Kundgebung in Bremen zu den Psychiatrie-Toten

Der Bundesverband Psychiatrie-Erfahrener gedenkt und mahnt Psychiatrie-Toten Am Sonntag, den 2.10.22 wird wie in den letzten Jahren, auch in Bremen eine Kundgebung zum Gedenktag Psychiatrie-Toter stattfinden. Um 14 Uhr treffen wir uns am Goethetheater (Goetheplatz 1-3, Bremen), um all jenen Menschen zu gedenken, die in Psychiatrien und in Folge psychiatrischer Behandlungen sterben. Wir demonstrieren gegen Zwang und Gewalt in Psychiatrien, ebenso wie den enthemmten Einsatz von Psychopharmaka. Ein besonderes Augenmerk legen wir auf die fehlenden statistischen Erhebung und Zählung von Todesfällen in Psychiatrien und nach psychiatrischer Behandlung. Ebenfalls möchten wir an die bestehende Diskussion über die Einführung des Tasers bei der Polizei in Bremen und anderswo anknüpfen. Wir positionieren uns klar gegen die Forderung der GDP einer flächendeckenden Einführung von Tasern bei der Polizei. Ebenso kritisieren wir die Erwägung des Innensenators Ulrich Mäurers (SPD), Taser doch noch in Bremen einzuführen. Auswertung der bisherigen 7 Todesfälle im Zusammenhang mit Tasern, sowie auch andere nicht tödliche Taser-Einsätze, z.B. in Bremerhaven zeigen, dass diese Waffe auffallend oft gegen Menschen mit psychischen Ausnahmesituationen bzw. psychiatrischen Vorgeschichten verwendet wurde. Diese Personengruppe hat dabei ein besonders hohes Risiko schwerwiegende, bis hin zu tödlichen Folgen davon zutragen. Wir sehen daher die Gefahr, dass diese Waffe nicht wie angeworben, Leben schützt, sondern eben wie Pistolenschüsse und Fixierungsgriffe für Menschen mit Vorerkrankungen, traumatisierte Menschen und Menschen in psychischen Ausnahmesituationen lebensgefährlich sind und es zu noch mehr Todesfällen im Zusammenhang von Polizei und psychisch vorbelasteten Menschen kommen wird. Wir laden euch ein. Kommt vorbei, sagts weiter! In Solidarität. So, 2.10.22 14 Uhr Goetheplatz 1-3, 28203 Bremen

Dringender Appell für Özgül Emre

Die Journalistin und Aktivistin Özgül Emre wurde am 16. Mai 2022 von der deutschen Polizei verhaftet und nach dem umstrittenen Paragraphen 129b in Untersuchungshaft genommen. Seit ihrer Inhaftierung am 17. Mai 2022 befindet sie sich im Hungerstreik gegen rechtswidrige und willkürliche Gefängnisuniformen. Nach den deutschen Gesetzen dürfen nur Verurteilte diese Uniform tragen. Sie ist aber noch nicht verurteilt. Es handelt sich also um eine willkürliche Entscheidung des Gefängnis- und Justizsystems. Trotz mehrfacher Zusagen, dass sie ihre eigene Kleidung erhält, hat der Richter nicht dafür gesorgt, dass dies umgesetzt wird. Kleidung, die ihr zugesandt wurde, wurde ihr entweder nicht ausgehändigt oder an die Absender zurückgeschickt. Die Gefängnisbehörde weigerte sich über einen langen Zeitraum, ihr Salz und Zucker zu liefern, was für jemanden, der sich im Hungerstreik befindet, von großer Bedeutung ist. Eine Reihe von Paketen mit Salz und Zucker, die von Aktivisten an sie geschickt wurden, wurden ihr ebenfalls nicht ausgehändigt. Das Gefängnis Rohrbach versucht, Özgül Emre zu ermorden und zu verstümmeln. Wir wurden darüber informiert, dass sich der Gesundheitszustand von Özgül Emre verschlechtert. Nach den Informationen, die wir von ihrer Familie nach dem heutigen Anwaltstreffen erhalten haben, konnte Özgül Emre keine Flüssigkeit mehr zu sich nehmen. Ihre Flüssigkeitszufuhr ist extrem eingeschränkt. Sie erbricht jetzt jede Flüssigkeit, die sie zu sich nimmt. Außerdem hat sie starke Schmerzen in der Leistengegend, wenn sie Flüssigkeit zu sich nimmt oder erbricht. Da sie keine Flüssigkeit verträgt, kann