’ Others in the 1J4 did not fully absorb these dialectics according to Mao, but began a stubborn fight for the transformation of the party. With two factions formally established after the congress, the transformists rapidly increased in number and influence among the cadres and cells of the party. Before long the nontransformists were reduced to a small group of MPD'ers and sympathizers, mostly at the top.
Things came to a head when the party committees in the eastern provinces, representing cells with a heavy workers' composition, sent in a resolution demanding the expulsion of the nontransformists. Faced with this situation, the nontransformists left the party without being formally expelled and entered one of the factions of the MPD.
Although they took some prominent individuals with them and much of the party's material resources, they did not take the name of the 1d4 or the bulk of the militants. Seven of the former Central Committee of twelve left, among them two outstanding fighters with honorable records of struggle: "Fafa" Tavares, who had run for Congress on the 1J4 ticket in the June elections and who had been a close collaborator of Manolo Tavares Justo; and Guido Gil, also a former collaborator of Manolo and author of two books on Dominican history. Strong in revolutionary spirit, these men lacked political understanding. As one Dominican revolutionary put it, "The problem is they're true revolutionaries, but they're not Marxists."
A closer look.at the conflicting political positions shows a deformed, scholastic Marxism on one side and a healthy instinct for the revolutionary essence of Marxism on the other.
The nontransformists (Maoists) used two basic arguments: (1) that the petty bourgeoisie has the predominant role to play in the current stage of the Dominican struggle; and (2) that the class nature of a party is determined solely by its social composition. . :
"In our country the petty bourgeoisie constitutes 80 percent of the total population," argued the MPD. "Without the incorporation, active participation, and support of these masses, ‘the proletariat cannot carry on the antifeudal and-antiimperialist revolution corresponding to this stage." They maintained that the pettybourgeois masses had to have a party that would mobilize and represent them and that ‘this party would play the decisive role at this stage. And they nominated the 1J4 to be that party, whether it wanted to or not.
The transformists replied that the petty-bourgeois and peasant masses must be organized and led not by a petty-bourgeois but by a proletarian party. And they pointed to nothing less than the experience of the Chinese revolution as a model, where a Communist party organized and led the peasants. The Leninist concept of the workerpeasant alliance, the transformists reminded their opponents, assigns the leading role to the workers' party.
To the nontransformist assertion that the 1J4 was petty bourgeois in social composition and therefore must eternally remain so, the transformists replied that the character of a party is basically defined by its ideological position. If a party has a proletarian ideology and form of organization, it is no longer petty bourgeois, they argued. And they reminded the learned "Marxists" of the MPD what Marx and Engels had said of the petty bourgeoisie in the Communist Manifesto: "If by chance they are revolutionary, they are so only in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat. They thus defend not their present, but their future interests. They desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat."
In essence, the Maoists did not want to see a tendency emerge that would call for a workers and peasants government and the immediate struggle for proletarian revolution. If they could convince the 1J4 militants that they were eternally decreed to be "petty bourgeois," then they would stick to the program of national democratic revolution. It is important to note that of all the left tendencies in Santo Domingo only the 1J4 transformists oppose the concept of "alliance with the liberal bourgeoisie. The transformists hold the position: "War to the death against liberalism!" (Trotsky long ago defined the attitude toward liberalism as the dividing line between Bolshevism and class-collaborationist Menshevisn. )
The impossible involutions of the Maoist theory were brought out when the transformists asked: If the 1J4 is inevitably a petty-bourgeois party, then why is the proletarian MPD in it? To preserve the working-class elements within it from corruption by the petty-bourgeois tendency, came the ineluctable reply. Why a "working class" tendency was fighting to dissuade a group from advocating a proletarian revolutionary program was a more subtle problen.
The militants of the 1J4 broke through this murky theorizing and transformed their party. The Dominican ruling class and its imperialist masters were not slow to recognize the danger to their interests in this development. They have unleashed sharp repressions against these courageous youths who have "placed themselves at the stand~ point of the proletariat."
A MILITANT STRIKE IN CHILE
By José Valdés
Santiago, Chile
A national strike of health workers that lasted 19 days ended here recently. - Some 38,000 were involved in the struggle against the ridiculous wage adjustment offerec by the Frei government. ;
The strike was characterized by great militancy. The workers stood up to police violence in street demonstrations that were held on various occasions in the central areas of Santiago, Concepcién, Valparaiso and other cities.
The Christian Democrat government arrested the majority of the leaders of the Federaci6én de Trabajadores de la Salud [Federation of Health Workers] and kept them in jail for ten days.
Other unions like the APEUCH [teachers and employees union] began joining the strike, further strengthening the strikers.
At this point the Communist and Socialist leaders of the CUT [Central Unica de Trabajadores] went behind the backs of the workers, selling them out with an agreement to accept the government offer which had touched off the strike.
The rank and file protested by remaining out for a few more days before going back to their jobs.
The strikers belonging to the MIR [Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria] and. PSR [Partido Socialista y Revolucionario] worked together in the picket squads, advancing proposals in the struggle that were accepted by the rank and file in meetings. They
proved themselves to be energetic fighters in the street demonstrations where the police caused trouble. Three members of the MIR were arrested in Santiago and ten in Concepcién.
Leaders of the Unién Obreros Municipales [Municipal Workers Union] belonging to the MIR succeeded in getting the Santiago provincial congress of this union to declare a 48-hour sympathy strike in behalf of the Health workers. —
During the strike, the MIR distributed thousands of leaflets and three issues of the union paper La Jeringa [The Syringe].
One of the lessons of the strike is thdt the Christian Democrat government is not ready to grant wage increases but is prepared to jail workers and use violence against any protest demonstrations.
