February 24, 1992

2. A second kind of insurrectionism avows itself as still being within the framework of people's war and aims only to ride on and accelerate the tendency of the ruling system to disintegrate by deliberately using armed city partisan actions (such as bus burning) during mass actions to inspire the unorganized masses to spontaneous action. The dangerous element in this kind of insurrectionism is the close and direct linkage of the violent actions of armed city partisans with the actions of the legal mass organizations.

This kind of insurrectionism is generated by elements in Metro Manila and other urban areas. It holds the view that although armed city uprisings cannot seize and keep power in the cities independent of the development of people's war, these can strengthen the revolutionary forces in the city and can lead to a change in the balance of forces and possibly a sharing of power between the revolutionary forces and sections of the reactionary ruling classes or, if the disintegration of the ruling system allows, to a final seizure of power by the revolutionary forces.

The proponents of this kind of insurrectionism stress the study of the historical experience of the Bolsheviks and the works of Lenin, especially with regard to the study of urban legal struggle and urban uprisings. But they miss the point about the legal mass actions in Russia being the target of enemy violence rather than being the initiator of violence before the February and October 1917 revolutions came. However, when confronted, they do not deny the concrete conditions of the Philippines, the Party's line of people's war and the requirements of urban legal struggle, especially with regard to the trade union movement.

While the proponents of this kind of insurrectionism differentiate themselves from those of other kinds, they have features strongly similar to those of the other kinds which should be noted. The similarity is generally in terms of depending on the spontaneous masses and specifically in terms of using armed city partisans, transport paralysis rather than mass actions, and use of city partisan groups supposedly to incite violence during legal mass actions.

This kind of insurrectionism has had adverse consequences proven to be detrimental to the Party and the revolutionary mass movements.

Party cadres and mass activists who otherwise would be encouraged to do work for the mass movement or join the people's army in the countryside are enrolled first in the groups of armed city partisans. The recruitment of armed city partisans has also been quite loose as to include unqualified elements, especially lumpen proletarians. At least some of the activities are also impermissible. Others have turned off a portion of public opinion. The maintenance of a few hundreds of armed city partisans already constitutes a significant drain on the Party's personnel and resources, which would be better allocated to comprehensive grassroots organizing work.

While it affirms that the character of the struggle in urban areas is principally legal and defensive, its advocacy of dramatic violent actions during legal mass actions prejudice the urban legal struggle and the legal democratic mass movement. So far, the enemy has not yet used any of the armed urban actions as pretext for wiping out the legal mass organizations, except in local communities. But the danger is there.

Back to top
<Prev   1  2  3  4  5  6   Next>