Chairman Mao- "Combat Liberalism" - Plus Special Introduction For Arab Nationalist Forum
Chairman Mao- "Combat Liberalism" - Plus Special Introduction For Arab Nationalist Forum
SPECIAL INTRODUCTION WRITTEN FOR THE ARAB NATIONALIST FORUM:
--John Paul Cupp, firstname.lastname@example.org
Here is a classice piece by Chairman Mao. Their are some awesome lessons in this, that are extra import for those of us who are or are dealing with western leftiststs, and the pro-imperialists and pro-zionists who call for "unity" without regards to the need for principle in behavior and ideas.
I think this re-enforces many points made by the AN moderators and I suggest those who have time give it a careful study.
Think of this for example "1)To let things slide for the sake of peace and friendship when a person has clearly gone wrong, and refrain from principled argument because he is an old acquaintance, a fellow townsman, a schoolmate, a close friend, a loved one, an old colleague or old subordinate. Or to touch on the matter lightly instead of going into it thoroughly, so as to keep on good terms. The result is that both the organization and the individual are harmed. This is one type of liberalism."
In other words LIBERATION first "Friends" THIRD, and Comrades Second!
"To let things drift if they do not affect one personally; to say as little as possible while knowing perfectly well what is wrong, to be worldly wise and play safe and seek only to avoid blame."
I think this speaks for its self. Whatever Zionist-controlled organizations, members of pro-imperialist social democratic cicrles, etc, who DO NOT STOP RED BAITING, WITCHUNTS, AND SCAPEGOATING, are ALSO GUILTY OF BETRAYING THE PEOPLE AND THE REVOLUTION. That is those who do not actively support anti-imperialism and anti-zionism, and yet know better, ARE NOT NEUTRAL, THEY'RE GUILTY.
Plus,you have to love Mao, just for the simple fact that he said "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." This is an excellant lesson for western leftists, or my comrades who think they need to prove something to western leftists, because western leftists think that every time you have sex, drink beer, or start up a zionist controlled "newspaper" about knitting collectives, its a "revolution", as long you call your "newspaper", "Little Beirut". Evidently, Arabs and Muslims now have more sex appeal that Che, the Zapatistas, or Black Liberation Fighters. This is the height of insult and treason, in an era, when objectively Arab and Muslim Freedom fighters are fighting fascism in power "by the barrel of a gun" (and human bomb)!
A GOOD LIBERAL IS A DEAD LIBERAL!
By Mao Tse-Tung
Liberalism manifests itself in various ways...
1)To let things slide for the sake of peace and friendship when a
person has clearly gone wrong, and refrain from principled argument
because he is an old acquaintance, a fellow townsman, a schoolmate, a
close friend, a loved one, an old colleague or old subordinate. Or to
touch on the matter lightly instead of going into it thoroughly, so as
to keep on good terms. The result is that both the organization and the
individual are harmed. This is one type of liberalism.
2)To indulge in irresponsible criticism in private instead of actively
putting forward one’s suggestions to the organization. To say nothing
to people to their faces but to gossip behind their backs, or to say
nothing at a meeting but to gossip afterwards. To show no regard at all
for the principles of collective life but to follow one’s own
inclination. This is a second type.
3)To let things drift if they do not affect one personally; to say as
little as possible while knowing perfectly well what is wrong, to be
worldly wise and play safe and seek only to avoid blame. This is a
4)Not to obey orders but to give pride of place to one’s own opinions.
To demand special consideration from the organization but to reject its
discipline. This is a fourth type.
5)To indulge in personal attacks, pick quarrels, vent personal spite or
seek revenge instead of entering into an argument and struggling
against incorrect views for the sake of unity or progress or getting
the work done properly. This is a fifth type.
6)To hear incorrect views without rebutting them and even to hear
counter-revolutionary remarks without reporting them, but instead to
take them calmly as if nothing had happened. This is a sixth type.
7)To be among the masses and fail to conduct propaganda and agitation
or speak at meetings or conduct investigations and inquiries among
them, and instead to be indifferent to them and show no concern for
their well-being, forgetting that one is a Communist and behaving as if
one were an ordinary non-Communist. This is a seventh type.
8)To see someone harming the interests of the masses and yet not feel
indignant, or dissuade or stop him or reason with him, but to allow him
to continue. This is an eighth type.
9)To work half-heartedly without a definite plan or direction; to work
perfunctorily and muddle along—”So long as one remains a monk, one goes
on tolling the bell.” This is a ninth type.
