Philippine Maoists show their true color: enemy of the proletarian revolution

Bayan Muna has become Bayad (Pay or Bribe) Muna (First)

-its the same history that fucks the world, and misnomer the ideal of true communism!

-its the same that made people mad in Russia and organized Kronstadt.

-its the same that believes that "socialism is possible in one country"

-its the same who destroyed the CNT-FAI and the POUM to pursue its political agenda.

-its the same who purged politicians and the masses in the late 30's.

-its the same who, like the famine in Ukraine, and the mistakes of the Great Leap Forward-Cultural Revolution, also kills its own people in Democratic Kampuchea!

-it is the same with Operation MIssing Link and Kampanyang Ahos.

-IT IS THE SAME WHO CLAIMS ITSELF THE (sole) VANGUARD PARTY OF THE PEOPLE!!!

Since its formation Bayan Muna is a maoist "legal front" for reformism.

Wow! I"C"C you now have something in common with the rabid anti-communist Etta Rosales and the SocDem and the fascist toy soldiers of the the Government of the Republic of the Philippines: RED BAITING. Thanks for revealing to the whole world your true colors.

Koalisyong Makabayan is not communist. However, the military and the socdems adamantly say so. It should be noted that complementing their red baiting campaign against members of progressive organizations is the extrajudicial killings of activists and leaders. So this is the contribution of your puny internet group in advancing the cause of proletarian revolution in the Philippines? Congratulations.

Whats progressive about the Maoists enrolling peasants and workers to fight other peasants and workers in a different uniform under a so called 'peoples war'? Whats progressive about a so-called 'Communist Party' participating in bourgeois electoral politics?

It gets you nothing but stronger mystifications in bourgeois elections among the working class and a lot of dead peasants and workers. How progressive. Like the French PCF calling itself 'The Party of the 10,000 shot' after WWII- stepping over the corpses of martyred workers to take their place in national politics.

I'm no Maoists but if and when the revolution you guys seek takes place, won't the majority of the enemy soldiers, especially in the enlisted ranks, be workers and farmboys?

Yes, Koalisyong Makabayan, a legal front of the "Communist" Party of the Philippines is NOT communist, and so as the "C"PP. So, why you said that we are "red-baiting"?
The ICC has nothing in common with the anti-communist Etta Rosales (a former maoist in the 80s) of Akbayan, socdems and the state. But you are. You, Rosales, and the state all agree that the "Communist" Party of the Philippines is a "communist" organization.
The text exposes the truth that the "C"PP through its legal organizations participates in bourgeois elections and blatantly supports the big bourgeois party of the billionaire Manny Villar to "advance the protracted people'd war".
And by the way, do you really understand what is communism and communist revolution? Or you just believe whole-heartedly that a "national-democratic revolution" led by a "communist" party is a way to socialism and participating in bourgeois elections is one of its tactics?
You, Etta Rosales, and the reactionary state have the same understanding of "communism": STALINISM-MAOISM.
Lastly, while your group abhor Akbayan, you have many commonalities with it. And one of them is actively participating in reactionary elections.

As much as I am not a defensor of armed struggle as means by itself for advancing the socialist revolution (thus disagreeing with the methods of the maoists, be them philipine or latin-american), I must say that 'Sasha' has hit an interesting point that the ICC (and most of the orthodox marxist parties), tho being politically correct, fail to address.

Although perhaps the most important task of the revolutionaries is to unmask centrist and reformist political parties indeed, as well as their capitulations to national bourgeoisie, one must have clear in his mind that they are not the same as the bourgeois, that most of their militants, though wrong, are fierce and honest militants for social change. Mistakes and disagreements must be clearly stated, of course, but one must take great care in order to make clear, to the workers, peasants and left-wing militants (be they socialist or not) that it is a criticism different from that of the right and that in the end, these groups and militants, though criticized, are in a sense respected as adversaries, but not hated as enemies. Unless groups such as the ICC manage to overcome this problem, they will keep screaming and raging against such equivocate groups just as the right does, and yet will fail to win them over to true communist activism.

