June 10, 2014
On Comrade Ajith’s erroneous view regarding GUIDING THOUGHT
Recently Communist Party of India (Maoist) and Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Naxalbari unified in a single party. As leader of CPI (ML) Naxalbari, comrade Ajith had expressed some views in his document: against Avakianism. [Naxalbari no. 4, July 2013]. There, he stood against GUIDING THOUGHT.
We are here refuting the comment of comrade Ajith about GUIDING THOUGHT.
In his document, he mentioned about our GUIDING THOUGHT project and three-party statement.
We communists are materialist. Ajith’s view is idealist. Ajith didn’t understand the motion of matter and its reflections. He doesn’t understand that a GUIDING THOUGHT guides a revolution.
Ajith says about line, and not thought. Ajith doesn’t understand the qualitative transformation of line.
He thinks thought and ism as the same. This is not the case.
He simply overlooked the emergence of Thought, its development to ism. For instance, Mao Thought.
GUIDING THOUGHT is truly collective. A thought is not individual’s. Individual doesn’t think. Rather thought belongs to a group of people, class etc. Gonzallo discovers this particular motion of matter as representative of communists of Peru and whole world who works for revolution. He is not the only person who thinks in this way, but he is the pioneer.
Siraj Sikder resolved some fundamental questions of Bangladesh revolution. Therefore we say his GUIDING THOUGHT.
In India, Charu Majumder and Perhaps Kanai Chaterjee also, resolved some fundamental questions of revolution of India. It’s not merely a line, but more than that.
Comrade Ajith should understand that an ism doesn’t fall from the sky suddenly.
Mao Tsetung Thought of 1937, 1949 and 1966 are not the same.
Marxism of Communist Manifesto, Marxism of Capital and post Paris Commune Marxism are not the same. These are of different levels.
Every revolution gives rise to a GUIDING THOUGHT. Nepal could have a GUIDING THOUGHT, but revolution was betrayed. Prachanda Path proved wrong. So, we already requested Napali sincere comrades to discover the particularity of Nepali revolution, what could be a Guiding Thought for revolution.
It is charu Majumder GUIDING THOUGHT that founded the revolutionary movement of India. We know that many Indian comrades believe the same.
Ajith thinks line is enough for making revolution. So, he places line against Thought. Thus, he diminishes importance of ideology.
Revolution means transformation of matter and thinking to qualitatively higher level. GUIDING THOUGHT theory was initiated by Chairman Mao and discovered and defined by Gonzallo. It is Gonzallo’s one of the most outstanding contributions. GUIDING THOUGHT doesn’t mean that it is universally applicable.
GUIDING THOUGHT is related to a particular country. But many aspects of a particular GUIDING THOUGHT can be universally applicable. For example, comrade Siraj Sikder said that a semi colony may have a colony. It is universally applicable. But not all the theories of comrade Siraj Sikder is universally applicable. In this context, Gonzallo Thought is the most advanced after chairman Mao, It defined the term Maoism and theory of people’s war. But still we are not saying that the whole Gonzallo thought is universally applicable. At the same time, Gonzallo Thought or any other thought can develop itself to Ism.
Already CPMLM France and Workers Organization of Afghanistan (MLM, PM) have criticized Ajith’s position.
We have noted that Ajith didn’t study the question of GUIDING THOUGHT.
It is very much necessary to study the question.
There are many Indian comrades who want to study this question and naturally many resemble our thinking.
We hope CPI Maoist will initiate the study of the most crucial ideological questions.
Communist party Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Bangladesh