can make a solid wall. Let the traitors deny this victory. If they do so it is only because of their class interest and because they are paid to deny it, no matter how ill-paid they may be by Peruvian reaction and by imperialism. We are conscious of the truth of the reality in which we live. That is why we are able to see how in the Party, in the People‘s Guerrilla Army, in the new power and in the masses, the achievements of this epic people‘s war are so much in evidence.

Are there any signs of the echoes of this process of people‘s war? Yes. For example, for the first time the U.S. Senate has now debated the people‘s war in Peru. Therefore this process is reverberating in the very lair of world reaction. This is not the main sign but it is an important one. In this world there are some people who build air castles, for example, a genocidal traitor like Fujimori, executioners such as the Minister of the Interior General Malcaxvii, the Minister of Defense General Torres Aciegoxviii, dyed-in-the-wool pro-Yankees such as C. Boloña Behrxix, the Minister of Economy, or reptiles and careerists such as Bernales, Tapia, Gonzales, and so on. Individuals who, as thorough lackeys of imperialism and the ruling classes, dream of vanquishing the people‘s war by using its great advances in order to beg the «aid» of imperialism, mainly U.S. imperialism, and to defend their ultra-reactionary Peruvian State by obtaining from them their so-called «re-admission» into the world economy.

In the USA, the opening moves for next years elections are taking place. Bush is going after re-election. He has achieved a paltry success in the Middle East. That is sufficient for them although everybody knows well that he did not achieve his aims. We say this because a vile and bullying onslaught against a people can never be considered as an achievement, especially today when every struggle of the world‘s peoples for their liberation is a component part of the world revolution (we are conscious of the class limitations of Saddam Hussein). Nevertheless, such is what constitutes «success» for U.S. imperialism. Moreover, though they undertook that war in the Persian Gulf in order to give impetus to their economy it has not resulted in the new economic impulse they expected and their economy continues to experience serious problems regarding the economies of other imperialist powers, although this fact does not imply that they have ceased to be an imperialist superpower. Furthermore, Bush undertook to fight a war against drugs and in that field he is also having to confront his own people. This is because, just as in the case of the handling of his economic problems, where he raises taxes and reduces expenditure on social programs and clashes with the American people, in this field he also has to confront the poorest and most exploited sections, particularly the oppressed minorities. Hence he does not obtain any results on that account. Moreover, this struggle against drugs is closely linked with the fight against the people‘s war in Peru and to the class struggle in the Andean region and therefore it has its repercussions in U.S. political life. Therefore, we must grasp the fact that this affair would not end in September 1991. We refer here to the hold placed upon the so-called «U.S. aid». In that affair, in order to receive such «aid», the Peruvian government has to comply with the «anti-drug» treaty, a treaty stipulating in one of its parts, the need for respecting what they call «human rights», rights which are systematically violated by that same government. The people‘s war in Peru is therefore a tool for use in the electoral struggle of the USA, but the factor which interests us is that it has repercussions in their own Congress. Besides, all this is a contributing factor to the struggle of our comrades of the Revolutionary Communist Partyxx and of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movementxxi with whom, because of this fact, we are more united in waging a common campaign against imperialism, mainly against U.S. imperialism, under the slogan of «Yankees Go Home!». This is another example of the achievements and the echoes of the 3rd Campaign.

In the fourth section of the document — «Elections, No! People‘s War, Yes!» — the most important section, we set out our criterion for evaluating marxism today. We analyzed the fundamental theses of marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, in four different fields. This constitutes a reaffirmation of our principles and even contains a description in ascending order of importance of our outlook taken as a unity. The document gives a lesser part to Marx, a larger part to Lenin and another very much larger to Chairman Mao. This also demonstrates the development of maoism as a new, third and higher stage.

Let us a take as a first concept, one which is most apposite today: Upholding, defending and applying marxism-leninism-maoism is the decisive factor in order to develop the proletarian world revolution. to demolish imperialism and world reaction and to smash revisionism. This is the gist of the matter. In the 1960s it was held that maoism was the most powerful weapon, that it was our atomic bomb, a peerless weapon. Today we must become even more aware of the historical significance of marxism. We must become even more conscious of its invincible character — that marxism is all-powerful because is true. This is the decisive factor. Everything else depends on this factor, everything has its starting point here. If we deviate from maoism the revolution would be delayed even though our enemies would not succeed in averting it since marxism-leninism-maoism will assert itself anew to direct the revolution. We need maoism mainly and we need to raise its banner very high, even higher each time around. This necessitates defending maoism because it is not enough to uphold it. We raise flags in order to defend them, but the main thing is to apply maoism.