sie weder Salz noch Zucker zu sich nehmen. Wenn eine Person, die sich im Hungerstreik befindet, keine Flüssigkeit zu sich nehmen kann und diese bald darauf erbricht und Schmerzen beim Erbrechen hat, bedeutet dies, dass der Hungerstreik nun ein sehr ernstes Stadium erreicht hat. Es könnte bedeuten, dass es die letzten Tage sind. Deshalb ist es auch so ernst. Sie könnte schwer behindert sein oder sogar sterben. Wir werden niemals zulassen, dass das Gefängnis Rohrbach und der deutsche Staat Özgül töten oder behindern. Ab morgen früh wird es vor dem Bundesgerichtshof in Karlshure eine ständige Mahnwache von Aktivisten geben. Doktor Lutz, der Richter am Bundesgerichtshof, trägt die volle Verantwortung für diese Situation. Er ist verantwortlich für die Entscheidungen von der Bekleidung bis zum Wohlergehen der Gefangenen. In diesem Sinne ist dieser Richter derjenige, der Druck auf das Gefängnis ausüben und dafür sorgen kann, dass das Gefängnis diese Unrechtmäßigkeit abstellt. Wenn das Gefängnis Özgül Emre ihre Kleidung nicht zurückgibt, kann sie behindert werden. Sie kann sterben. Wenn Richter Dr. Lutz dies nicht garantieren kann, sollte er Özgül Emre sofort in ein anderes Gefängnis verlegen. Andernfalls wird er für ihre Gesundheit und ihr Leben verantwortlich sein. Wir rufen alle Menschen auf, Özgül Emre zu umarmen und sich an der Mahnwache vor dem Bundesgerichtshof in Karlshure zu beteiligen, um ihre Tötung oder Verkrüppelung zu verhindern. Lassen wir nicht zu, dass Özgül Emre vom deutschen Staat getötet wird! Lassen wir nicht zu, dass sie zum Krüppel gemacht wird! Özgül Emre ist unsere Ehre! Schluss mit der Auferlegung von Gefängnisuniformen! Lassen Sie Özgül Emre’s berechtigte und legitime Forderungen akzeptieren! Wir bitten Sie, sich mit der Justizvollzugsanstalt Rohrbach und dem Bundesgerichtshof in Karlshure in Verbindung zu setzen, um gegen diese ungerechte Behandlung zu protestieren und sie aufzufordern, die Forderungen von Özgül Emre sofort zu akzeptieren. Bundesgerichtshof Karlshure Herrenstraße 45 A, 76133 Karlshure Telefon: +49 (0) 721 1590 Justizvollzugsanstalt Rohrbach Peter-Caesar-Alleee 1, 55597 Wöllstein Telefon: +49 (0) 6703 3060

Das bisschen Haushalt?

Veröffentlicht am 21. Juli 2018 von rfkautor Unter dem Titel „das bisschen Haushalt“ legte die bürgerliche Zeitung Faz kürzlich dar, dass Frauen noch immer mehr Reproduktionsarbeit erledigen als Männer, also mehr Wäsche waschen, kochen, putzen, Kinder versorgen, etc. Bis dahin nichts, was wir Frauen nicht sowieso wüssten. In schönster bürgerlich-pseudowissenschaftlicher Manier wird aufgeschlüsselt, welche Generation von Frauen in welchem Alter wie viel im Haushalt leisten muss. Die Faz kommt zu dem Schluss, dass Frauen jeder Generation mit Mitte 30 am meisten in dieser Sphäre arbeiten müssen. Wer hätte das gedacht? Dann, wenn die Kinder da sind und der Kerl gerne Karriere machen möchte? Auch wenn die Faz alles mit Zahlen, die auf die Stunde genau berechnet sind, belegt, weiß sie nichts, was wir nicht auch wissen: Frauen werden unterdrückt und ausgebeutet. Frauen sind diejenigen, die zuhause nicht nur die Reproduktionsarbeit für sich sondern auch für den Rest der Familie machen sollen. Frauen sind diejenigen, denen zugeschrieben wird, dass sie gerne Opfer für die Familie bringen und dass sie sowieso nichts glücklicher machen kann als eine glückliche Familie. Frauen sind also diejenigen, deren Bedürfnisse nicht zählen und die rund um die Uhr für andere arbeiten sollen. Das wollte uns der Artikel der Faz aber nicht beweisen. Stattdessen strotzt er nur so von der reaktionären Ausstrahlung, Frauen