In addition, the Communist party showed once more that it aims at maintaining “peaceful coexistence" with the Frei government at the expense of the interests of the proletariat.
Finally, the recent strikes show that the workers are in process of again turning to militant struggles and want to open a counteroffensive. Coming actions will show whether or not they are capable of toppling their bureaucratic leaderships.
DISSATISFACTION ON THE CAMPUS IN JAPAN ~~ -*
‘Last November 20, some 300 students at Meiji University in Tokyo barricaded themselves in a few wooden buildings in which they were living. Outside 800 riot police sought to dislodge them. As the police advanced, shielded “by armored cars, they were met with a hail of rocks and beer bottles. Before the clash was over, at least 52 persons had been injured, most of them policemen.
At issue was a demolition order. The old wooden buildings | ‘were to be torn down and the students had been ordered to move into new reinforced concrete dormitories. They had refused because it meant double the rent -~ from 340 yen to 680 yen [US$#1.88] a month.
On the same week end, a rally was held by Neat students to protest a rumored tishice. a tuition fees from an average 20; 000 yen LUS#$138.89] a year to 60, 000 yen US$166.67
These figures may look low in comparison to costs in some countries such as the United States. Their import can be better grasped by the following figures. For a year ata private university in Japan, including food, lodging and clothing, the cost to students is now estimated at about 170,000 yen [US$472. 23]. This is no less than 69% of the average Japanese annual income.
; Public. schools have lower tuition fees than’ ‘the private institutions, but the difference is ‘not great.
While costs have been rising, the pressures compelling Japanese youth to seek a college education have likewise been increasing. Academic standing is of great importance in the business world and in industry.
The economic motive is thus a very strong component in ‘the unrest among students “that has characterized Japan's huge educational mills in the past few years. Their reactions to increases in costs, even relatively minor ones, have at times been quite violent leading to pitched battles with the police when university administrations have called in the forces of "law and order."
Political factors have likewise been operative.-.-Among these the issue of student autonomy has come increasingly to the fore. Another issue has been the escalation of U.S. imperialist aggression in Vietnam with its acute reminder to Japanese sensibilities of the specter of a possible nuclear war.
The scandals involving malfeasance in office have also served to stir dissatis-— faction among students, underlining the unattractiveness of the entire perspective under capitalism, with Japan reduced to a satellite in the orbit of the supergiant American power... -
The coming year on Japan's campuses will thus most likely see more of the same. And perhaps on a broader and more militant scale.
CANADIAN PROFESSORS CALL FOR IMMEDIATE END TO BOMBINGS IN VIETNAM
Toronto
In a statement issued to the press. January 5, 338 members of the University of Toronto faculty called for an “immediate , unconditional and permanent end to the bombings of north and south Vietnan.
"They urged the Canadian government to ‘demand this of the U.S. and at the: same time "reveal all military production contracts related in any way to the Vietnam war." Ottawa, they said, should "consider following the example of Sweden in refusing to sell arms to the U.S. until this intervention ceases." ..
The statement had been circulated throughout the faculty ‘gust before the Christmas. celebrations. Its initiators pointed out in an accompanying statement that "although the students at this University have been fairly active in searching for ways of exerting pressure to bring this slaughter to an end, the faculty have done very little."
In behalf. of the faculty, and in answer to a previous protest, Professor Mc- Naught explained that "a group of us came together and decided that with the fourth or fifth escalation of the war it was time to make known the opinion of the faculty | again."
While the petition does not refer to it, some of the faculty are known to be gravely concerned about the use of Canadian university research facilities and personnel to aid the U.S. aggression. Early in November the editor of the Montreal McGill university student paper was fired for publishing an article revealing that a professor on that campus was working on a U.S.-financed project involving a method of determining the solidity of the. ground from the air so that planes can land in an unknown area.
The University of Toronto student Committee to End the War in Vietnam organized a protest meeting which was addressed by the deposed editor. He was later reinstated.
The statement signed by the 338 also called for the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Vietnam -- with the rider, "as early as possible." The professors did not make clear why they did not call for immediate withdrawal and why they thought it should be left to the ‘American aggressors to decide when to withdraw.
Despite this limitation, the statement by the 338 may well mark a significant development for the entire Canadian anti~Vietnam-war movement.
The first serious sign of concern in professorial circles came in response to the November 11-12 Student Days of Protest initiated by the University of Toronto Committee to.End the War in Vietnam. A sizeable group of faculty members of Montreal's Sir George Williams University firmly solidarized themselves with the student action.
In Toronto several University of Toronto faculty members participated in student actions around the November 11-12 protest. .
‘The University of Toronto committee intends to send a delegation to the prime minister and the minister of External Affairs. Professor McNaught éxpressed the opinion that there "seems to be a marked interest in making the committee a vehicle for continued.action."
The statement was sent to all full-time, on-campus faculty members. More than twenty-five percent signed, including sixty deans of faculties and full professors. Along with leading Canadian academicians were at least three college principals -- Professor Northrop, Frye of Victoria, Dr. D.C. Williams of Erindale and Dr. Robin Harris of Innis College.
PROTESTS MOUNT IN BRITAIN AGAINST WILSON'S ROLE IN VIETNAM WAR.
By John Walters
London
_ On December 19 George Brown, British foreign secretary, answering questions in the House of Commons regarding the bombing of Hanoi, said: "I don't believe the American Government has done any such thing." This was despite the fact that, even then, evidence was accumulating that left no doubt about the question. In the Sunday Times of December 18 there had appeared a dispatch. by Jacques Moalie which confirmed the reported. bombing and went.on to say, "...it is plain enough that the official North