10)To regard oneself as having rendered great service to the
revolution, to pride oneself on being a veteran, to disdain minor
assignments while being quite unequal to major tasks, to be slipshod in
work and slack in study. This is a tenth type.
11)To be aware of one’s own mistakes and yet make no attempt to correct
them, taking a liberal attitude towards oneself. This is an eleventh
Being a member of the ABCF is not easy. And we have seen it become more
difficult as the years have passed and the ideological and procedural
conflicts have become more complicated and involved. Conflicts of
interest are only natural when building an organization such as the one
we are involved in. And it is necessary to debate and discuss issues
pertinent to our collective growth and development thoroughly. Our
growing ability to do so will qualitatively nurture our organization
and help it grow. A disability to do so will only deteriorate our
“This kind of methodical evaluation is a concrete manifestation of
politics in command. In other words, it stems basically from the
philosophical conviction that in all relations between human beings and
their environment, human beings must assume conscious responsibility
for their actions and not resort to the vulgar materialism of always
blaming others or outside conditions and thus seeing themselves as
In contrast, however, it has also become painfully obvious at times,
that collective members can involve themselves in and encourage
conflicts and debates that are very unimportant and irrelevant to our
collective work and growth. Very infrequently does engaging in
dialogues such as these become productive.
Distinguishing between the two is sometimes very difficult. At the same
time, trying to be principled and productive while taking part in
necessary critical discussions is just as difficult. We’re coming out
with this piece on criticism to try and help point the organization in
a more forward direction - specifically because we have seen how the
lack of anything of the kind has at times left some members in a state
of confusion and lead to possibly avoidable impasses.
Why is Criticism Important?
“Criticism in the positive usage is the examination, analysis and
evaluation of the comparative worth of one’s acts, practices, policies
and/or ideas by others. Self-criticism, is of course, this same
principle applied to one’s self, but it also refers to the
organizational practice of critically examining and reexamining its own
policies and/or policies and practices of its members...
“Criticism in its positive usage corrects/adjusts mistakes of
practice and of thought, and resolves differences among individuals and
makes for a smooth running, well functioning organization. Mao Tse Tung
in his discourse on criticism put forth the slogan ‘Unity-Criticism-
Unity’ to show how individuals come together and unite under one
principle or set of principles, but in the actual working out of these
principles, differences arise for various reasons which militate
against the accomplishment of declared ends, and against the cohesion
of the organization. When these differences arise there must be
criticism in which those with differences interpenetrate, modify one
another, and form a new and more perfect unity on the basis of having
worked out contradictions that were inherent in the old unity.”2
The founding of the ABCF in 1995 was a clear example of such “ Unity-
Criticism-Unity.” An examination of the notes both from the May ‘95
founding conference in DC, and the October ‘95 conference in Ohio
should illustrate this.
At the founding conference, several ABC collectives came together and
discussed issues of importance to them and ideas about how to move
forward. This culminated in the adoption of a proposal to federate into
the first organization of ABC collectives in N. America, the ABC
Federation. Participants had agreed to “come together and unite under
one principle or set of principles.”
However, shortly thereafter, while attempting to work collectively
under the structure we had agreed to, or, “in the actual working out of
these principles, differences arise for various reasons which militate
against the accomplishment of declared ends, and against the cohesion
of the organization.” It became clear that at least two entirely
different and indeed conflicting perceptions existed about what the
These differences peaked shortly before the ‘95 Ohio conference and was
an example of how “When these differences arise there must be criticism
in which those with differences interpenetrate, modify one another, and
form a new and more perfect unity on the basis of having worked out
contradictions that were inherent in the old unity” The fact that
there were two different perceptions about what we had united around,
and what these perceptions were, only became clear as a result of the
discussion and criticism that took place at this meeting. Only when we
were able to recognize the differences that existed through criticism
and self criticism, were we able to move ahead and a much clearer
perception about what the ABCF was existed as a result.
We have seen how this was of enormous benefit to ourselves. In October
‘95, the ABCF was a formation of eight locals coexisting with different
ideas about the direction of the whole. Shortly after the October ‘95
conference in which we had the opportunity to criticize and be self
critical of the nature and direction of the organization, the ABCF
dwindled to only 3 locals. However, because these 3 remaining locals
were able to recognize what had come to pass “and form a new and more
perfect unity on the basis of having worked out contradictions that
were inherent in the old unity”, we were able to provide a strong and
precise platform upon which we could organize ourselves and others into
the ABCF. For the most part, we have been able to grow collectively and
recruit new and focused locals into the organization. While most of the
other ABC groups who left the ABCF in October ‘95 have yet to “form a
new and more perfect unity on the basis of having worked out
contradictions that were inherent in the old unity”. As a result, most
have either dissolved, or continue to work in relative isolation,
unable to develop a form of communication with other ABC groups around
the country. This has lead to few groups or people being aware that
non-federated ABC’s exist.
