MIM presents world's first translation of excerpts of Comrade Gonzalo's "Interview" into English:

Comrade Gonzalo speaks on Nicaragua, Cuba, bureaucrat capitalism, the nature of rulers in Peru

From MIM Notes 43, August 1, 1990 translated by MA10 The following is an excerpt from an interview conducted in 1989 by the Peruvian newspaper El Diario which supported the PCP and the people's war in Peru. This is the first in a two- part series; next month MIM Notes will publish Chairperson Gonzalo's discussion of the conditions for world revolution. Note: Where MIM translates "popular war," we should say "People's War" in Maoist idiom. Bureaucratic capitalism El Diario: Chairperson, what is the analysis of the PCP (Communist Party of Peru) on the process of the Peruvian state and where is it going? (p. 77) Gonzalo: We have an understanding of the contemporary Peruvian society, understood as that which began in 1895, we consider that from there began the process which we are living and we think there are three moments. The first moment in which were established bases for the (disentanglement) of bureaucratic capitalism; a second moment after the second world war because until then embraces the first, to go deeply into bureaucratic capitalism; this (deepening) of bureaucratic capital will mature the conditions for the revolution and with the beginning of the popular war, in 1980, we entered the third moment of general crisis of bureaucratic capitalism; the destruction of the contemporary Peruvian society because it historically lapsed/expired, consequently, what we see is its finale and that which fits is hard work, and combat, and a struggle to bury it. Diario: Why do you consider the thesis of bureaucratic capitalism fundamental? Gonzalo: We consider this thesis of Chairperson Mao Tse-tung key because without understanding it and acting on it, it isn't feasible to develop a democratic revolution without conceiving of its uninterrupted continuation as a socialist revolution. We understand that bureaucratic capitalism, which began to occur in Peru since (1895), in the three moments which we just sketched. We conceive of this form, on a semifeudal base and beneath a dominant imperialism develops a capitalism, a late capitalism, a capitalism which was born from feudalism and submitted to dominant imperialism. It is these conditions which generated that which Chairperson Mao Tse-tung designated bureaucratic capitalism. So, bureaucratic capitalism developed the large monopoly capitalism which controlled the economy of the country, capitalism made up of, as Chairperson Mao said, the large capital of the large landowners, of the comprador bourgeoisie and the large bankers; from here was generated the bureaucratic capitalism (tied up/reiterated) with feudalism, submitted to imperialism and monopoly, and this one must keep in mind, is monopoly. This capitalism reached a certain moment of evolution and combined with the power of the state and used the economic means of the state, utilized economic influence and this process generated another faction of the grand bourgeoisie, the bourgeois bureaucrat; in this way it will give a development of bureaucratic capitalism which is monopolistic... but this process will lead to generate conditions which mature the revolution; this is another important concept, speaking politically, which the Chairperson raised regarding bureaucratic capitalism. It is erroneous to consider that bureaucratic capitalism is the capitalism which the state develops with the economic means of production it has in its hands; it is erroneous, and doesnUt (agree) with the thesis of Chairperson Mao Tsetung. It would be enough to think this way, if bureaucratic capitalism was only the state, if this capitalist state was confiscated and the other, monopoly capitalism, wasn't, in whose hands would it be? In those of the reactionary of the grand bourgeoisie. Besides, politically we permit a differentiation with much clarity between the grand bourgeoisie and the national or middle bourgeoisie, and this we see as instrumental to understanding so as not to put ourselves at the tail of any of the factions of the grand bourgeoisie, nor of the comprador nor of the bureaucrats, which in Peru is what the revisionists and the opportunists have done and continue to do, decades of this sinister/left politics of labeling a faction of the grand bourgeoisie as national bourgeoisie, progressive and supportive. The comprehension of bureaucratic capitalism allows us to understand the difference, reiterated, between national bourgeoisie and grand bourgeoisie, and to understand the correct tactic which we must follow: precisely that which Maritegui established. For this we consider extremely important the thesis of bureaucratic capitalism. (p. 79) On Nicaragua Diario: What is your opinion of Nicaragua, what of Cuba? (p. 123) Gonzalo: I would like to reiterate that which I said in a conversation with friends on these problems. Nicaragua had an inconclusive