on service de presse Savior sn
Vol’. 5,7 No. 3 January 20, 1967
JOHNSON ESCALATES THE WAR ANOTHER NOTCH
With its decision to escalate the war in Vietnam another notch by opening a drive in the Mekong Delta, the Johnson administration has discarded the last pretense that the U.S. armed forces constitute merely a supporting arm for the Saigon regime. The assault forces in this new area of war consist principally of American troops. They are being deployed in the way imperialist troops have always been deployed in campaigns to conquer a country and convert it into a colony.
The brazen way in which Johnson is now proceeding is due in part to the complete exposure of the lies and duplicity with which he has proceeded up to now. The "credibility gap" became all "gap" and no credibility. Having been utterly exposed, Johnson is now proceeding without bothering about "peace" offensives, wanting to drag Hanoi into "negotiations" and similar malarkey cooked up by public relations experts in the effort
New York, N. Y. 10010. HP
to sell the war to the American people. Johnson is in the position of the gangster caught; in a searchlight but who thinks he still has time to finish the holdup and make a get away if he operates fast-enough.
Johnson's boldness, however, is due primarily to his conviction that he has little to worry about from China, where. the Mao regime is undergoing an acute political crisis, and still less from the Soviet Union, where Khrushchev's heirs give every indication that they do not intend to open any kind of counterescalation that could cause the Pentagon to hesitate, still less to retreat.
The most serious blow to Johnson on the "credibility" front was dealt by Harrison E. Salisbury, an assistant managing editor of The New York Times, who, after eighteen months from the time he applied, was granted permission by the government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam to visit the country. As the representative of the most powerful and influential single capitalist newspaper in the United States if not the Western world, what he wrote was bound to have great influence among broad circles that have been hesitant about the war in Vietnam but not ready to move into opposition.
Salisbury's eyewitness accounts from Hanoi, verifying the fact that the U.S. has been bombing civilians -- assertions of the White House, State Department, Pentagon, U.S. field command and Saigon puppets to the contrary -- created a sensation in the United States. Washington really had been lying and Hanoi had been telling the truth!
Some of the administration spokesmen pushed the. line that Salisbury could not speak otherwise while. he was in Hanoi and while his dispatches were subject to censorship. They predicted that he would reveal “the truth" upon leaving the country.
Salisbury has now done this. On reaching Hong Kong, he wrote a series of long articles which at this writing (January 15) are still running in the New York Times. They not only confirm everything he reported while in Hanoi, they reinforce his exposures. They in fact constitute a most interesting and valuable account that speaks decidely in favor of the Vietnamese people and their heroic struggle-against the military colossus that has invaded their country and inflicted indescribable horrors and suffering on then.
Besides offering his own tribute to their indomitable spirit, Salisbury cites the reactions of others. Among them, he quotes the observation of a "Communist visitor":
"Imagine! Their pilots get up at 4 A.M. They go out into rice paddies and work for three or four hours standing in cold water up to their hips. Then they come in and fly their planes against the Americans. I have never heard of such people."
With all the attendant publicity in other newspapers and over television and radio, the account provided by Salisbury is certain to be accepted by the great majority of Americans as an authentic account of what the Vietnamese are really like, how they feel and what their aims are. The image is one that is most appealing to the American imagination, a heroic, determined people fighting for their freedom against a monstrous ruthless bully. The result will be to considerably strengthen the antiwar movement in the United States and to win fresh adherents to it in circles that have as yet not moved into action.
A NEW PHASE IN THE POLITICAL CRISIS IN CHINA
By Joseph Hansen
The political crisis that has been shaking the Mao regime, appears to have entered a new phase, finally involving masses of workers in the plants. The conflict that began in the top circles of the ruling group has thus become extended further and further into the population as those in the leadership seek a definitive solution.
Sensational headlines, based on reports in wall bulletins put up primarily in Peking and relayed through consular attachés and Japanese correspondents, have appeared in the Western press. According to these sources, battles between the adherents of Mao and his opponents reached such sharpness in a number of cities, including Canton and Shanghai as to amount to “civil war."
These interpretations, however, have been discounted among the Western powers, conspicuously so in the case of the U.S. State Department which hopes to reduce its credibility gap by discounting speculation and sticking to hard facts in this instance.