All this is only to illustrate just how crucial and indeed beneficial
criticism and self criticism is, when applied correctly. Or as Mao
correctly stated, “The only way to settle questions of an ideological
nature or controversial issues among the people is by the democratic
method, the method of discussion, of criticism, of persuasion and
education, and not by the method of coercion or repression.”3
When is criticism necessary?
As has been illustrated, criticism is at times crucial to the
development of the organization. On the other side of the coin,
criticism is also at times abused and can be needlessly directed or
used negatively to disrupt. At this point we’ll try and define some
ways of distinguishing between these two.
As is defined in our constitution and structure, the ABCF is unified
“to build an organization capable of offering long-term, non partisan
support of class war prisoners (PP/POW’s)”.4
When contradictions arise that impede that goal or disrupt that unity,
or, violate any of the other Four Basic Foundation Principles, this is
generally the time in which criticism must be applied. This is not to
imply that within the discourse of our political development,
individual ABCF collectives should not discuss other matters of
political relevance at any time. Only that official and ABCF-wide
internal criticisms should be put forth when one collective feels
another collective has violated any or all of the Four Basic Foundation
Principles of the Federation as defined in the ABCF Constitution and
If you are confident that you have observed a breech or contradiction
of the common principles we have committed to struggling, it is vitally
important for you to bring this to others attention. Failing to do so
is both liberal and subjective.
“Subjectivity assumes many forms, e.g., the protection of one’s
feelings or those of others; fear of hurting feelings or discouraging
people by pointing out their mistakes; attacking those who hurt your
feelings by criticism; fear of taking issues with others; not pointing
out the person who makes a mistake or not pointing out a mistake at
once but waiting until the persons involved are less emotionally caught
up in their mistakes and then dealing with the question only as an
abstraction and therefore without the sharpness which enables the
maximum lessons to be learned by all concerned; hesitating to take
issue with or criticism of the leaders; hesitating to criticize
themselves for fear of undermining confidence in the organization
(emperor protection); “selling” ideas to others rather than discussing
and debating issues in such a way that members can make responsible
choices; making excuses for oneself or for others when mistakes are
made (not enough time, something else came up, conditions beyond our
control, etc.), thus being “ understanding” and “sympathetic” rather
than demanding on oneself and others.
“All these are manifestations of liberalism which is part of the very
air we breathe in the u.s. Liberalism or the evasion of responsibility
is what most amerikkkans mean by “freedom.” Freedom is the right not to
be held responsible or accountable for one’s actions. Since this
tendency is so powerful in the society, it is inevitable present in the
organization. In the past the u.s. has been able to survive liberalism
because of the unique historical conditions of this country,
particularly the “wide open space” which have allowed people to pick up
and leave the scene of their mistakes. Finally, however, the chickens
are coming home to roost in the country. In a revolutionary cadre
organization, they come home much sooner.
“Liberalism leads to the covering up of mistakes and therefore to the
weakening of the organization. When mistakes are covered up, they also
pile up to the point where it becomes impossible to isolate and correct
the specific mistakes, and the organization is in danger of breaking up
in demoralization and bitter antagonisms.
“The above list of liberal weaknesses, incomplete as it is, is familiar
to everyone who has ever been in any kind of organization. When one
realizes how many of these have characterized one’s own practices in
the past, it is easy to become discouraged, unless you keep in mind at
all times the goals and methods to which you are committed and the
collective commitment to this goal which will enable the organization
to grapple with and overcome these weaknesses one by one, week in and
week out, through criticism and self-criticism in the course of the
Some Thoughts on Making Criticism
If you believe a contradiction exists that does impede the working
unity of the organization, you will need to address this contradiction.
