portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

economic justice | political theory

The Communist Party of the Philippines.. old dogma, new revisionism

The Communist Party of the Philippines.. First-Worldist dogma, revisionism
Maoism - Third Worldism
Maoism - Third Worldism
World Wealth in 2000
World Wealth in 2000
Joe the plummer
Joe the plummer
Houses of ordinary American workers
Houses of ordinary American workers
The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) is a party that sometimes claims to be Maoist. They are leading a people's war that is landing blows against U$ imperialism. However, their efforts are hindered by First-Worldist revisionism. On October 15th, 2008, the CPP issued a boilerplate statement on the financial crisis. An pro-Democrat, pro-Obama, Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Fight Back!) blog reproduced the statement:

"The world capitalist system is undergoing a deepening recession that can only result in the massive destruction of productive forces and further concentration of capital in the hands of a few. This global economic malaise is now causing production slowdowns, massive job losses, worsening impoverishment and intensified exploitation and oppression of the proletariat and ordinary people in the capitalist centers, with even worse consequences for peoples in the Third World." (1)

The CPP does not demonstrate that it has any grasp on revolutionary science. Instead, the CPP re-cycles decades-old dogma from the international communist movement of the past. When a revolutionary organization dies ideologically, it is only a matter of time before it dies as a revolutionary organization. To reinvigorate the CPP requires the abandonment of First-Worldist revisionism. First-Worldist revisionism will only hinder their struggle. Eventually the Filipino people will have a real communist organization, one way or the other.

Revolutionary science, like all science, evolves. There is nothing in the statements of the CPP that could not have been written decades ago. Their movement is on auto-piolet, guided by an out-of-date theory programmed decades ago. The problem is that their dogma, shared by any number of of First-Worldist "Marxist-Leninist" organizations, is inadequate to meet the challenges of today.

These dogmatic organizations are akin to the utopian "socialists" of Marx's day. These organizations, represented in the U$ by WPP, FRSO, RCP U$A, and other Trotskyists and White chauvinists, do not have a scientific analysis. Instead, their starting point is the recycling of dogma. However, because of the prestige of the Bolshevik and Chinese revolutions, these organizations present themselves in the idiom of the international communist movement of the past even though their actual practice is only Marxist in appearance. What is unfortunate is that the Comintern in its day and Mao in his, for opportunist reasons, tolerated and supported this kind of error, these kinds of utopian organizations. Mao's mistake should not be repeated.

Who are our friends? Who are our enemies?

There is only so much global social product. It is simply not possible to equalize the wealth of First-World workers and Third-World workers at the current wage level of First-World workers. In other words, First-World workers consume many times more than an egalitarian distribution of the global social product would provide. There is no reasonable sense in which First-World workers are exploited. After all, most First-World workers fall within the richest 15% of the world's people. What kind of communist party advocates for the richest people in the world?

The CPP's statements imply that they advocate a distribution of the global social product that maintains First-World wealth at the expense of Third-World poverty. In other words, the CPP advocate an imperialist distribution of the global social product. This completely goes against Marxism.

In addition, the CPP severely misjudges the effect of the current crisis on First-World populations. Rather than standing in solidarity with Third-World populations, the crisis will shift First-World populations toward fascist populism. The declining wealth of First-World will cause the lower strata among First-World workers to blame their declining position on migrants and foreigners. To advocate unity among popular movements of the Third World and fascist and social-fascist movements of the First World is to betray the former to the latter.

The starting point of revolutionary science today is global class analysis. Without understanding that entire nations are bought off by imperialism, people's movements set themselves up to be co-opted and destroyed by imperialism. In rejecting global class analysis, the theoretical void is filled by revisionist theories. It is no accident that the CPP, in their frozen world, is unable to callout revisionist First Worldism or the the theory of productive forces as advanced by forces like the WWP, FRSO, RCP U$A and the CP Nepal (Maoist). Can the CPP find its way to the communist road? The Filipino people will liberate themselves eventually, with or without the CPP. Victory is not possible without Maoism-Worldism.