Why uphold, defend and apply marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism? In order to develop the proletarian world revolution. The main trend in the world is revolution. There is no future for humanity without the complete and total victory of the revolution realized as communism. Therefore the issue is to develop the world revolution. To develop the world revolution can only mean applying it, realizing it in practice. What has been said here today is a profound truth — how many we are is not the fundamental thing. The important question is if we want to carry it out or not. Yesterday, in 1848, Marx and Engels were but two people, today, 143 years later, we are millions throughout the world. Yesterday we had nothing. Today we have two great historical experiences rich in lessons, experiences which are present, which are alive in us, in the proletariat and in the peoples. We must insist that the fact that there have been two restorations does not deny the fact that the revolution is the main trend. To deny this fact is a dark pipe dream of reactionaries because the proletarian world revolution continues to advance and we are a part of that advance. It is undeniable that the proletarian world revolution will demand the cost of bloodshed, but what does not demand the cost of blood in this world? We ourselves would not be here without the lives sacrificed by so many communists and revolutionaries throughout the world.

We also need maoism in order to demolish imperialism and world reaction and to sweep them off the face of the Earth. The more slime they throw at us, the more they themselves will drown in their own quagmire and bury themselves even deeper while we will be their historical grave diggers. This great social purge is something inevitable.

We need maoism in order to smash revisionism. Imperialism and revisionism will together end on the garbage heap, but it is not possible to fight against imperialism without fighting against revisionism.

With total conviction and without the slightest doubt to worry us, let alone hamper us, we reaffirm for ourselves the decisive importance of maoism. The communists, the working class, the revolutionary people, are optimists. Nothing can stop us.

And all this leads us to defeating the generalized counter-revolutionary offensive. This slogan must become our watchword.

A second concept is to put emphasis on a task we have agreed upon: To generate favorable public opinion and to launch deep ideological work among the masses. Let‘s implement this task with great speed and firm decision. Marxism has taught us how to make propaganda work. The words of Marx have borne powerful fruit in the whole world, read in nearly every language. Lenin taught us that the time that elapses between sowing and reaping in propaganda work is unimportant and that propaganda always gives magnificent fruit. Chairman Mao pointed out that both reaction and revolution need to generate favorable public opinion. The reactionaries need to generate public opinion against the revolution and in favor of their continued exploitation. We need to generate favorable public opinion in order to seize power and to defend it with revolutionary violence. Without the winning of public opinion for the revolution there can be no seizure of power.

We have a great ideology, marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, the most powerful weapon in today‘s world, and we have its creative application, Gonzalo thought. Therefore let us arm minds, and each time do it better and more thoroughly. If one wins over the mind one is arming the hand. It is not accidental that our Party is characterized by its strength in the political sphere, and politics is nothing more than the concrete application of ideology in the struggle for the seizure of power.

Our ideology is being attacked today by everybody and in every aspect and these attacks are bound to grow stronger. But our enemies are afraid of facing us as they can‘t debate ideologically against marxism. The bourgeoisie‘s critique does not go beyond wild assertions and epithets without the slightest foundation, and this is simply because it doesn‘t have any. What arguments are they trotting out to confront marxism-leninism-maoism with? The new ideologues of the bourgeoisie are but candles in the wind. For example, let‘s take Fukuyamaxxii, who appeared on the scene as a bright light. He shone for a brief moment and has already faded from view, like the smoke of a cheap cigar. Fukuyama denied historical development by claiming that all ideologies, specially the ideology of the proletariat, had become obsolete. Nevertheless, Fukuyama excluded the ideology of the bourgeoisie from this fate, basing himself in a supposed final victory and purported eternity of imperialism as an economic and political system. But, spurred on by the class struggle, history and ideologies continue to do battle and it has been the job of history itself to evaporate his pipe dreams. The class ideologies continue to fight, be it in the guise of Islamic fundamentalism with its religious outlook or as neo-liberals, neo-positivist and fascists as the expression of bourgeois ideology on the one hand, and fundamentally us, the communists, with our scientific ideology marxism-leninism-maoism on the other hand, as we are doing here with the people‘s war in Peru which is directed by the Communist Party. Once again, as is always the case, the wind promptly blows away the pseudo-theoretical dreams and rantings of the bourgeoisie.