One of the most striking features of the situation remains its obscurity. Although the crisis involves the key country in Asia and a quarter of the human race and weighs heavily in the immediate world situation through its effect on the course of American : escalation of the war in Southeast Asia, the real issues, as well as the true alignment of forces and the figures representing them can only be deduced.
This fact alone directly belies the image of intransigent Marxism which Mao seeks to present to the world. The main characteristic of Marxism is its effort to secure full consciousness of reality in order to be able to intervene correctly in changing it. This is impossible without adequate factual information.
In the current conflict access to the facts is deliberately barred. The press and radio in China is controlled by the Mao faction and it puts out only tendentious information. The opposition is barred from free presentation of its views. There are no free discussions or debates. ee
On top of this, such information as does pierce the curtain.of censorship is often highly contradictory. Leaders who are presented one day as sterling representatives of "Mao's thought," even entrusted with the most responsible ‘posts in defending, disseminating and advancing Mao's views, come under fire themselves sometimes almost as soon as their names have’ become familiar. Declarations that appear to be completely in the spirit of "Mao's thought" are shortly denounced as being a mere smokescreen intended to cover up the very opposite ‘of what’ the declarations: say.
The forces set in motion prove to be far from homégeneous! “Thus the Red Guard Movement, created as ‘the sword and shield of Mao, presently is found to contain contradictory currents so that reports appear of one sector of Red Guards being opposed to another. The same holds true in other areas, not excluding the armed forces.
An impression of confusion and even chaos is inevitably created abroad and it is probably not ‘far from the mark to conclude | that the confusion is even greater inside China itself.
Such a situation is characteristic of a blind factional struggle in which the programmatic differences have not yet come out into the open, or are deliberately kept bottled up, while the contending groups battle over what they are most interested in -power. The factional lines tend to form along false issues or exaggerated issues, and gossip, slander and vilification play an inordinate role. The most damning thing that can be said about both the two main groupings, the one around Mao and the other around Liu Shao-chi, is that both of them appear to be playing the same kind of game, neither of them seeking in the Leninist way to bring out the real programmatic issues.
If there is a difference in responsibility in this, the heaviest charge must be laid against Mao, for he is in position to change the way in which the factional struggle is being conducted.
A single instance will illustrate the point. The Maoists claim that the opposition is seeking to restore capitalism. If true, this is an exceedingly serious charge. Yet if an examination is made into the real import of the charge, it is seen at once that Mao is not referring to the capitalists still-remaining in China. In a study published in the current issue of the Harvard Business Review, Professor Barry M. Richman, a Canadian who visited China in the spring of 1966 and who was permitted. to make a survey of 38 factories in a wide range of industries in 11 major cities, estimated that there are still 400,000 capitalists in China. They are scattered throughout industry and occupy influential positions. In Shanghai about 30 to 35 percent of all textile enterprises and many retail stores are run by them. They draw five percent interest on their capital and high.salaries.
One of them, who was interviewed by Richman, picked him up in a new Jaguar and drove him to his luxurious home.
These capitalists, protected, fostered and even pampered by the regime, have not yet come under attack in the current crisis. On the contrary. They have been reassured that any shots falling in their direction are accidental or incidental.
The talk about "capitalist restoration" thus refers in reality to proposals or arguments in top circles of the bureaucracy either identical, or closely similar, to the proposals of Liberman in the Soviet Union to put individual plants on a "profitability" basis. It can be argued that in the long run this would tend to foster a capitalist restoration more quickly than other bureaucratic ways ‘of running the planned econony; but the immediate objective of those in the Soviet Union who advocate such a "reform" is to gain a greater voice for the technocrats in political decisions and along with it
more extensive privileges and greater security in their enjoyment. Other sectors of the bureaucracy, particularly those specializing in the manipulation of political power, understandably resist this pressure.
This is not debated openly in the Soviet Union due to the fact that all sectors of the bureaucracy are concerned about covering up the spécial privileges enjoyed by the bureaucracy as a whole. The debate thus swings around "efficiency."
Similar considerations appear to weigh heavily with the Mao regime although it is obvious that bureaucratic privileges in China are not nearly so gross as they are in the Soviet Union. Thus the argument there swings around whether or not such proposals signify the "restoration of capitalism."
Despite the secrecy and the confusion it is possible to peg the point where the current phase of the struggle opened.