Also, because we firmly believe that no one is above being questioned,
criticized, or corrected, including ourselves, we would like for
everyone to be fully aware that though one may feel that they have
observed or discovered a contradiction, the individual making the
criticism may be incorrect in doing so and should always be aware of
this possibility. As has been stated:
“As long as the revolutionary movement all over the world was dominated
by the D-day concept of revolution (which had been borrowed
mechanically from the example of the 1917 Russian Revolution),
criticism used to take the form chiefly of post- mortem analysis. For
example, one group or individual would insist that a particular setback
in revolutionary developments in a particular country was the result of
a mistaken policy and therefore of the group or individual sponsoring
the policy. Simultaneously, the claim would then be made that if those
in charge had pursued the policy of the critic instead, then there
would have been success rather than failure. This kind of arrogant
subjectivism and hypothetical after-thinking is completely foreign to
the concept and practice of revolutionary criticism and selfcriticism.
The point being is that we are talking about ideas, and no one person
or collective has all the correct ideas. As the Mao has correctly
stated, “Correct ideas come from one’s social practice.”
When drafting your criticism, it is very important to be as specific,
even meticulous and clear about what it is you are raising an objection
to. Give concrete examples and back them up with whatever evidence you
may have. If you have no evidence or examples to site, it will usually
be very difficult for others who are likely coming from a different
perspective to understand or agree with you. Try to determine if the
contradiction falls within the below three categories of human error
and define how they do so clearly and precisely, again, with evidence,
examples and/or proof of events.
“The differences which arise that disrupt unity can generally be found
to have their basis in these three categories of human error:
“1) Opportunism: opportunism is defined as that tendency for an
individual to make a decision or commit an act that is favorable to
his/her own self aggrandizement and at the expense of the collective or
the movement as a whole. Opportunism stems from selfishness and petty
When opportunism arises, either in an individual or in an organization,
it is to be severely criticized and if necessary the individual or
individuals expelled from the organization or ostracized from the
movement. (Note: we should always qualify the definition of opportunism
as being at the expense of the collective or the movement.)
“2) Subjectivism: the second type of error that disrupts unity and
impairs revolutionary progress may be found in the general category
called ‘subjectivism’. Subjectivism can be distinguished from
opportunism often only by the merest of hairlines. It generally has to
do with personality flaws. One makes a decision or commits an act that
is based on one’s personal feelings, desires, resentments, jealousies,
prejudices etc... Such subjectivism may possibly stem from any number
of sources; childhood trauma, subliminal conditioning, religious
superstition, etc... When such subjectivism pops up to impede the
functioning of the individual or the progress of the organization it is
imperative that it be dealt with. The consciousness of many must
necessarily be stripped of the old pernicious ideas and values inbred
by bourgeois culture. Though, again, Mao Tse Tung cautions that those
traits and personal idiosyncrasies which are not particularly harmful
to the individual or the cause, but are largely a matter of style,
should not be needlessly criticized.
“3) Errors from objective causes: thirdly there is the type of error
that stems from objective causes. For example, one may have lacked
certain objective information, or may have placed too heavy an emphasis
on certain elements of a situation rather than more correct elements.
And/or the environmental conditions themselves may have been such as to
limit the formulating of a more correct idea or policy. This last type
of error is the type that a cell or collective will inevitably find
itself dealing with again and again. That is to say, most persons
coming into a collective can be expected to more or less quickly grasp
the rules against opportunism and subjectivism (though time to time
these problems too must necessarily be dealt with) and subscribed to
a... outlook which in its concreteness, means analyzing a situation
with the objective facts of the situation uppermost in mind. But the
objective factors of a situation are continually undergoing change as
the old elements and factors fade and diminish, and new elements
appear. Hence policy and practice must be reexamined periodically,
and/or new policy to into account the changes in the situation.”7
Once you have defined, documented and supported your position, we offer
the below guidelines that may help you determine the best way in which
to forward a criticism or begin a critical discussion:
“How to conduct a Criticism Session:
“In conducting a criticism session, we find that these few broad rules
“Criticism not before the collective: Mannerisms of a subjective nature
which are minor, and inconsistent with the organizational rules and
principles [in our case the Four Basic foundation Principles] may be
dealt with privately by one rade pointing out the error and
inconsistency to the other. The criticism should be acknowledged by the
recipient and resolved at this point.
“Criticism before the collective:
A) Opportunism is a major departure from revolutionary principle and
must be brought before the collective.
B) Subjective errors that persist after criticism is brought in private
should be brought before the collective.
C) All objective propositions that have to do with the organizational
policy and practice, or that affect the Black Liberation Movement [or
for us, any or all of the Four Basic Foundation Principles of the
Federation] as a whole should be brought before the collective.
“Each criticism should be dealt with on its own merits; that is, do not
bring up a criticism of another individual in order to divert attention
from ones’ self (unless there is a direct connection between the two).