1. Excellent conditions for revolutionary upsurge in the face of the worsening global capitalist crisis by Communist Party of the Philippines October 15, 2008  http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/200... .italist-crisis/

Jose Maria Sison loves Amerikkka

In a recent statement entitled "Support coordinated actions to demand the bail out of the American People, not the bankers," Jose Maria Sison kisses Amerikan ass. (1) The "Communist Party of the Philippines" demonstrates, once again, that it is led by a First-Worldist revisionist, not a proletarian internationalist. Sison consistently advocates for First-World populations at the expense of Third-World populations. Sison consistently allies himself with social-fascist parties in the First World against the Third World.

Revolutionary Political Economy versus First-Worldist Revisionism

In this statement, Sison laments that there was a bailout for the "finance oligarchy," but "there is no bailout money for the American people who are the real creators of wealth and who have long fleeced by the monopoly bourgeoisie and its imperialist state." Sison also states, "The bailout money poured into the financial banking sector does not flow into the money stream available to the working classes and the people nor to the real economy."

1. Amerikan people are not the main creators of their wealth. In fact, very few are employed in the productive sector at all, "the real economy." Amerikans are, in the main, employed in the white collar, service and distribution, and public sectors. Amerikans are employed realizing value that has been created elsewhere. The vast majority of Amerikan wealth has come to Amerikans through imperialist mechanisms. The very land that Amerikans build their houses on was plundered from hundreds of indigenous nations. The wealth that allows Amerikans to buy such luxurious homes originates in exploitation of the Third World. Amerika is the most thoroughly bourgeoisified nation in the world. Virtually all sectors of Amerikan society benefit by aligning with the monopoly bourgeoisie and its imperialist state against the Third World. By obscuring this point, Sison promulgates the racist, settler, imperialist myth that Amerikans deserve the land that they occupy and the wealth that they stole.

In abandoning proletarian political economy, Sison implicitly embraces the Theory of Productive Forces. If wealth is not generated by human labor, then technology is the main factor as such an argument implies. Sison's line directly contradicts the Maoist line of the Four Firsts policy that the human element is principal over the technological. Sison's argument implies the wealth of Amerikans is a product of their technology, hence the enormous wealth of the First World belongs to First-World populations Whereas, Marxists recognize that wealth is created by productive labor. And, since Amerikans barely do any productive labor, the source of their wealth lies elsewhere, the Third World. And, this wealth is stolen by imperialist mechanisms in order to maintain the Amerikan way of life. The Theory of Productive Forces was exposed by Maoists during the Cultural Revolution as the revisionist theory par excellence.

2. Sison complains that nothing will be done to "rescue or help the ordinary American people, including the American working class, and now the impoverished middle class, from the rigors of industrial decline, rising unemployment, unpaid debts, mortgage foreclosures and the aggravating conditions of recession which can no longer be hidden by debt financing."

So, who are these "ordinary Americans" that Sison has chosen to advocate for? The median annual household income for 2006 was $48,201 (USD), or 2,371,007 Philippine pesos (PHP), according to the United States Census Bureau. (2) Per household member (including all working and non-working members above the age of 14) it was $26,036 (USD). (3) Sison has become the advocate for those who have incomes of 1,293,992 Philippine pesos (PHP) a year. Sison believes that Amerikans who make 1,054,000 Philippine pesos (PHP) a year deserve more than they currently have. About half of the Philippine population lives on less than 2$ a day, 98 Philippine pesos (PHP).

The majority of the world's population in the Third World exists in a permanent state of crisis. The majority in the Third World exist in a state of catastrophic poverty created by imperialism. They exist on the edge of annihilation. Amerikans, even the poorest segments of the Amerikan "working class," are some of the wealthiest people in the world; they fall around the richest 10-13%. In other words, the Amerikan "working class," are richer than around 90% of the world's population. There is no meaningful sense in which the Amerikan "working class" constitute an exploited class, a proletariat, a revolutionary class. They may earn a wage or be salaried, but that is where the commonality ends between Amerikan "workers" and Filipino workers. What kind of communist advocates for the richest people in the world? Sison sells out his own people in order to make the rich richer.