It was made public with an editorial in the December 26 issue of the People's Daily stating that "a new upsurge of the great proletarian cultural revolution is rising in industrial and mining enterprises throughout the country."
According to the editorial, "great achievements" have been made in the past 17 years. "However, it should be noted that many of our industrial and mining enterprises, to various degrees, are seriously influenced by capitalism, revisionism and even feudalism in political ideology, organization, administration and the work of leadership. Such influences not only shackle the workers' revolutionary enthusiasm and hinder the development of the productive forces, but also breed the seeds of revisionism and are potential hot-beds of capitalist restoration."
As further described in this important editorial, "In some enterprises, in collaboration with the landiord, [the] rich peasant, [the]. counter-revolutionary and bad elements who have sneaked into the ranks of the workers, [that is] with bourgeois elements who have not reformed themselves sufficiently and [with] degenerated elements, a handful of people within the party who are in authority and have taken the capitalist road have doggedly opposed Chairman Mao's correct line and done their utmost to promote revisionist practices. They have been vainly attempting to lead the socialist enterprises onto the capitalist road."
Although the efforts of the "handful" have been in vain, "tens of millions of workers" are now rising up in defense of the correct line of Chairman Mao.
The editorial held out a perspective of electing "cultural revolutionary groups, committees or conferences" to represent the masses. "A system of general elections must be instituted in accordance with the principles of the Paris Commune,"
As yet there have been no indications that Mao really intends to institute a system of proletarian democracy such as that exemplified by the Paris Commune. The promise, however, certainly makes an attractive plank in the faction's platform whatever Mao's real aims are.
On December 27, the day after the editorial appeared, a Red Guard newspaper in Peking announced that the Federation of Trade Unions in China had been dissolved and its official organ suspended. Since the trade unions include 21,000,000 members, it was rather dubious that they had been dissolved with a stroke of the pen. More likely what is involved is the reorganization of the union. bureaucracy.
Thus, instead of a step toward the establishment of proletarian democracy along the lines of the Paris Commune, it appears that the actual objective in opening this new phase of the factional struggle was to strike at the mass base on which the Liu Shao-chi group stands. Since this meant the involvement of "tens of millions of workers," as the editorial in the People's Daily put it, it also signified a more spectacular and even more dangerous stage of struggle in which the final outcome remains to be seen.
It was following this aggressive move by the Mao-Lin group that clashes were reported between Red Guards and workers and between different sectors of workers in a series of cities.
As for the Communist party, it is torn by the conflict. Instead of holding the initiative, it occupies the strange position in a single-party system of apparently constituting the opposition party, as one acute observer has noted. Yet to become activated in. the struggle is the peasantry. This most powerful force is reflected primarily through the army. The next moves may therefore be made there. These could well prove decisive, bringing the struggle to its culmination.
OUSTER OF ADAM CLAYTON POWELL ANGERS BLACK AMERICANS
The new Congress which opened in Washington January 10 provided fresh evidence: the very first day on how well the two-party system serves the interests of the American capitalist system. Lacking any other means of registering dissatisfaction with the ruling party and. its war in Vietnam, voters in many areas turned to the Republicans in the elections last November. With strengthened forces, the. Republicans resumed their old game of setting up‘a coalition with the Southern Democrats to run Congress.
Their first action was to strike down Adam Clayton Powell, the Negro who has represented Harlem'for 22. years in the House of Representatives and who, through the operation of the unofficial seniority system in Congress, had become chairman of the House Education and: Labor Committee, a-prominent. congressional position and one that carries substantial: control of jobs, financial outlays and other "patronage."
On January 9 the Democrats met. in caucus to decide on nominations. It was this body that decided to remove Powell as chairman of the Education and Labor Committee and to nominate in his place the white liberal ‘Democrat Carl D. Perkins of Kentucky. The ~ following day the House voted 364 to 64 for a motion barring him from taking his seat in the new Congress while a committee conducts a five-week "investigation" of his qualifications. ;
The excuse used for this action was his alleged use of congressional funds for personal travels. How flimsy the pretext was can be judged from the fact that this is a common practice among congressmen. Other irregularities have been charged against him such as failure to pay sufficient atterition to his legislative duties and _ Seeking to. get around a court judgment:.in a defamation suit.
. The truth is that Powell, if anything, stands on a somewhat higher level than most congressmen. His. remissnéess in office is around average. His real "crime" is that he is not white.