weiß zu machen, dass sie gar nicht kämpfen müssten. Die Vorstellung, dass Frauen im Haushalt mehr arbeiten sollen, ist laut FAZ „überholt“ und alles weitere ist nur noch eine Frage der Umsetzung von der Theorie in die Praxis. Das patriarchale Problem löse sich über die Generationen hinweg von selbst. Frauen, die 20 Jahre früher geboren seien, hätten viel mehr arbeiten müssen und der Trend gehe weiter. Frauen aus späteren Generationen würden viel weniger ausgebeutet werden. Es ist, als würde die Faz sagen wollen: „Stellt euch nicht so an, erstens könnte es viel schlimmer sein und zweitens wird es immer besser – weil sich die Einstellungen geändert haben.“ Mit keinem Wort wird erwähnt, dass die verbesserte Stellung der Frau und stärkere Billigung ihrer Rechte die Ergebnisse von Frauenkämpfen sind. Dafür haben Frauen nicht Zeitung gelesen und sich gedacht „ach, das wird schon jemand für mich lösen“. Dafür sind Frauen aufgestanden und haben sich organisiert, um für etwas besseres zu kämpfen. Und erst recht nicht wird erwähnt, dass wir uns aus der Ausbeutung und Unterdrückung, die wir Frauen noch immer tagtäglich erfahren, nur befreien können, wenn wir weiterhin kämpfen. Engels hat uns gelehrt, dass wir das Patriarchat in einer Welt, die auf dem Privateigentum beruht, nicht abschaffen können. Tagtäglich stellen sich die Verhältnisse auf Grundlage der herrschenden Ordnung wieder her. Solange es Privateigentum gibt, bleibt auch die Reproduktion Privatsache. Jeder Mensch muss selbst sehen, wie er es schafft, seinen Lebensunterhalt zu finanzieren. Und jeder Mensch muss zusehen, dass die eigene Arbeitskraft für den nächsten Tag wieder hergestellt wird. Üblicherweise wird das in dieser Gesellschaft in Beziehung, Ehe und Familie so organisiert, dass Frauen für die Reproduktion zuständig sind (und zusätzlich lohnarbeiten). Dass sich das nicht ändert, liegt nicht nur an der durchgesetzten patriarchalen Ideologie, dass Frauen reinlicher sind, es gerne ordentlich haben, besser mit Kindern umgehen können, nicht für harte Arbeit gemacht sind oder ähnliches. Gerade die Produktionsverhältnisse machen eine Auflösung des Patriarchats unmöglich. Weil die Reproduktion privat organisiert ist, fallen Frauen in der Regel eine Weile aus dem Job raus, wenn sie Kinder kriegen. Die reine Möglichkeit, dass das geschieht, nimmt das Kapital zum Anlass, die Löhne von Frauen niedriger zu kalkulieren als die von Männern. Das macht zum Einen Frauen in der Beziehung abhängiger von Männern als andersrum und schafft damit eine Grundlage der Ausbeutung und Unterdrückung. Zum Anderen ist dadurch selbst bei Paaren, die einen weniger patriarchalen Anspruch pflegen, naheliegend, dass die Frau zuhause bleibt, wenn Kinder anstehen. Da wir in diesem Schweinesystem gemäß der kapitalistischen Logik schlechter bezahlt werden und ohnehin weniger Karrierechancen haben, reproduzieren wir mit Entscheidungen, die die Verhältnisse uns nahelegen, immer wieder die Erscheinungsformen des Patriarchats. Dieses Problem lässt sich nur lösen, wenn die Produktionsmittel vergesellschaftet werden und die Reproduktion nicht mehr privat sondern gesellschaftlich organisiert wird. Daran haben wir Frauen sogar ein doppeltes Interesse. Denn sogar die Faz weiß, dass weniger Hausarbeit für uns im Laufe der Generationen nicht zustande kommt, weil wir plötzlich mehr Freizeit haben, sondern dadurch, dass wir zusätzlich lohnarbeiten gehen müssen. Neben der Ausbeutung zuhause müssen wir uns zusätzlich auch noch durch das Kapital ausbeuten lassen. Das bedeutet, der Weg um unsere doppelte Unterdrückung abzuschaffen, ist