Lately, they have returned to Joseph de Maistrexxiii and that is truly a ridiculous situation in which to find themselves. Even Uslar Pietrixxiv, a man decorated by the King of Spain, has recounted how de Maistre was the enemy of all progressives. How could it had been otherwise, since he was a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of the Pope and the reactionary and obscurantist Church! Therefore the bourgeoisie is taking cover behind the most ultra-reactionary of their «theoreticians». But this process is nothing but the further reinfection of a rotten carcass and it is obvious that the bourgeoisie and reaction in general lack any fresh blood to reinvigorate their ideological corpse. They merely have recourse to poisonous substances which can only hasten their ideological putrefaction.

And now, how should we respond to their ideological attacks? We must unmask them thoroughly, dispossess them of their false and stinking flags, confront them with marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, applied to the concrete reality. Marxism is the only true, scientific ideology. It can move mountains and transform the world by standing it upright and not on its head, as does idealism. Marx held that philosophy had been enchained, expropriated from the masses and bogged down in dusty webs of complicated words in order to hide it from the people. We must free philosophy and deliver it back to the masses. We must use our own ideology in order to powerfully mobilize the masses: the generation of favorable public opinion is a question of mobilizing the masses in order for the masses themselves to become propagandists and agitators. Let us develop a massive movement to educate the masses in marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, and Gonzalo thought. Since the time of Marx we have been taught this need and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is the most vivid and greatest example of mobilizing the masses with marxist-leninist-maoist ideology in order to continue the construction of socialism under the dictatorship of the proletariat, in order to continue the revolution and to impede the usurpation of its fruits, thus defending the revolution. Therefore, let us mobilize the masses in a deep and boundless theoretical and ideological movement of marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought ideas. Let us free them from that feudal, pro-imperialist bourgeois pile of garbage which makes them see the world upside down, standing on its head. Let us free philosophy from the bookshelves, from the voluminous tomes, from the false academic centers and carry it to the masses, to the day-to-day class struggle, to the people. The soul has been taken from the masses, therefore our task is to restore it to them so that they would not let themselves be fooled any longer. Philosophy and science are not for the elite but for the masses. Today the masses are more and more imbued with dialectics, but they must become conscious of this fact. They must consciously apply the laws of dialectics. They must use the law of contradiction with full knowledge of its implications. They must apply dialectics in the management of nature, of society, of ideas. The masses are capable of doing this because the masses are the makers of history, the creators of everything. Moreover, we must not forget that practice is the source of knowledge, that humanity is fundamentally an agent of change and that humanity, in its daily social practice, implements transformations and in the midst of them, learns and acquires knowledge. We must not forge that this knowledge acquired in practice is again returned to practice and in this process generates changes, developments, advances and transformations and, since everything bears a class imprint, humanity‘s practice, its knowledge and its transformations will also bear a class imprint, that is to say, knowledge and transformations in favor of or against the proletariat and the people. Practice is the source of knowledge, it is the transforming historical action of the masses of humanity. The masses, by means of their social practice within a concrete historical moment, equip their minds with the ideas which correspond to that concrete historical moment and therefore arm their hands in order to accomplish the tasks prescribed by history. Studying is also an indispensable complement of the process. Humanity is action within and in relation to a class and therefore it generates ideas. This constitutes ideology. Humanity‘s organized action is social transformation, advancement for the majorities. Engels teaches us to hammer home ideas with actions and this is a method which we have been applying in the Party since the 1970s. We should persist in this.