3. Sison says that he supports the mass movement against the bailout. What mass movement is Sison talking about? A mass movement against bankers does not exist in the United States, unless Sison is talking about Obama rallies. Sison's politics, in the immediate term, tail the Democratic Party. In the long term, Sison is fanning the flames of fascism, social-fascism in particular. Sison is greatly misleading his readers in the Philippines about the true status of the revolutionary movement of the First World. Those who talk about "mass line" in the First World are full of hot air. There is, generally, no mass line in the First World because there are no masses. Sison is serving up the Filipino people to the imperialists.

Contrary to Sison, Maoist-Third Worldists hope that the financial crisis worsens for Amerikans. The Amerikan way of life that Sison defends not only results in millions and millions of deaths, it is also ecologically unsustainable. The Amerikan way of life puts our, and our children's, very future in jeopardy. Maoist-Third Worldists hope that Amerikans lose all of their wealth. For the sake of humanity and the planet, Maoist-Third Worldists want to burry the Amerikan way of life once in for all.

Exposing Sison.. revisionist globe-Trotter

Sison has a level of prestige because of his past involvement in people's war. Today, Sison is a mover and shaker, a First-Worldist, revisionist scenester. Sison makes himself available as a tool, as a mascot, to First- Worldist organizations. Sison and his First-World allies are arch-opportunists. Sison's main visible political activity, based in the First World, is directed against the revolutionary movement. Sison uses his prestige to betray the revolution by promulgating of the new, modern revisionism: First Worldism. He sells out the Third World to the First World.

The International Communist Movement is at a turing point. The new, great wave of revisionism represented by organizations like the RIM and ICMLPO has reached its peak. The parties that have most closely been identified with "Maoism" globally have exposed themselves as thoroughly revisionist. These organizations are intellectually dead. As a brand, "Maoism" has been so sullied as to make it next to useless even by the revisionists who have created this situation. This is the kind turning point represented by Lenin's confrontation with the social chauvinists of the Second International or Mao's confrontation with the Soviet social-imperialists. Maoist-Third Worldists are confronting the revisionists of our age. Do you stand with the Maoist-Third Worldists, the ideological vanguard, with the vast majority in the Third World? Or, do you stand with Sison, the Amerikans, the First World? Or, are you a cowardly fence-sitter?



2.  http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new04_001.htm *numbers adjusted using current exchange rate

3.  http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new02_001.htm *numbers adjusted using current exchange rate

Our differences with Jose Maria Sison

A Filipino that makes 1,054,000 Philippine pesos per year is not part of the global proletariat...

Failing to understand the degree of First World parasitism has proven itself a catastrophic error to people's movements in the Third World. This error, on the part of Mao Zedong, contributed to the restoration of capitalism in the People's Republic of China. This error, on the part of Mao-influenced leaders the Third World, has lead to the destruction of their movements by First Worldists and police agencies. To claim that the U$ and other First World countries have a significant revolutionary class is total nonsense. To tell the Filipino people otherwise is to serve them up to the imperialists. It is a betrayal of the global proletariat.  http://manila.indymedia.org/en/2008/12/1927.html

1. Who are our enemies? Who are our friends? This is a question of the first importance. Jose Maria Sison has consistently answered this question incorrectly. Sison does not understand the basic contours of the global class structure. The First World super-exploits the Third World to such a degree that there is no significant First World proletariat. The First World "working class" should be regarded as bourgeois. The median income for an Amerikan household member is $26,036 (USD), 1,054,000 Philippine pesos (PHP). A Filipino that makes 1,054,000 Philippine pesos (PHP) per year is not part of the global proletariat in any meaningful sense. A person in the United States that has access to 1,054,000 Philippine pesos (PHP) in income a year is also not part the global proletariat. (1) A minimum wage worker in the U$ is in the richest 15% in terms of global distribution of wealth. (2) Many of the poorest of Amerikans have more income and access to capital than the Filipino bourgeoisie. These Amerikans are less inclined to stand against imperialism than many compradors in the Third World. The lack of a First World proletariat is also confirmed by the complete lack of First World socialist revolutions. The only First World revolution was imposed on what would become the German Democratic Republic by the Soviet Union.