die Vernichtung des alten Staats und der Aufbau einer neuen Produktionsweise. Auch wenn wir das Patriarchat in diesen Verhältnissen nicht zerschlagen können, können und müssen wir jeden Tag dagegen ankämpfen. Auch wenn wir es noch nicht zerschlagen können, können und müssen wir dafür jeden Tag dafür sorgen, dass es besser wird. Wir kämpfen gemeinsam mit unseren männlichen Genossen dafür, das Patriarchat eines Tages hinwegfegen zu können. Hier und Heute heißt das: Wir müssen ernst genommen werden, wir müssen uns selber zutrauen zu kämpfen, wir müssen Rechte einfordern und durchsetzen. Wir müssen uns wehren! Wir wollen eine Gesellschaft ohne Patriarchat? Dann lasst uns aufstehen und diese Gesellschaft herbeiführen. Unsere Befreiung können wir nur selber machen. DER ORIGINALARTIKEL IST AM 21. JULI 2018 AUF „DEM VOLKE DIENEN“ ERSCHIENEN. IHR FINDET IHN UNTER FOLGENDEM LINK: http://www.demvolkedienen.org/index.php/de/t-proletarischer-feminismus/2475-das-bisschen-haushalt

Aktuelles zur Situation der Frauen in Palästina

Veröffentlicht am 25. Juni 2018 von rfkautor Seit dem Beginn der Besetzung Palästinas sind die palästinensischen Frauen in die Kämpfe des palästinensischen Volkes involviert. Durch ihre politischen Kämpfe erreichten die Frauen teilweise Unabhängigkeit von den Männern und kämpften aktiv für ihre Befreiung mit. Mit der 2. Intifada und der verstärkten Präsenz des israelischen Militärs wurden Frauen, besonders die jungen, in den Kerker des Hauses gesteckt, größtenteils aus Angst vor Übergriffen seitens des israelischen Militärs. Als eine weitere Folge wurden Frauen immer jünger verheiratet. Sie litten immer mehr an psychischen Krankheiten und Ängsten. Zwar begannen auch immer mehr wieder Frauen sich zu militarisieren und gegen die Besatzung Palästinas zu kämpfen, jedoch erlitt das palästinensische Volk einen enormen patriarchalen Rückschritt, besonders aufgrund der fundamentalistisch-islamischen Regierung. 18788711 303 Als am 30. März diesen Jahres die Proteste und Rebellion des palästinensischen Volkes erneut aufflammten, beteiligten sich erneut wieder mehr Frauen. Viele Frauen haben genug von der Regierung, die nicht an die Gleichberechtigung von Mann und Frau glaubt und statt des jetzt geltenden Gesetzes lieber islamisches Recht gelten lassen will. Viele Frauen können nicht selbstständig das Haus verlassen, sie müssen sich an Kleidungs- und Kulturregeln halten, die sie einschränken. Trotz alledem lassen sich die palästinensischen Frauen nicht entmutigen, sie wissen, dass sie die Hälfte der Gesellschaft sind und dass ohne sie eine Befreiung unmöglich ist. 40% soll der Frauenanteil an den neuesten Protesten gewesen sein, berichtet die Palästinenserin Abdelalim. Auch soll die Beteiligung ein wichtiges Zeichen gegen die Spaltung der Geschlechter der palästinensischen Gesellschaft gewesen sein. Die Frauen formulieren ihre Forderungen klar, wünschen sich Frieden und ein Ende der israelischen Besatzung, aber lehnen auch klar den Zionismus Israels ab und sind bereit, für ihre Zukunft und die ihrer Kinder zu kämpfen. Ihnen ist bewusst, dass der Kampf des palästinensischen Volkes auch immer ein Kampf der Palästinenserinnen war, oder wie sie es sagen: “Women will always be in the front lines of our national struggle.” (Frauen werden immer an der Frontlinie unseres nationalen Kampfes sein.) DER ORIGINALARTIKEL IST AM 23. Juni 2018 AUF „DEM VOLKE DIENEN“ ERSCHIENEN. IHR FINDET IHN UNTER FOLGENDEM LINK: http://www.demvolkedienen.org/index.php/de/asien/2387-aktuelles-zur-situation-der-frauen-in-palaestina

For a Unified Maoist International Conference!