A ruthless campaign has been waged against him for a numbér. of ‘years in the press and other media, full advantage being taken of his faults and foibles and especially the $164,000 lawsuit against him which has. taken dramatic turns as the lawyers sought to trap him when he visited. his district’ and his church’ in Harlem.
Those who did the knife job on him in- Congress had two aims. One was to get their hands on the patronage that went with the chairmanship of the powerful committee he headed. The other was to strike a blow at "black power" aspirations by removing a leading representative of the Negro community from such a prominent position in Congress. In the calculation:of the leaders of the two-party system, the biow struck at: Adam Clayton Powell is a slap in the face to all the black voters.
Actually Powell has not been an.advocate of "black power" although he has made a few equivocal statements in this direction. His career has been in the Democratic machine -- and even-against the wishes of some of the New York political bosses: who would’ have preferred. someone less inclined to cut his own swath. Various efforts have been made to defeat him'in Harlem. but- each time’ Powell has managed to survive due to his. popularity among the masses.
The liberals of the Democratic party played the most reacherous role in the move against Powell. This’ is affirmed by the country's leading liberal Democratic newspaper , the New York Post. "The liberals got him, of course; they exist for the dirty jobs," wrote Murray Kempton in the January 11 igsue.
The reaction in Harlem and other black ghettos was an angry one. The January 12 New York Times quoted David Henderson, an 18-year-old bank teller as saying:
"When you're black you stand out. They unseated Adam to show black people that they're not as big as they think they are. I hope we put him back where he belongs -by rebellion, strength. I'm all for violence, any shape any form if this is what it takes to get. him back:" | :
The same paper also quoted Mrs. Iucille.Lanclos, a 70-year-old woman: "You got to stick with him through the thick and thin. All they want us to be is porters and scrubwomen. He's a black.man so they don't want him to have power.
"Why do they hate the black man so? We put him there -- why do they have to take him away? I don't believe in violence but J believe you reap what you sow -- that's what the Bible says, so I'm praying."
NEW YEAR'S GREETINGS FOR AMERICAN SAILORS IN ITALY
By F. Bassi
Rome
According to Italian folklore, if anything special happens on New Year's Day, it is bound to be repeated throughout the year. The headquarters of the American NATO military base at Livorno (Leghorn) in Tuscany must be hoping that it ain't so, at least for 1967. On that day 5,000 American sailors on shore leave got very warm greetings from the local working-class population.
About a week previously, a big demonstration had been staged in the city in solidarity with the Vietnamese people. Thus when the sailors began coming ashore, feelings were already high. These were not assuaged by the behavior of the sailors in the following days. They broke shop windows and street lamps and injured a girl.
Around the docks they tore down all the posters put up.in Italian and English by the youth organizations of the Communist party and the PSIUP [Italian Socialist Party of Proletarian Unity]. These read: "Red Livorno greets you in the same spirit and with the same anger as the Vietnamese people greet your bombs."
On New Year's Eve an effigy of an American sailor was strung up to a palm tree. A placard was attached to it reading in both Italian and English: "Joe, stop killing; go home!" ;
‘The local authorities, worried about the effect of such a New Year's greeting card, had the effigy taken down by firemen. A crowd gathered and began protesting. A squad car pulled up and one of the policemen got out and began wielding his club.
Unfortunately the crowd was not in a receiving mood and the result was. that the squad of cops had to leave, three of them being taken to the hospital.
By now the temper of the crowd, particularly the youth, was such that a spontaneous demonstration flared up. They went after any American sailors they could find.
They beat them up and chased them to their ships. As the crowd overturned one of their automobiles, the Communist mayor of the city and a Communist deputy sought to calm down the demonstrators. But they could do nothing. Along with the police, they had to beat a retreat. Only when the city was cleared of American sailors did the demonstration end.
As usual: the local Communist party leaders played the role of peacemakers. They did not want the demonstration and they did not encourage it. However, the situation continued to roll beyond their control.
A leaflet was distributed the next day criticizing them. "It is an illusion," said the leaflet among other things, "to hope that peace can be preserved by leaving. imperialism free to act. The insane logic of imperialism is the logic of exploitation and destruction, which does not halt unless it is defeated. Enough of peaceful strolls organized in agreement with the police! Vietnam is not distant. The USA is not distant. Imperialism has NATO bases in Italy."