Moreover, how should we arm the masses with the ideology and practice of marxism-leninism-maoism, Gonzalo thought? The masses, taking into account the level of popularization and the elevation to new levels of knowledge, equip themselves ideologically from the standpoint of their concrete problems in the three fields: ideological, political and economic. Let us take up the lessons of the rectification campaign of the 1st Plenary Session of the Central Committee and, taking into account the popularization and the elevation of level, distinguish between directors and cadres on the one hand and ordinary Party members on the other, differentiate the Party‘s organizations: the Party, which has a concrete membership, the People‘s Guerrilla Army, and its generated organizations. Also, let‘s differentiate between the mass organizations fighting alongside us.

Let us take into account that, among other advantages, reaction has many means of information at its disposal, including a whole system of advanced media, newspapers, magazines, radios, television, and so on. We do not have these means, but we can count on one resource which is incomparably more powerful — that the masses are the makers of history. Knowledge is generated by practice and practice is the product of the masses.

We have held that the masses must be turned into propagandists and agitators, that the masses must themselves fight and resist and that all these tasks they know how to carry out. They have always done it and therefore it would not be anything extraordinary for them to do it now. Which system shall we apply? From mouth to ear. The first instrument we have is the spoken word. This is a means which allows us to reach the deepest and profoundest layers of the masses. It allows us a more flexible approach since we can adapt the spoken word to the concrete conditions of the audience, be it an audience of peasants, workers, students, intellectuals, soldiers, businesspeople, and so on. This is a more flexible, more tactical method, always of course within a general strategy. Let us also employ the written word. We do not only fight with swords but also fight with pens. Let us use a clear and simple language. Let us use graphics. These are very good, for example for the illiterate peasantry. Let us use all modern means that we can get our hands on, without forgetting that from among all these means, the main one is the spoken word, since is the one which is most directly within the reach of the masses of the people.

Let us repeat, we serve the masses, we handle the word and it doesn‘t cost us a penny, therefore we have the tactical capacity. For example, let us promote the expression of complaints against oppression. For that the only thing that is needed is a group of people who would recount their experiences of growing oppression and exploitation. If one person begins another follows and everyone will feel the strength of their own capacity to explode in anger. This spurs the people and moves them to action against the sources of exploitation and against the oppressors. It promotes the expression of complaints in many different groups and places. The word of one person joins the word of others and acquires the force of a hurricane. One person alone is weak, but together people constitute a great force. Another form of written mass propaganda are the big-character posters. Chairman Mao taught that these were instruments of democracy and that to use them the masses didn‘t even need paper, they can use the walls, plaster, charcoal, paint if available. Write big characters, simple slogans that say what is wanted, what forms of struggle to apply, which are the positive experiences, which are the negative ones, let the masses judge their own leaders. In this way the democracy of the masses expresses itself, a democracy totally opposed to the trumpeted bourgeois democracy which is actually not for the people but for those who rule and exploit them. The power of the thinking and acting masses is inexhaustible. They contribute in every field — political, military, economic, artistic, scientific. Let us develop people‘s democracy more and more again every time. Let the masses debate the plans and judge their implementation as it is done in the People‘s Guerrilla Army. In this way a higher understanding, a greater unity and a more powerful action is achieved. Let the masses, also by means of democracy, give vent to their capacity as agitators and propagandists.

But a great and massive ideological movement needs the Party as the directing force, because the Party is the most conscious part of such a movement since it knows, handles and applies the ideology, marxism-leninism-maoism, Gonzalo thought, the laws which guide the revolution and its politics, that is, the laws of the class struggle for the seizure of power and the people‘s war as the main form of struggle. Without the Party the masses would be unable even to equip themselves with a plan. We know that a plan is an ideology, and the Party‘s plan is a marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought plan. Once the plan is made the Party must mobilize diverse organizational apparatuses, because a policy cannot be carried out without an organizational form which can embody it, be it the Party apparatuses, the Army, the generated organizations, the organs of power or the organizations generated by the low and deep masses. Then the masses would be able to realize that great ideological mobilization to uphold, defend and apply marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism as a universal truth and Gonzalo thought as specifically main for us, in its character as a creative application to our reality. And then let the armed actions hammer home those ideas.

Thus only the Communist Party can direct this great process of mass propaganda and agitation. Chairman Mao taught us: «Under the directorship of the Communist Party, as long as there are people, every kind of miracle can be performed.»xxv


Here today we are implementing the agreements of the 2nd Plenary Session of the Central Committee. Our duty was to carry out the rectification campaign, and the duty of the membership, the Party members, fighters, activists or masses, was to put all this into practice. We are now about to crown this task and therefore we had to individually and collectively study the document «Elections, No! People‘s War, Yes!», and we had to debate it and apply it.