Proposal regarding the balance of the International Communist Movement and of its current General Political Line I. INTRODUCTION As communists, we are sons and daughters of a single class in the world, the international proletariat, which has its destiny undeniably welded – communism – which either all or none enter. For that, we firmly subject ourselves to proletarian internationalism as a fundamental principle for the ICM, we unfold our powerful and immortal lemma that was established in the Manifesto of the Communist Party from Marx and Engles: “Proletarians of all countries, unite!” Communism is the inexorable goal of history, humanity marches toward it and this unfading goal will be reached no matter the vicissitudes we face today. The principal task for the communists is to conform and develop themselves as a marxist-leninist-maoist Communist Party to initiate and develop People’s War to conquer Power – which we have to develop according to the particularity of each country – serving the World Proletarian Revolution to reach our final goal: Communism. The existence of a communist party is decisive to make the proletarian revolution at the New Era in which we develop ourselves. Without a marxist-leninist-maoist Communist Party, revolution can not be carried out and neither can it develop itself to conquer and defend the New Power. The International Communist Movement is the vanguard of the international proletariat. The principal problem today for the ICM is the dispersion of forces and the main danger is still revisionism. Its unity is built on the base and guidance of marxism – today marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism – and its application to the concrete practice of revolution on each country and to the process of the world revolution. Chairman Mao told us: “the history of the international communist movement shows us that proletarian unity is consolidated and developed in the struggle against opportunism, revisionism and divisionism”. The current dispersion was originated with the capitalist restoration in the USSR and in People’s China, and it was aggravated by the emergence of the right opportunist line, revisionist and capitulationist (ROL R&C) in Peru, the revisionist treason of “Prachandism” in Nepal and the “avakianite” liquidationist revisionism in the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM), among other manifestations of new revisionism in different parties and organizations. Splittism and the following dispersion were the result of new revisionism’s treason to the fundamental principles of marxism in the proletarian movement. The demarcation line between marxism and the new revisionism consists in: 1) acknowledging or not acknowledging maoism as the third, new and superior stage of marxism and the necessity to combat revisionism and all opportunism; 2) acknowledging or not acknowledging the necessity of revolutionary violence – as People’s War – to make revolution in one’s own country; 3) acknowledging or not acknowledging the necessity to demolish the old state apparatus and replace the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie with the dictatorship of the proletariat; 4) acknowledging or not acknowledging the necessity of the revolutionary party of the proletariat. The ICM can not give a single step toward its reunification without combating revisionism and all opportunism implacably and inseparably from the struggle against imperialism and all reaction. This is why we base ourselves in the principle of “two-line struggle as a driving force for party development”, which is decisive to formulate and defend the red proletarian line and to combat the other non-proletarian lines, in other words, to keep the Party red. The general counterrevolutionary offensive that was unleashed in the beginning of the 90s of the last century, mainly by Yankee imperialism, is being defeated by the marxist-leninist-maoist revolutionary counteroffensive through the People’s Wars, the struggles for national liberation and the struggles developed by the proletariat and the oppressed peoples of the world. We greet the heroic People’s Wars in India, Peru, Turkey and the Philippines and the armed struggles for liberation of the nations occupied by imperialism. Class struggle in the era of the world proletarian revolution and of the general crisis of imperialism and its sweeping away, the era in which we develop ourselves, follows the logic of the people that was established by Chairman Mao Tsetung, according to which there is no definitive defeat for the proletariat. Thus, the capitalist restorations in the USSR (1956) and in China (1976) can not stop the revolutionary march of the international proletariat on its path to ultimately settle down in Power. These defeats are only moments in the development of the contradiction between revolution and counterrevolution, from which we draw lessons to prevent restorations in the future. The few decades of dictatorship of the proletariat – which started the construction of socialism in more than a third of the world – produced the greatest social achievements for the masses in human history, which were never reached before. The end of the social-imperialist USSR in the beginning of the 90s did not represent the defeat of marxism nor the failure of socialism, but the bankruptcy of the decomposing revisionism and social-imperialism. Marxism – today marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism – is the most complete, progressive and rational doctrine of the whole human history; it represents the new because it is the world view, the ideology of the last and most advanced class in History: the proletariat; the class that is conscious of its historical role of being the gravedigger of capitalism and, consequently, of all class society. Maoism is opposed to all the decadent and obsolete bourgeois ideology and its revisionist deviations. During more than 170 years starting from the Manifesto of the Communist Party in 1848, the ideology of the proletariat has emerged and developed itself in the crucible of class struggle in three stages: 1) marxism, 2) marxism-leninism and 3) marxism-leninism-maoism. Maoism is the almighty scientific ideology of the international proletariat, it is almighty because it is true; the