The leaflet was signed, "Militants of the PCI [Italian Communist party], PSIUP and independents in favor of a Livorno Committee against American Aggression in Vietnam."
NINE PAC MEMBERS SENTENCED TO DIE IN SOUTH AFRICA
By Barney Desai
London
According to the South African Rand Daily Mail (December 15, 1966), nine members of the banned Pan Africanist Congress [PAC] of Azania were sentenced to death in the Cape Supreme Court for their part in the death of a shopkeeper in 1962. This is confirmed by a report in the December 15 London Times.
All but one of the condemned men, it is reported, were already serving sentences ranging from six to twenty years for their part in the 1963 Paarl revolt.
The PAC headquarters in Maseru, Lesotho, in an urgent report states that one of
the condemned men, Wellington Mzimase Tyhobeka, had disappeared on August 29, 1966, under mysterious circumstances from Maseru, capital of the then Basutoland, a British colony. Although his disappearance had been reported to the Basutoland mounted police, his whereabouts could not be traced.
This once again raises the question whether Tyhobeka had in fact been kidnapped from Basutoland by the South African police. It brings to mind the recent kidnapping from Basutoland of the Pan Africanist Congress Acting National Secretary John Nyati Pokela, who has now been traced to a South African jail in East London, South Africa, where he is awaiting trial.
In view of the fact that a South African refugee, last seen in British territory, has now been sentenced to death, the. case of Pokela assumes alarming proportions as well.
The violation by the South African police of British territory in order to kidnap and then sentence to death people who had been given sanctuary in Basutoland (now Lesotho) needs a thorough investigation immediately, so that every effort can be made to save both Tyhobeka and Pokela from the gallows.
The PAC strongly contends that although Basutoland became independent since these events, the British government is nonetheless morally responsible for the fate of these victims of South African Prime Minister Vorster.
An unequivocal demand should now be made to the Pretoria regime for the immediate release and return of Pokela and Tyhobeka to Lesotho.
JAPAN TEACHERS UNION OFFICIALS ARRESTED FOR PROTESTING VIETNAM WAR
- The 587,000-strong Japan Teachers Union [Nikkyoso] is simmering over the police reprisals taken against the organization' s participation in the nationwide demonstrations October 21 against the war in Vietnam.
On that day 64% of the organized teachers in the Tokyo area walked out of their classrooms for two hours. The figure for Saga was 72% and similar turnouts occurred throughout the country.
The police crackdown did not begin until December 10 when they picked up Chairman Yukio Fujiyama and Vice-Chairman Harunosuke Suzuki of the Metropolitan Teachers Union, an affiliate of the national organization. They were charged with violating a civil-service law banning strikes by local public service workers. ; The Japan Teachers Union at once began mobilizing a nationwide protest movement. However, the police continued their reprisals. On December 12 they arrested eight more Tokyo area leaders. In Saga they arrested nine leaders of the local chapter and announced that similar arrests would be made in other parts of the country.
Finally on December 21 they arrested the union's two top leaders, Chairman Sadamitsu Miyanohara and Secretary General Motobumi Makieda.
Engaging in an illegal strike is an offense punishable with imprisonment of ‘not more than three years or a fine of less than 100 ,000 yen Labout US#$300].
The union charges that the arrests were inspired by the government’ with the aim of diverting attention from the corruption scandals that have shocked the country. The union also points out that the arrests violate the International Labor Organization's Convention 105 which bars police intervention in labor movements.
JAPANESE SOCIALISTS AND COMMUNISTS VIE IN MEMBERSHIP DRIVES’
The Japan Socialist party announced January 3 that. it plans to increase its membership during 1967 to 100,000. -On November 30, 1966, it had-52,900 on the books. The paid subscription to the party newspaper on that date stood at 102, 128 copies. Besides doubling its membership the party hopes to double the circulation. of its press in 1967.
‘Last: November the- Japan’ Communist party, a much smaller organization, announced that its membership had increased 170% during the previous two years.
STRUGGLE OVER PROGRAM IN DOMINICAN JUNE 14 MOVEMENT
By Antonio Valdés
The June 14 Movement of the Dominican Republic [1J4 -- pronounced one-jay-—four, from the emblem used by the movement in its literature] has recently taken an interesting turn in a development that sheds light on the course of the Dominican revolution in general. A dispute has been going on in the 1J4 for some time (a process we will detail below). The issue is a curious one: whether the movement could or should "transform itself" into a proletarian party advocating socialist revolution.