From what has been said before we can see the objections to the contributions presented. The main problem is how to apply the study of the document to today‘s political situation. We communists learn to study in order to apply, otherwise we would be merely intellectuals and would not be using marxism to resolve burning questions. Studying in the abstract is something metaphysical, idealistic, bourgeois. We are not pragmatists either. We don‘t study simply with a utilitarian purpose such as the imperialists or vulgar mechanical thinkers. We study theory in order to apply it in practice and to transform a given reality, in order to change the world for the benefit of the working class and the people. Therefore this is a problem of application and it could be dealt with on three different levels.


On this topic the question is straight-forward and the document outlines for us the burning problems of today‘s marxism: revolutionary violence, class struggle, socialism and proletarian dictatorship, and the struggle against revisionism. Of these four, socialism and the dictatorship of the proletariat is the main topic. On this question the issue is maoism as a new, third and higher stage, marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly maoism, because with such an ideology we shall «storm heaven». In this lies the value of the document, a document which reaffirms marxism and holds that to be a marxist today means to be a marxist-leninist-maoist, mainly a maoist. The document shows a clear understanding on the question of maoism as a new, third and higher stage with universal validity, for the communists, for the proletariat and for the peoples of the whole world. That is its decisive point. Therefore our standpoint is rooted in maoism and, as the Congress has pointed in one of its historic resolutions, the main contribution of Gonzalo thought is to have developed the definition of maoism as a new, third and higher stage of marxism.


Here the main issue is that the document serves for the building of the new State being implemented by means of the people‘s war, through the People‘s Guerrilla Army and under the directorship of the Communist Party, while basing it on the masses which constitute the people. In the document we can find very valuable points which we must apply today in the new State.


Each one of us is duty-bound to grasp and embody the document in order to better serve the revolution. Under this topic, the direct concerns of those present here are the questions of art and the questions of the role of intellectuals, and the answer is to always put politics in command. Every study of marxism shakes up people and the contradiction between the two world outlooks comes to the fore. Marxism gives hammer-blows to the non-proletarian outlook and fuels the ideological forge. As in every task, three stages, each with its own contradiction, present themselves. At the beginning arises the contradiction between starting the study and not starting it. Starting-up already constitutes a 50% advance. Later, during the stage of development, the contradiction between carrying it through and leaving it half-baked arises. That represents another struggle and, in our case here, the question of leaving this task for another did actually arise. That issue even became a heavy burden for some people and that was a bad thing as it meant permitting the old, the bourgeois attitude, to take charge. We held discussions and as a result we agreed to crown this task as a priority using shock methods. This is a very useful method, a component part of the marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought style of work. It consists of concentrating all our energies in accomplishing the unfinished task, stretching our time until the task is completed, just as when we apply forced marching when the enemy is hot on our heels. In this way we pass the point of no return and do not let them catch up with us. When studying it is something similar and we do not allow the bourgeois outlook, which is present and contending inside our own minds, to defeat the proletarian one. On the contrary, with this new ideology which we represent, we defeat the idealist, the bourgeois enemy which is alien to the working-class outlook Therefore there arises the resistance which the old ideas present and each one of us does battle consciously and voluntarily inside our own minds until we overcome such internal resistance. The old ideas say: how are you to leave behind that which has sustained you for so many years? The old ideas always make us see rotten weeds as if they were beautiful roses and thus the will is weakened. The shock method helps to overcome such resistance.

In the third stage, at the crowning moment, there also arises a contradiction for or against the completion of the task and the struggle continues until there is a decision for crowning it and until the task is actually fulfilled. Having completed the study already constitutes a qualitative leap, and the shock method has been a good instrument in contributing to the culminating leap.

You have accomplished the task of rectification. This is nothing but a means of developing the two-line struggle in order to adjust us to the proletarian ideology.

How much have we advanced?. From lack of knowledge of what had been outlined in the document to a study and a debate which has enabled us to be equipped with the marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought outlook about four fundamental and burning problems of today‘s marxism. From the contributions that have been expressed here we can conclude that the lessons learned are being applied to today‘s issues.

