From: ez000281@hamlet.ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.latin-america
Subject: Re: Pol Pot & Shining Path
Date: 11 Jan 93 08:40:41 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

Gene P. Ledbetter writes:

>A Peruvian reader wrote:

>>> The answer was already witnessed by a horrified world
>>> after the fall of the K'mer Rouge and the Pol Pot regime
>>> in Cambodia some years back. ... This is the nightmare
>>> Peru will experience should Sendero Luminoso take over.

>Comrade MIM replied:

>> You will never find anywhere a published FACT that Comrade
>> Gonzalo said he follows the ideology of Pol Pot. Nor will
>> you find the words from Pol Pot's mouth hailing Comrade
>> Gonzalo's Maoism.

>I have not had the pleasure of reading the earlier
>discussions on this topic, but I believe that our reader is
>more concerned with similarities in the _behavior_ of the
>Khmer Rouge and the Sendero Luminoso than he is with
>differences in maoist doctrine.

Of course Gene, only a mistic would bother about the ideological differences 
between Pol Pot's belief with those of Abimail Guzman, what matters is praxis, 
not what the "fourth sword of marxism" really end up thinking. It would be a 
sick discussion one which attemps at finding reason within maost doctrine 
(actually it would be more "illuminating" to discuss with a Jehova's Witness) 
imagine what it would be like to have a theoretical debate on gonzalism.

>The behavior of the Khmer Rouge was documented in a book[*]
>written by two Vietnamese journalists who entered Cambodia
>immediately after the Khmer Rouge were driven out.  The
>authors discovered that the KR had attempted to murder
>everyone who had any education or had been tainted by foreign
>influence.  Possession of books or eyeglasses or the
>knowledge of a foreign language meant instant slaughter.
>Under such a regime, Comrade MIM would be liquidated.
>[* "Kampuc^io, la nigraj jaroj", Hanoi.]

Seems simmilar to whats hapenning in Peru BEFORE Sendero actually takes 
control, so I guess the differences between both are very little.

>On a slightly different subject, the Comrade mentions:

>> On the other hand, you will find that the U.S. government
>> has given concrete military aid to Pol Pot.

After the Khmer Rough was ousted our government unfortunately channeled aid to 
Prince Shianouk, who was really a front to the KR.  All of this disgraceful 
policy we owe to that great "liberal" Stephen Solarz.

>I could not believe it when I first learned that the U.S.
>government and Prince Sihanouk would side with the Khmer
>Rouge in order to oppose the Vietnamese.  I had a better
>opinion of Prince Sihanouk.

Well I never did, but Solarz did, and fortunately voter didn't have a good 
opinion of Solarz and we got him out of office  What Solarz accomplished in 
Cambodia would be the equivalent of aiding a Sendero Front in the event Castro 
invaded and ocuppied Peru.  Solarz opted on geopolitical concerns, not on 
humanitarian ones.

>I find it curious that the U.S. government does not seem to
>be interested in the Sendero Luminoso.  Perhaps the Comrade
>or some of my fellow bourgeois reactionaries would care to
>comment.  As you may recall, the U.S. government is usually
>willing to fight communism everywhere in the world,
>particularly in Latin America.

Well, I'm not one of your bourgeoise reationaries, but I care to comment: Of 
course we're not interseted in Sendero..  Sendero is not in power for a change, 
Sendero is not operating under the cover of a guy like Shianouk, Sendero 
represents the Khmer Rouge BEFORE their bloody rise to power, and as such we 
will do what we can to help Peruvians exterminate this plague.  

Edelmiro
Newsgroups: soc.culture.latin-america