revolution and its problem is that is didn't destroy the power of all the grand bourgeoisie, it was centered in antisomocismo, and I think this is a problem. A democratic revolution must remove the three mountains and here that wasnUt done. On the other hand, it developed within Cuban criticisms readjusted in recent times and this simply lead it to depend, in the final analysis, on the Soviet Union. How can we understand this? Because in the conversations between diplomatic representatives of the two superpowers is where... we see and act the situation of Nicaragua, like that of Afghanistan or that of the Middle East; they are all very symptomatic of the steps of progress and counterprogress that it is very coincidental with reunions and agreements of the superpowers the measures taken in Nicaragua, in its relationship with the contra. We think that Nicaragua, as well deserves this heroic country, to follow the correct road must develop the democratic revolution completely, and this will demand a popular war, it must break with the stick of command of the Soviet Union, assume in its hands its own destiny and defend its class independence and this demands a party, and obviously, to subject to the concept of the proletariat; otherwise continue being a pawn and this is lamentable. We think that this country has shown the sign of great combativeness and its historic destiny cannot continue without developing the revolution as corresponds with a party based in Marxism- Leninism-Maoism and a popular war, and develop itself independently without guardianship of anyone, and no-one, neither near nor far. On Cuba Of Cuba, I can only say this concretely, the game of a role in service to the Soviet Union is not only in Latin America, it is carried out in Angola for example, and in other places. Passed from one hand to another hand, from one owner to another; a process presented as an "exceptional case" to the Cubans themselves. Cuba has a high responsibility in America because it was a hope; but we must record well what happened in 1970, Fidel Castro said that the strategy of armed revolution had failed, looked to abandon it, to leave that which was it incentive and support. Douglas Brava left the front arguing that it wasn't the fault of the strategy but of the "Castro" tactic, but also unfortunately after Brava sought amnesty. We think these situations have generated many problems in America, but today these same criteria readjusted will be the voice of the social imperialist owner spread and presented as a new revolutionary development which will be concretized in Nicaragua. This is a falsehood. That which we must affirm, is that Latin America is already mature (enough) for popular war, and this is its road. Latin America has an important role to carry out, we donUt forget "backyard of the U.S." as the insolent imperialist yanqui continues to say. Latin America also has importance in the world, fulfilling the ideology of the proletariat, the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism, of forging communist parties and moving toward popular wars within the world revolution. Latin America at the end of the century will be more than 500 million people. We have many things which unite us and we must work together for closeness. I don't want to say that we will disentangle from the world revolution, because we will only fulfill our work as part of the world revolution; not enough with Latin America, communism is for all the world or for no- one. (p.125) Peru and the world revolution Diario: What is the contribution of the Communist Party of Peru to the world revolution? Gonzalo: The principal contribution is to (plan/outline/carry out) Maoism, as the new, third and superior stage of Marxism; we assumed serving and contributing what this ideology constitutes in commanding and guiding the world revolution. The question derived from this is to show the strength, the transcendental perspective of Maoism. Also to show that it principally supports the proper efforts, without continuing the staff of command of the superpower, nor any imperialist power, it's possible to make the revolution, and even that it's necessary to do it thus; and demonstrate the potential of popular war which is expressed in spite of all our limitations. And if it happens, we will be as some say a hope, that which implicated responsibility and will be a torch for the world revolution, an example which can serve other communists. In this way we are serving the world revolution. ___________________ Postcript by mc5: The most difficult point above is the one concerning bureaucrat capitalists. The context is the common revisionist practice of seeing state-capitalists as progressive or at least a certain wing of the bureaucratic capitalists as progressive. Gonzalo is not attributing a "progressive" role to state-capitalism the way many revisionists and "leftists" do. In seeking temporary allies in a national bourgeoisie, Gonzalo looks outside of the bureaucrat capitalist class.