The task has been accomplished and has generated a qualitative leap and an adjustment to the four fundamental issues of today‘s marxism.

Finally, it is good to emphasize that the document constitutes a serious contribution to the marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought counter-offensive in the face of the converging counter-revolutionary revisionist and imperialist offensives. It also constitutes today a serious contribution for the struggle against the generalized counter-revolutionary offensive. Therefore in arming ourselves with the teachings of the document we are serving the Peruvian revolution and the proletarian world revolution. It is true that there is no such thing as a completely finished question since all knowledge, being in itself a part of matter, is necessarily relative and needs development. But this knowledge corresponds with marxism-leninism-maoism, mainly with maoism and therein we find its value. Besides, it corresponds with the outlook of Gonzalo thought. Therefore it is marxist-leninist-maoist, Gonzalo thought knowledge.


1. This meeting is very good, the work has been advanced. Let‘s earnestly undertake study while under conditions of war. It is a helpful tool for the better handling of the war. Studying has prepared the conditions for a higher qualitative leap which reflects itself in practice.

2. While summing up the first contributions we dealt with the question of the contradiction between analysis and synthesis while studying, noting that the first contributions were focusing on analysis. But now, after the subsequent contributions, synthesis has been achieved in this very place and time and the gist of the question has been grasped: to take position in support of maoism.

The qualitative leap which had been prepared for became a reality. The limitations of the study were the lack of sufficient synthesis, but it did lay down the conditions for the qualitative leap. If one is capable of grasping analysis and synthesis studying becomes something more powerful and thorough and therefore the essence is grasped and the qualitative leap takes place.

3. Marxism has been grasped in four fundamental and burning issues.

4. The study is undertaken in order to apply it to today‘s class struggle. We seek means of opening avenues to fight on the battleground of living problems. One must bear in mind the prospects and not merely remain with what is written in the document.

5. This meeting is helpful for the maturing of certain problems which occur throughout the whole Party. Therefore our actions here are helpful to all other comrades in that they give us experience. For example, the shock tactics as an instrument for the completion of studying in the rectification campaign is something very useful for the whole Party.

6. We must understand better the specific political task linked to the building of the new power by means of the people‘s war and to the prospect of the seizure of power country-wide. That is, of course, something necessary, but it has to be linked to its specific application here, which is to be artists and intellectuals. Therefore you must guide yourselves by the slogan of «serving the people and following the directorship of the Party».

7. How much have you advanced?. You have undergone a qualitative leap while practicing an intense and systematic study taking on living issues. There is now a higher understanding of what marxism-leninism-maoism is and of the need of upholding, defending and applying it in order to totally transform Peruvian society and to serve the world revolution.

8. If there is a qualitative leap, how should we consolidate the new qualitative leap?. And, how should we develop the new qualitative leap?. How to consolidate and how to develop the qualitative leap are two issues which relate to the question of serving the Party better and more thoroughly, two issues which relate to the question of serving better and more thoroughly the revolution in Peru and the proletarian world revolution, of serving the cause of the whole of humanity‘s emancipation, to the question of the march towards communism.

We propose to continue with «Karl Marx»xxvi by V. I. Lenin in order to further our ideological formation and with the Reports of the 2nd Plenary Session of the Central Committee in order to further our political formation.

The effort that has been displayed is very good. We congratulate each and every one of us.

i Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) was a German philosopher and the founder of the system of Hegelian philosophy, or dialectical idealism, at the core of which lay the method of dialectics. Hegel developed the dialectical method, which had its origins in Ancient Greece, to its highest point, which became the basis for the Marxian dialectic — dialectical materialism.

ii Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev (1894-1971) was the 1st Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1953 to 1964. After Comrade Stalin‘s death in 1953, Khrushchev maneuvered himself into power by allying himself with Georgy Zhukov, Marshal of the Red Army, and executed or purged many of Stalin‘s supporters. At the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956, Khrushchev attacked Stalin heavily in order to discredit the socialist system, and at the 22nd Congress in 1961, he systematically revised the fundamental principles of marxism. Khrushchev‘s variant of revisionism became extremely prevalent in the international communist movement and most countries today still have a Khrushchevite political party.