third, new and superior stage of marxism; the current marxism that we uphold, defend and principally apply. The new revisionsim of the ROL in Peru, of the called “prachandaism” and “avakianism”, etc., act within the international proletarian movement as part of the general counterrevolutionary offensive, as an anti-maoist counter-current that attempts to hold down the World Proletarian Revolution. The new revisionism negates marxism, the party, socialism and the dictatorship of the proletariat. However, the center of its attacks are condensed in the negation of the People’s War as an essential question of maoism – a question that is inseparable from it. The fundamental of maoism is Power, in other words, the power to the proletariat, the power to the dictatorship of the proletariat, the power based on an armed force led by the Communist Party. Notably: 1) Power under the leadership of the proletariat within the democratic revolution; 2) Power to the dictatorship of the proletariat within the socialist revolution and the successive cultural revolutions; 3) Power based on an armed force led by the communist Party, conquered and defended through People’s War. Chairman Mao established the strategy and tactics of the world revolution. The development of the world revolution is the principal aspect for preventing the world imperialist war and, if it starts, we communists must oppose it with world People’s War. This demands us to lead People’s War to face the imperialist wars of aggression against the oppressed nations in Asia, Africa, Latin America and even in Europe itself. Even without the imperialist aggression we must lead People’s War to make revolution in all kind of countries, comprising countries and continents until advancing toward the world People’s War, with which we will sweep away imperialism and the reaction from the face of Earth. Thus, it corresponds to us making the world revolution through People’s War, and the base for it is constituted by the oppressed nations. Therefore, the fundamental aspect of maoism is Power. People’s War and Power for the class are an essential part of maoism, and an inseparable aspect of it, namely the political and military conception of the proletariat: Power conquered and defended by the armed force led by the Communist Party. The Party expresses the political, military and construction strategy of the proletariat according to the three kinds of revolution. People’s War is the superior form of struggle, through which the fundamental problems of revolution are solved, all that is good comes for the people comes from it; it is the military strategy that correspond to the political strategy (conquest of power) to transform society in favor of the Class and the people; it is the principal form of struggle and the People’s Army is the principal form of organization, an army of a new type that combats, mobilizes, politicizes, organizes and arms the masses, and produces. People’s War is a war of masses led by the Communist Party to conquer the New Power, which is materialized in the people’s committees and base areas for the conquest of Power in the whole country. In order to carry out People’s War it is necessary to have four fundamental problems in mind: 1) ideology of the proletariat, marxism-leninism-maoism, applied to the concrete practice and the particularities of revolution on each country, both oppressed countries or imperialist countries; 2) the necessity of the Communist Party that leads the People’s War; 3) specification of the political strategy for the democratic or socialist revolution and the path of it; 4) base areas. The New Power, or Front-New State that is formed in the base areas are the core of the People’s War. In order to establish the base areas, Chairman Mao established three fundamental requirements: 1) to have armed forces, 2) to defeat the enemy, 3) to mobilize the masses. That is to say, to develop the Guerrilla warfare, which means to annihilate the living forces of the enemy and thus creating a void of power in order to establish, construct and defend the new Power, to destroy the old social relations of production and build new ones. From that the contradiction New Power/New State Vs Old State is developed, through various reestablishment and counter-reestablishment moments, according to the fluidity of war. Imperialism is the superior and last stage of capitalism, it is monopolistic, parasitic and decomposing and agonizing. It is in a general and last crisis and due to this situation it is harassed by its inevitable cyclical crisis that are increasingly worsened and deeper. Because of that it has to always attempt to recover from worse conditions, only to be swept away by the world revolution. Imperialism is the tendency toward reaction and war in all the line. Imperialism and world reaction will collapse in the midst of a complex of wars of all kinds, they will be swept away from the face of Earth with People’s War, and Socialism will emerge. Chairman Mao established that “Yankee imperialism is a colossus with clay feet” and that ““imperialism is a paper tiger, which must be strategically despised and taken into account tactically” The process of World Proletarian Revolution in which we develop is within the frame of the “50 to 100 years” in which imperialism and world reaction would be swept away from the face of Earth, as foreseen by Chairman Mao. Thus, revolution has become the historically and politically principal tendency in the current world. All the fundamental contradictions of this epoch are aggravated, the principal one being the contradiction between oppressed nations and imperialism. The objective conditions were never so ripe for revolution. The development of the subjective conditions advances, smashing the declining general counteroffensive and smashing pessimism and capitulationism spread by revisionism. The conditions are each day more favorable for revolution. More People’s Wars are required in order to develop the world proletarian revolution. It is necessary to constitute or reconstitute communist parties – according to each case – on each country in order to develop new People’s Wars, By applying the teachings of Lenin “go further into the deepest masses”, “educate them in the practice of revolutionary violence” and “sweep away the colossal heap of garbage relentlessly fighting opportunism and revisionism.” II. FOUNDATIONFOR ESTABLISHING THE GENERAL POLITICAL LINE FOR THE ICM By applying marxism-leninism-maoism to the concrete practice of revolution on each country and the World Revolution, we point out the following foundations for the establishment and development of the General Political Line for the International communist Movement: 1. NEW ERA With the emergence of imperialism, the world was divided between a handful of oppressing nations on the one hand, and a big number of oppressed nations on the other, which ripened the conditions for the World Revolution. The triumph of the Great Socialist Revolution of October 1917 led by the great Lenin and the Bolshevik Party marked an extraordinary feat in Universal History – the end of the world bourgeois revolution and the opening of the New Era, the Era of the World Proletarian Revolution and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. There were many revolutions before the great October Revolution, each one of them provided new impulse for society. However, these revolutions only replaced an exploitation system with another. The Great October Socialist Revolution (GOSR) was the first revolution that was conceived and carried out to establish a society free from exploitation and oppression – a classless society. The October Socialist Revolution represented a radical turning point in the history of humanity. It opened a New Era in the shining and long path that leads to socialism and communism. The GOSR potentiated revolutionary violence as an indispensable weapon to transform the whole world. Lenin said: “In the October Revolution … revolutionary violence was a brilliant success.” He assumed the Marxist principle of revolutionary violence as a universal law. We reaffirm ourselves in the established by Chairman Mao that “Power grows from the barrel of a gun” and that “we are in favor of the theory of the omnipotence of revolutionary war.” In order to appraise the world in this New Era we see that four fundamental contradictions that are expressed: 1) the contradiction between capitalism and socialism – the contradiction between the two radically different systems will take this whole period and it will be one of the last to be resolved, it will last even after the seizure of Power; 2) the contradiction between bourgeoisie and proletariat – it is the contradiction between two opposed classes and will also remain after the seizure of Power, it manifests itself in various ideological, political and economic forms until its solution when we enter communism; 3) the interimperialist contradictions – these are the contradictions between the imperialists for world hegemony, it takes place between the superpowers, between the superpowers and the imperialist powers and between the imperialist powers, this contradiction will be resolved in the period of 50 to 100 years; 4) the contradiction between oppressed nations and imperialism – it is the struggle for the liberation of the oppressed nations to destroy imperialism and the reaction, its solution is also included within the 50 to 100 years, it is the historically principal contradiction during this whole period of time; however, any of the four fundamental contradictions can become the principal according to specific circumstances of class struggle, temporarily, or in certain countries, but the historically principal contradiction will again express itself as such until its final resolution. We, the marxist-leninist-maoist, have to carry out three kinds of revolution in order to, in perspective, achieve our final goal, communism: 1) democratic revolution – the bourgeois revolution of a new type, led by the proletariat in the backward countries, it establishes the joint dictatorship of the proletariat, the peasantry and the petty bourgeoisie, and (under certain conditions) the middle bourgeoisie, all under the hegemony of the proletariat through its Communist Party; 2) socialist revolution – in the imperialist countries, which establishes the dictatorship of the proletariat; 3) the cultural revolutions – they are carried out in order to continue revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, to submit and eliminate the whole generation of capitalism and to struggle against the attempts of capitalism restoration, they serve to strengthen the dictatorship of the proletariat and to march toward communism. Chairman Mao taught us that “the replacement of the old for the new is a universal, eternal and inescapable law”. It is a law of history which, in the struggle for establishing the new social system, the classes cannot impose themselves in one single attempt, in one single blow, and it cannot be different with the proletariat. The capitalist restorations in the USSR (1956) ad in China (1976) are part of the contradiction between socialism and capitalism – the historical struggle for the replacement of the old by the new. Lenin warned that the exploiting classes would never resign after being defeated and expropriated. Their hatred and efforts to restore capitalism would be hundredfold by their defeat. This is why they must be firmly submitted to the dictatorship of the proletariat in order to generate the conditions for the extinction of classes. Lenin declared: “liquidating capitalism and its traces and introducing the principles of the communist order constitutes the content of the new epoch in the history of the entire world that has now commenced..” This way, Lenin pointed out that this task would take a long time and that in order to completely liquidate the classes it is not only necessary to eliminate the exploiting classes but also to make disappear the differences between city and countryside, workers and peasants, manual and intellectual labor and others. This contradiction will only be solved through a long and complex process of restoration and counter-restoration, until the dictatorship of the proletariat and socialism are consolidated in the whole world – paving the way for the disappearance of all social classes, with which the state is also extinguished, and humanity enters the always shining golden communism. Chairman Mao taught that: “socialism will eventually replace the capitalist system; This is an objective law, independent of the will of man. As much as the reactionaries try to stop the wheel of history, sooner or later the revolution will take place and, without a doubt, will triumph.” 