Watch out... as much as the so-called comunist parties have a big tarn in their names, saying that all those processess you mentioned (who have different levels of CP involvement and different CPs and contexts and correlations of force between the classes) are all the same is a dangerous step into abandoning marxism.

As much as liberalism is a bourgeois ideology, 1848 liberalism is different from the liberalism of the late 19th century, from the one of the 30s, and from, say, our times' neoliberalism. The name's the same but they are very different animals and one must take great care before making such broad statements.

Groups may be bourgeois (such as the CP's, Maoists, Trotskyists, etc) but their members are most likely all well meaning, militant and interested to do what they can. They want the same thing left communists and other parts of the proletarian political milieu want. However, the groups they are in are not what they think they are- revolutionary, working class, communist. The tactics, strategies, ideology and history of these groups puts them squarely in the service of the bourgeoisie.

If so, there you have an example of a very willing, hard-to-find audience for 'true' communist propaganda which is being wasted out because left communists cannot communicate properly with them and win them over.
Of course, this may in fact be due to other, political problems subjacent to left communists. If such isn't the case I propose a sincere challenge: win over these militants from their equivocate parties, comrades! And that is more easily done with argumentation than with rants about the eternal treason of all CPs.

PS:.Just to clarify, my 'Watch out' reply was a response to the 'History repeats itself!' post

If you are referencing this article when you say, "you'd do better with argumentation than with rants,"? Is this article a 'rant' in your opinion? I don't see it as such. Specific arguments are made against their behavior and why they are bourgeois (participation in elections, building relationships with other bourgeois parties etc).

Open and activist recruiting is not the answer. Aggressive mass recruitment is a goal of leftist (Trotskyists especially) factions who have no interest in the development of militants, only in having more bodies on their membership lists and sending them dues money. The ICC policy on membership is much different from that of leftist groups of all varieties, from Maoists and Trotskyists to liberals and social-democrats; where all that is required is that you send an application for membership and dues payments regularly. Your principles and revolutionary development are of little importance to them, it is alright if you don't agree with most of their programme, it's alright if you don't understand their ideas, it's alright if you don't participate in group functions, etc.

Sasha's "argument" is accusing us as "red-baiting" because we criticize and expose the policy of the "Communist" Party of the Philippines ("C"PP), in which obviously he/she belongs or perhaps a faithful symphatizer. His/her argument of "red-baiting" is because he/she believes that the "C"PP is a communist organization. Other than that argument, he/she did not reply in the gist of the article which at the very least elaborated that participating in bourgeois elections and allying the big big bourgeois parties in order to win are counter-revolutionary.

I think its him/her who made rantings in our article rather than proposing counter-arguments by simply dismissing the article as "red-baiting". Even rediculing us a "puny internet grouplet" as if he/she knows the dynamics of the activities of a communist organization.

Winning over the sincere militants within the counter-revolutionary organization like the "C"PP would only means exposing and critizing the practices of their organization harmful to the advancement of proletarian struggles not only in the Philippines but internationally. Also, encouraging these militants to debate within their own organization.

Now, here is the fact: the Philippine election last May 2010 triggered a debate within the Philippine maoist party. The small minority who are still loyal to maoism saw the policy of their leaders as "right opportunism". They even have an internet blog on this. But what is the reaction of their leaders of this "concern" maoists? The maoist leadership accuses them as "trotkyists", "senderistas" (in Peru) and even state agents! And even threaten them for grave punishment for making public their criticism!

With that kind of attitude, its not surprising that these maoists despise any persons or organizations criticizing what they did. What the leftist organization want to their members is BLIND OBEDIENCE and LOYALTY to their leaders.

We hope that Sasha or any other readers will put forward arguments here defending that  participation in elections and allying with bourgeois parties are still part of the arsenals of "revolutionary tactics". And not just simply said that we are "red baiter" or "anti-communist" without any valid arguments.