iii Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-) is a Russian social-democratic politician who was the leader of the Soviet Union from 1985 until its dissolution in 1991. Gorbachev continued Khrushchev‘s variant of revisionism and granted more economic and political power to the non-State-monopoly bourgeoisie in the Soviet Union, headed by Boris Yeltsin, which eventually seized the chance to carry out a State coup, dissolving the Union of Socialist Council Republics on 25.12.1991.

iv Deng Xiaoping (1904-97) was a Chinese revisionist politician who, after the victory of the new-democratic revolution in China in 1949, worked under Liu Shaoqi‘s leadership to restore capitalism in China and to turn it into an imperialist power. He was condemned during the Cultural Revolution, rehabilitated after a sham self-criticism in 1973, then condemned again in 1976 after ordering workers to be shot for protesting. He then carried out a counter-revolutionary State coup in October 1976, one month after Mao Zedong‘s death, against Mao‘s comrade and wife, Jiang Qing, and other comrades such as Zhang Chunqiao. After a brief period in which the revisionist Hua Guofeng formally ruled China, Deng took over officially, formally ending the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and initiating a period of «opening up» and «market reforms», through which the Chinese State-monopoly bourgeoisie managed to strengthen its own economic and political power, avoiding a collapse of social-fascism like in the Soviet Union. Deng Xiaoping‘s rule saw China develop from a powerful socialist country into a social-imperialist power, which today has become a social-imperialist superpower.

v Perestroika (meaning «reconstruction») was a political movement in the social-imperialist Soviet Union launched by Mikhail Gorbachev in connection with his concept of Glasnost (meaning «openness»). These two policies directly led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

vi Alberto Fujimori (1938-) — Elected President of Peru in 1990 and served as its fascist dictator from 1992 to 2000 following a self-coup. Under his directorship, the Peruvian reactionaries managed to defeat the people‘s war in Peru with the assistance of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the help of traitors inside the Communist Party of Peru. He is currently imprisoned in the concentration camp on the Callao Naval Base in Lima alongside Vlademiro Montesinos, former head of the Peruvian secret police, Víctor Polay, former head of the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement and several former members of the Communist Party of Peru.

vii Cambio 90 — The political party for which Alberto Fujimori ran for President of Peru in 1990. See Note 6.

viii The American People‘s Revolutionary Alliance is a social-democratic party in Peru. It was originally founded by Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre in 1924, based on the idea of a class front, similar to the Guomindang in China. It was fought by J. C. Mariátegui who established the need for an independent proletarian political party in Peru. Later, the APRA developed as a social-fascist party. Under the leadership of Alan García Pérez, President of Peru from 1985 to 1990 and again from 2006 to 2011, it was responsible for the massacres against the prisoners of war and political prisoners in the Peruvian concentration camps, which took place in 1985 and 1986.

ix The United Left was a «coalition party» formed by various revisionist groups in Peru, including the «Unified Mariáteguist Party», in 1980. It was dissolved in 1995.

x The Socialist Left was a «coalition party» formed by three political parties which left the United Left in 1989. It was later dissolved.

xi Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonssøn Quisling (1887-1945) was a Norwegian military officer, politician and Nazi-German collaborator, who headed the German colonial puppet government in Norway from 1942 to 1945. In 1945, he was executed for high treason. His name has become synonymous with the worst kind of treason and betrayal.

xii Fernando Terry Belaúnde (1912-2002) was the President of Peru from 1963 to 1968, when he was deposed by General Velasco‘s State coup, and again from 1980 to 1985.

xiii See Note 8.

xiv This refers to the massacre of prisoners of war and political prisoners at three Peruvian concentration camps on 19.06.1986 on the order of fascist Peruvian President Alan García. More than 300 comrades and colleagues were murdered. This was documented in the pamphlet «Day of Heroism: 3rd Anniversary», published by the Peruvian People‘s Aid in June 1989.

xv The patrols, or rondas, were reactionary militias set up by the Armed Forces of Peru in order to pit the people against each other. Often, peasants and shantytown dwellers were forces into these patrols at bayonet point. The Communist Party of Peru fought hard to dissolve these patrols, for example through exercising red terror against those who participated actively in them.