Only after the original criticism has been resolved should another
criticism be broached.
“No attack upon personalities or unprincipled criticism [see later].
A) No name calling
B) No disparaging remarks about an individual (but only about acts of
In addition to these guidelines, we would also like to offer the
following reminders Mao drafted. Though they were written for the
Communist Party of China and make frequent reference to the “ communist
party” or “socialist transformation”, the subject matter at hand
certainly transcends those specific circumstances and can be broadly
applied. We should all keep the following in mind when making critical
evaluations of others (or ourselves for that matter):
“In the political life of our people, how should right be distinguished
from wrong in one’s words and actions? On the basis of the principles
of our Constitution, the will of the overwhelming majority of our
people and the common political positions which have been proclaimed on
various occasions by our political parties and groups, we consider
that, broadly speaking, the criteria should be as follows:
1) Words and actions should help to unite, and not divide, the people
of our various nationalities.
2) They should be beneficial, and not harmful, to socialist
transformation and socialist construction.
3) They should help to consolidate, and not undermine or weaken, the
people’s democratic dictatorship.
4) They should help to consolidate, and not undermine or weaken,
5) They should help to strengthen, and not discard or weaken, the
leadership of the Communist Party.
6) They should be beneficial, and not harmful, to international
socialist unity and the unity of the peace-loving people of the
Lastly, an overriding principle that we should ever be mindful of, “To
criticize the people’s shortcomings is necessary,... but in doing so we
must truly take the stand of the people and speak out of whole-hearted
eagerness to protect and educate them. To treat comrades like enemies
is to go over to the stand of the enemy.”10
Negative or Incorrect Criticism
Possibly as often as criticism is used to build, it is used just to
destroy and divide, at times even under the guise of building. How can
we differentiate between the two? There are several ways in which we
can attempt to do so. Though, this is undoubtedly an incomplete guide
to make distinctions, when viewing criticisms in an overall
perspective, the following may be helpful.
“Perhaps another way to get an indication of the value of positive
criticism is to compare it with the bourgeois use of criticism, or
“At the base of the difference between the bourgeois use of criticism
and the [correct] use, lies the false ideological emphasis on the
individual, rather than on the collective. As a result, for the
bourgeois with their emphasis on individualism, criticism inevitably is
negative. It is [not] used to build, but rather to destroy. It ceases
to be a tool by which to correct and adjust mistakes, or resolve
differences and repair breaches in unity, but rather it becomes a
weapon of assault of one personality upon another. It is divisive and
destructive; it is fault-finding, nit picking and slanderous; an attack
upon the intrinsic worth of an individual.”11
Also of importance are the following codes of conduct that are found in
the Irish Republican Army Green Book. Again, while the below are
written specifically for them and their organizational structure, the
principles which are put forward also transcend the framework of their
organization and can be used by many.
“1) Any volunteer who attempts to lower the morals or undermine the
confidence of other Volunteers [in the Army]... shall be deemed guilty
“2) Any Volunteer taking part in a campaign of slander and denigration
against another volunteer, thereby weakening authority and discipline,
and bringing the Army into disrepute, shall likewise be found guilty of
“Minimum penalty: Dismissal with ignomy.
“3) All Volunteers are expected to act in an honorable way so as the
struggle is not harmed or undermined.”12
Another reality which may help us differentiate correct from incorrect
criticism was forwarded again by Mao when he wrote; we “must grasp the
principle of subordinating the needs of the part to the needs of the
whole. If a proposal appears feasible for a partial situation but not
for the situation as a whole, then the part must give way to the whole.
Conversely, if the proposal is not feasible for the part but is
feasible in the light of the situation as a whole, again the part must
give way to the whole. This is what is meant by considering the
situation as a whole.”13
Reaction to Criticism
Upon receiving a criticism from another, it is important to keep your
cool. Don’t respond right away, give yourself some time to think it
over. Responding to criticism, be it positive or negative, takes a lot
of political maturity. Important also is the fact that something can be
learned from both good and bad criticism. Because of this, it is
crucial to remain calm and principled in your response and reaction to
criticism. If not, we may never be able to discover what was at the
root of the criticism.
Try to view each criticism objectively. Do not take them as personal
attacks, or a criticism of one’s person or personality. If a criticism
has been made correctly and with consideration, it has been made of an
act, or an idea of an individual (or collective), not of the
individual. As mentioned earlier, “No disparaging remarks about an
individual (but only about acts of an individual)”. It is important to
repeat, we criticize the act, or the idea - not the individual.
