We are reprinting this pamphlet by the Revolutionary Collective because we see that it is overall a good, concrete exposure of the line and practice of Workers Viewpoint Organization on the student question.
This sumup can be a useful tool for revolutionary and advanced students and Marxist-Leninists to deepen their grasp of WVO’s right opportunism and to guard against their wrecking, hegemonistic activities. This is particularly important since WVO is now calling themselves the “Party”.
We add a few points to clarify and deepen the sumup:
1) The Revolutionary Collective describes several actions by WVO which might seem to be “left” opportunism. However, they are simply bourgeois hegemonism under a “left” cover. WVO’s “adventurism”, acting like “small roving bands”, etc. are just their opportunist attempts to gain influence or hegemony over the student movement (and in the Marxist-Leninist movement) at any cost, even at the cost of attacking the people. This is similar to their opportunism in other areas of the movement. Hegemonism is an end in itself for WVO which they uphold over revolutionary politics or principles.
Since their line cannot win over the students, they are forced to resort to trickery. Through such foolish tactics, WVO hopes to appear super-revolutionary and to spring up magically into the leadership of the student movement. This line leads WVO to try to fool revolutionaries with naked lies and vulgar distortions; it leads them to intimidate the masses with demagogy or adventurism.
But this is only a “left” cover. WVO’s antics complement their inability to do propaganda, failure to politically consolidate the masses, their avoiding of line struggle (such as their backing out of the Boulder, Colo, forum with LPR, see Resistance, Vol. 8, no. 7), and their general liquidation of politics. This is their true right opportunism. Their phrasemongering, their revolutionary-sounding demagogy is a “left” cover for the lack of revolutionary politics in their line.
2} The plan for the 12/21/76 action at Brooklyn College was for the masses of revolutionary students to enter the rooms where other students were taking the exams. They would then try to win over other students to tearing up the exams themselves. This is the revolutionary mass line. WVO instead proceeded to grab the exams away from students without trying to win them over. They thus antagonized students, treating them not as part of the masses, but as the enemy.
3) WVO still uses this struggle at BC as an example of what “revolutionary” work they do on the campuses. As the Revolutionary Collective clearly proves, the WVO line is based in lies, opportunism and bourgeois hegemonism. It is more an example of bourgeois trickery than revolutionary work among the students.
WVO’s attempted sabotage of the student struggle at BC is similar to their action at an anti-Bakke Decision rally at the University of Colorado in October, 1977. There, even though WVO wasn’t part of the organizing coalition and was only invited to give a 5 minute solidarity statement, they suddenly tried to trick the masses into changing the character of the event into a march. WVO tried during the rally to substitute their own plan (so they could later claim they “led” the rally) for the students’ democratically-agreed-upon plan. Instead of keeping to the time allotted, they went on in a frenzy, phrasemongering for over half an hour, in spite of many attempts to stop them. But all their yelling didn’t work. The students saw through their agent-provocateur tactics and steadfastly upheld their unity and the original plans.
4) The August Twenty-Ninth Movement (ATM) in an article in Revolutionary Cause (Vol. 2, no. 2) used the Revolutionary Collective sumup to “prove” the erroneous position that the WVO is “left” opportunist. But the Revolutionary Collective clearly characterizes WVO as right opportunist. This is also proven by WVO’s actions. The ATM failed to raise this difference in the article. Instead, they omitted the points and conclusions around WVO’s right opportunism and opportunistically changed the essence of the sumup. The principled thing to have done would have been for ATM to have polemicized with the Revolutionary Collective about the character of WVO’s line. This is typical of ATM’s inability to understand Marxist-Leninist principles.
5) WVO did do some “self-criticism” in their article summing up this struggle. However, it is so vague, general and rhetorical that we agree with the Revolutionary Collective that there really is no self-criticism.
WVO represents possibly the most demagogic of the right opportunists. Their appeal to backward sentiments and their sham attempts to rally revolutionary forces as well as their class collaboration are still real dangers to our movement. As part of the main danger of right opportunism, WVO needs to be fully exposed, and expelled from our ranks. We hope that publishing this sumup will foe useful not only for revolutionary students but for other forces as well in carrying out this task.
Colorado Organization for Revolutionary Struggle (MLM) May, 1978