xvi Juan Velasco (1910-77) was the fascist military dictator of Peru from 1968 to 1975. Under his rule, bureaucratic-comprador capitalism was strengthened through a series of reforms which evolved the semi-feudal Peruvian agriculture into a corporative system of peasant «cooperatives» under State control. Velasco portrayed himself as a «socialist» and a «revolutionary» and was falsely viewed as a «national-bourgeois» leader by the Peruvian revisionists.

xvii Víctor Manuel Malca Villanueva (1933-2015) was a Peruvian General who served as Minister of the Interior and Defense under Alberto Fujimori.

xviii Jorge Torres Aciego (1927-99) was a Peruvian General who served as Minister of Defense during the first year of Alberto Fujimori‘s Presidency.

xix Carlos Boloña Behr (1950-2018) was a Peruvian economist and politican who served as Minister of Economy and Finance from 1991 to 1993 under Alberto Fujimori.

xx The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA is a revisionist political party in the United States of America. Founded in 1975 after a period of preparatory work by the Revolutionary Union in San Francisco, it initially represented the refounding of the Communist Party of the USA, which had been totally taken over by revisionists and reactionary agents of the Yankee State. It is headed by Bob Avakian. During the 1980s, struggles took place between the Communist Party of Peru and the Revolutionary Communist Party over how to conceive of maoism — as a new stage of marxism or simply as «Mao Zedong thought». Avakian conceded in 1993 in words only. He then began promoting his own revisionist line while lending his prestige to give legitimacy to the 2nd Right-opportunist line in Peru, which had emerged against the people‘s war. Avakian‘s revisionism became dominant within the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement after the year 2000 and played a large role in its eventual collapse.

xxi The Revolutionary Internationalist Movement was an international organization of communist parties and organizations, which was founded in Paris in 1984 at the 2nd International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations. Before, the 1st International Conference had been held in 1980, at which 13 parties and organizations issued a Declaration «To the Marxist-Leninists, the Workers and the Oppressed». At its founding, the RIM adopted a Declaration. The Communist Party of Peru joined it shortly thereafter, pointing out several key problems in the RIM which would have to be overcome (see Abimael «Gonzalo» Guzmán: «Bases of Discussion for the General Political Line of the Communist Party of Peru», January 1988). On 26.12.1993, the RIM issued the declaration «Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!», proclaiming maoism to be the new, third and higher stage of marxism as defined and synthesized by Comrade Gonzalo. On 01.01.2000, the RIM issued the declaration «For a Century of People‘s Wars!», which proclaimed the universal validity of the strategy and tactics of people‘s war. However, inside the RIM, several factions had emerged. The Left was centered in the Peru People‘s Movement, the organization generated by the Communist Party of Peru for the Party work abroad. The Center included some different parties and organizations supporting the Communist Party of Peru. The Right consisted of several factions: One headed by Bob Avakian of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, one headed by Miriam of the 2nd Right-opportunist line in Peru, and one headed by Prachanda of the Communist Party of Nep al (Maoist). These three revisionist factions colluded and contended in order to split apart the RIM and cause its collapse. The Left, due to problems of dogmatism, did not manage to win over the Center-Right (the vast majority of RIM members) and the organization thus collapsed. It was formally dissolved in 2012.

xxii Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama (1952-) is an American political writer and economist. He became briefly famous in the early 1990s when he argued — mainly in his book «The End of History and the Last Man» (1992) — that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the world-wide spread of U.S. imperialist domination would lead to a world of eternal peace. His positions were openly disproven by the Yugoslav and Gulf Wars and he has since been considered a washed-up pseudo-philosopher, even by bourgeois contemporaries.

xxiii Joseph Marie, comte de Maistre (1753-1821) was a reactionary, restorationist French philosopher, lawyer and diplomat, who played a key role in ideologically legitimizing the restoration of feudalism in France following Napoléon‘s defeat in 1815.

xxiv Arturo Uslar Pietri (1906-2001) was a Venezuelan propagandist who played a prominent role in reactionary politics in Venezuela prior to the State coup directed by Hugo Chávez.

xxv Mao Zedong: «The Bankruptcy of the Idealist Conception of History» (16.09.1949)

xxvi See V. I. Lenin: «Karl Marx» (1914)