One section of the leadership, influenced by the dogmatically Maoist Movimiento Popular Dominicano [MPD], held that the 1J4 could not and should not take this turn. The other section, independent-minded revolutionists, said that the party could and should -- and they have gone ahead and done it.
The Dominican political scene today is characterized by two contradictory trends. On the one hand, there is a rightward drift on the part of the U.S.-backed Balaguer regime, most sharply expressed in the continuing terrorist campaign by police and militarists against former rebel fighters. On the other hand, there is an increasing radicalization among the masses. This can be seen in a recent rash of strikes and a leftward turn in the Partido Revolucionario Dominicano [PRD], till recently headed by Juan Bosch. Bosch himself has left the scene, and PRD "moderates" have been resigning under pressure from the rank and file who favor a militant policy. What has happened in the June 14 Movement was the result of a similar, though more radical, process.
The recent report from Santo Domingo by the journalist Norman Gall (World Outlook, Vol. 4, No. 39] is worth recalling in regard to the mood of the masses: "The slum dwellers of Santo Domingo, who defeated crack tank and infantry units during the revolt, still have thousands of arms hidden. Many are frightened and angry about the beatings, deaths, and disappearances in recent months of members of the rebel forces..." Gall quoted a PRD slum dweller who fought in the April 1965 uprising: "The people want to fight again because they don't want to be killed this way."
A more detailed look at the June 14 Movement's evolution is valuable for two reasons. First, it indicates a development similar to that undergone by the Guatemalan guerrillas and, for that matter, by the Cuban leaders after they came to power -toward the view that the Latin-American revolution must be socialist. Second, it reveals once again the sectarian and nonrevolutionary role played by those who follow the theories of that “inspired genius" -~ Mao Tse-tung.
The June 14 Movement was named after an attempted uprising against Trujillo on that date in 1959. It began as a radical nationalist, antidictator party, much like the July 26 Movement of Fidel Castro; and it was composed, like the July 26, primarily of student youth. After Trujillo's death in May 1961 it became a focal point for the increasingly radical activists who militantly opposed the leftovers of Trujilloisn. After the overthrow of Bosch in 1963, Manolo Tavares Justo, the 1J4 leader at that time, led an abortive guerrilla fight, but when he surrendered, he was brutally slaughtered together with about a dozen comrades. In the constitutionalist uprising of 1965, 1J4 militants participated actively in defense of the rebel zone. Following that uprising, in the fire of events the intense debate over the possibility of the 1J4 transforming itself began.
Up to the June 1966 elections the debate was kept within the limits of the leading bodies of -the party, without being put up for discussion in the cells. However, a number of cells independently raised the question. The discussion began to spread to all the cells. of the party, and after the elections it became the issue of the day.
Within the top leadership the majority maintained that transformation was impossible or undesirable. But a sizable minority in the leadership favored "transformisn." They pointed to the increasing influx of workers into the 1J4, which had developed a reputation for militant struggle. The "transformists" argued that the growing working-class element in the 1J4 would eventually demand radical changes in the program and perspectives of the party.
_ In the midst of this discussion, elements of the Maoist MPD, who favored the "nontransformist" position, entered the 1J4. Making a bloc with the nontransformist majority in the leadership -- who were on a lower political level -- these Maoists soon achieved control of the leading organs of the party. Once in controlling positions, they began a campaign against the "harmful and anti-Marxist. thesis" of transformisn.
(A word is in order on what we mean by "Maoism" in this article. Both transformists and nontransformists admire Mao. But the MPD follows the Chinese line faithfully -- including the two-stage theory of revolution, advocating a national democratic revolution to be followed later by a socialist revolution. They hew blindly to a factional and sectarian attitude toward the pro-Moscow Communists. In these ways the MPD leaders show themselves true Maoists. The 1J4 transformists, while they are attracted by Peking's more militant verbal stand in the Sino-Soviet dispute, have not been trained in the Stalinist school of blind obedience. They reject both sectarianism and revisionism. Though influenced by Maoism, they are not, strictly speaking, Maoists.)
The entry of the MPD into the June 14 Movement produced splits within the Maoists’ own ranks. A group of MPD'ers who held their own variant of "nontransformism" broke away and formed their own