Failing to understand the degree of First World parasitism has proven itself a catastrophic error to people's movements in the Third World. This error, on the part of Mao Zedong, contributed to the restoration of capitalism in the People's Republic of China. This error, on the part of Mao-influenced leaders the Third World, has lead to the destruction of their movements by First Worldists and police agencies. To claim that the U$ and other First World countries have a significant revolutionary class is total nonsense. To tell the Filipino people otherwise is to serve them up to the imperialists. It is a betrayal of the global proletariat.

2. By omission, Jose Maria Sison's uninformed analysis negates the national question for oppressed nations within the borders of the U$. Sison discusses the situation of the U$ "worker," yet he omits any discussion of national liberation within the U$. This negation of the national question via omission is de facto White chauvinist.

3. Sison has lent his de facto support to the Prachanda clique. The Prachanda clique in Nepal has abandoned almost every core aspect of Maoism in favor of eclecticism and reformism. They have abandoned people's war in favor of electoral reformism. Lenin denounced Kautsky for such a line. The Ninth Congress Report of the Chinese Communist Party denounced Liu Shaoqi similarly in April of 1969. The Prachanda clique has abandoned dual power in favor of bourgeois reformism. They have abandoned New Democracy in favor of bourgeois reformism. Prachanda has abandoned the Cultural Revolution in any meaningful sense. Either Maoism stands for something universal or it does not. For Sison and Prachanda, Maoism has ceased to stand for anything universal. Both Sison and Prachanda should stop calling themselves Maoists. They should instead call themselves "fans of Mao." (6) (7)

4. Sison did not object to the moribund RIM's alliance with U$ imperialism against the resistance in Afghanistan. Also, Sison did not object to the RIM's alliance with the U$ imperialists against the Islamic Republic of Iran. (8) In these cases, Sison revealed that he favors an alliance with the First Worldist parties of the RIM and ICMLPO over Islamic resistance to imperialism in the Third World. Sison's practice indicates that he believes that the parasitic populations of the First World are better allies than Islamic forces in the Third World. Sison has rejected the Maoist practice of the United Front.

5. Sison has not voiced any criticism of the recent statement by the National Democratic Front, signed by the Communist Party of the Philippines, that promulgates the ridiculous personality cult of the northern Korea revisionists. This statement, while not literally calling the Korean monarchy "socialist," certainly gives the impression that it is something to be upheld or followed. The revisionists in northern Korea are not upheld as a model by Maoists. (9)

We call on all scientific revolutionaries to join us in raising the red flag against revisionism. Jose Maria Sison should correct his ways. Maoism-Third Worldism is the way forward in the Philippines and everywhere else. Let's make the 21st century a century of people's wars to wipe imperialism off the face of the Earth once and for all!


1. Simple Questions by the Numbers.  http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com... .tionary-or-not/

2.  http://globalrichlist.com/

3. Sison, Jose Maria. Global Trends, Challenges and Opportunities After 911. September 22, 2006. In this document, Sison discusses everything under the sun, but omits the national liberation struggles in North America in order to not offend White chauvinist organizations that he is allied with.

4. Sison, Jose Maria. ILPS Extends Its Solidarity with the People of the U.S. Against the Criminalization of Immigrants and Intensification of the U.S. War of Terror. Reproduced with commentary here:  http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/countries/aztlan/chicano092506.html Note that Sison omits any discussion of the liberation of Occupied Mexico and instead adopts the White populist and integrationist framework of White chauvinist groups like WWP, RCP, and so on.

5. Also see:  http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/countries/phil/migrants091306.html

6. On the "RIM" renegades in Nepal.  http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/on-the-situation-in-nepal/

7. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is dead. Long Live Maoism-Third Worldism.  http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/on-nepal-recent-analysis/

8. Disband the RIM.  http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com/2006/10/16/disband-the-rim/
9. New Democratic Front. 60th founding anniversary of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea  http://neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2008/09/13053.php



homepage: homepage: http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com