Also, if you are to be in an organization, you will be dealing and
working with the broad array of individuals who make up that
organization. We come from many different places and have grown to who
we are in different ways. We therefore deal with things as differently
as the individuals we are. This is part of collective struggle.
Therefore you will have to deal with everyone’s different
personalities. Some people will make criticisms that are direct, blunt
and to the point, seeming almost unmerciful. Others will seem more
generous and forgiving. Within the ABCF, we do not foresee a time in
the near or distant future when we will all approach one another about
critical discussion in a way in which all of us will be satisfied.
Therefore we believe that it does not necessarily have to be written in
a style in which one likes or believes would be more beneficial to the
individual. Though obviously ABCF members should be considerate and
understanding not only with each other, but in all of our dealings.
However, so long as it generally conforms to “Some thoughts on making
criticisms”, and does not fall within the category of “Negative
Criticism” the format or style shall remain subjective.
“All things considered, when taking into account the competitive
environment in which we live, still, we realize just how difficult it
can be to make or take criticism. In the amerikkkan social and
political environment at all levels, it is very difficult to make this
kind of objective criticism/self- criticism a real part of daily life
and practice. This again is for the very deep historical reasons
already referred to, especially the tendency of amerikkkans to look
upon problems as nuisances and headaches, to be gotten rid of by some
external means (e.g., pills), rather than as challenges from which one
can learn. Therefore, the tendency is to cover up mistakes rather than
to admit or grapple with them. Amerikkkans are also very preoccupied
with their own personalities or individualities and inclined to develop
guilt feelings about their own mistakes or as a result of hurting other
peoples feelings, by pointing out mistakes. For example, an individual
may apologize for making a mistake because he feels guilty, thinking
that he or she is criticizing himself or herself when s/he is really
just expressing subjective or personal feelings. Often what is put
forward as self-criticism is simply self-protection, e.g., when an
individual rushes to admit a mistake to avoid criticism or further
examination of the mistake by others.”14
When responding to either positive or negative criticism, remain
principled and try to remember what has been said earlier about making
your own criticisms or responses. We’ve previously attempted to clearly
illustrate how and why criticism is crucial to development of the
organization. It is tedious and difficult and is precisely why we lead
this passage by saying being in the ABCF is difficult. We have seen
members quit the organization or avoid participating in critical
discussion. This is bad and we must be aware from the moment we make
the decision to join the ABCF that participation on nearly any front of
a struggle will require some level of protracted commitment and
patience. We feel this is particularly true of PP/POW support and
specifically within the ABCF.
“All this may seem very elementary and common-sensical, but it is far
from being obvious, either in the general overall political atmosphere
of this country, or in the particular atmosphere of the ‘movement’s’
helter skelter, on-the-go politics. Amerikkkans generally tend to have
a technical approach to every project, to try to overpower those whom
they are seeking to influence or to defeat, by the sheer weight of
their know-how and equipment. Or they have a ‘new frontier’ approach:
if something doesn’t work out so well, or things go bad, just abandon
the project, or the place or the people involved in it, and go on to
something or somewhere or somebody else. They are always running off to
a new beginning.”15
After all, “An organization like ours, which seeks political objectives
based upon the principles of justice and freedom, must ensure that
these principles are applied internally and in our dealings with each
Finally, it is clear that several different sources have been used and
cited in this piece, many of them having origin in other than anarchist
movements. However we feel that the merit of what is said is the
principle point here, and believe that such merits are not constricted
to the specific time place and individuals that produced them. In
general, what is said is objectively of more value than whatever
individual etc. may have said it.
1 Organization Means Commitment, Anonymous
2 Black Liberation Army Study Guide, 1977-78, BLA Coordinating
3 On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People, Mao Tse
4 ABCF Constitution and Structure, ABCF
5 Organization Means Commitment, Anonymous
6 Organization Means Commitment, Anonymous
7 Black Liberation Army Study Guide, 1977-78, BLA Coordinating
8 Black Liberation Army Study Guide, 1977-78, BLA Coordinating
9 On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People, Mao Tse
10 Talks at the Yenan Forum on Literature and Art, Mao Tse Tung
11 Black Liberation Army Study Guide, 1977-78, BLA Coordinating
12 The Green Book, Irish Republican Army
13 The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War, Mao Tse
14 Organization Means Commitment, Anonymous
15 Organization Means Commitment, Anonymous
16 The Green Book, Irish Republican Army
add a comment on this article
add a comment on this article