2. THE PROCESS OF THE WORLD REVOLUTION There are two forces that operate in the revolutionary movement in the whole world: the international communist movement and the national liberation movement, the first one is guidance and the second is the base. The movement of national liberation of the force that operates within the nations oppressed by imperialism and the reaction. In the decade of 1910, Lenin paid maximum attention to the struggle in India, China, Persia, putting forward that the socialist revolution would not be uniquely and exclusively the proletariat against their bourgeoisie but of all colonies against their oppressors. He said that there is a fusion of forces: the international proletarian movement that act in the whole world, and the national liberation movement of the oppressed nations, and, given that the masses in the oppressed nations are the majority of the global population, it will be a decisive weight in the world revolution. He gets to the conclusion that revolution shifts toward the oppressed nations, but do not deny revolution in the imperialist countries, furthermore he shows that a socialist state – just as USSR was – could develop in the midst of imperialist siege. This is how the law of uneven development of revolution in the world operates. Further developing Marx, Lenin lay the basis of the strategy of world revolution to undermine imperialism, unite the struggle of national liberation with the struggles of the international proletarian movement and develop revolution. Although “Proletarians of all countries, unite!” is the lemma for the communists, he puts forward that the lemma that should guide the struggle of the two forces should be “Proletarians of all countries and peoples of the world, unite!”. The latter unites unifies the proletarian movement for the construction of socialism in the imperialist countries with the struggles of national liberation in the colonial and semi-colonial countries, a lemma that was accepted by the Communist International. Chairman Mao, developed the strategy and tactics of the world revolution, he specified this lemma according to the tasks at the time: “Marxist-leninists of all countries, unite! Revolutionary peoples of the whole world, unite; overthrow imperialism, contemporary revisionism and all reactionaries of the different countries!” Thus he fuses the national liberation movement with the international communist movement and these two forces impulse the development of world history. The international proletarian movement is the theory and practice of the international proletariat. The proletariat struggles in three spheres – ideological, political and economic – and since it appears [for the first time] in history as the last class, it does so struggling. The following feats stands out: 1848, when the Communist Manifesto written by Marx and Engels establishes the foundation and the program of the proletariat; 1871, Paris Commune, where for the first time the proletariat seizes power; 1905, general rehearsal of revolution; 1917, the triumph of the October Revolution in Russia, the class establishes the dictatorship of the proletariat and opens a new era; 1949, the triumph of the Chinese revolution, the joint dictatorship of the revolutionary classes led by the proletariat and the uninterrupted step into socialist revolution is resolved, it changes the correlation of forces in the world; and the decade of 1960 with the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, led by Chairman Mao Tsetung, revolution continues under the dictatorship of the proletariat in a sharp struggle between restoration and counter-restoration. We must develop the struggle for demands serving the seizure of Power. The proletariat generates the trade union and the strike within its struggle for demands, which are not only instruments for the struggle for demands, but they “forge the class for the great battles to come”. The strike is the principal instrument of the struggle for demands and the general strike is a complement to insurrection. The proletariat generates political apparatus: the Communist Party which is totally opposed and distinct to the other parties, it has the goal of seizing political power, thus defined Marx. Lenin established the character of the Party of a new type when combating the hindering influence of the old revisionism, which generated bourgeois worker parties based on the labor aristocracy, union bureaucracy, parliamentary cretinism and that are adjusted to the old order. Chairman Mao Tsetung developed the construction of the Party around the gun and put forward the interrelated construction of the three instruments: communist party, army of a new type and revolutionary United Front, among which the center is the Communist Party. The proletariat generates ideology: marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism, for the world proletarian revolution. Marxism was principally founded by Marx. Marx and Engels gather the best that was produced by humanity: German classical philosophy, English political economy and French socialism, to found the ideology of the proletariat. Marxism has never given a step in life without struggling against erroneous positions. Thus, it has to confront Proudhon and anarchism, the rightist deviations and supposedly creative developments of Dühring, the opportunist positions that emerge within the German social-democrat party. Our immortal founders Marx and Engels have shown, through scientific analysis, the collapse of capitalism and its inevitable change into communism – where no more exploitation of man by man will exist. They established the mission of the proletariat of all countries: raise in revolutionary struggle against capitalism and gather all workers and exploited in this struggle. The old revisionism would develop after the death of Engels – with Bernstein and Kautsky – and Lenin will combat and defeat them. In brief, Marxism will establish Marxist philosophy, or dialectical materialism, and scientific socialism. Lenin develops marxism and raises it to a second stage, marxism-leninism. He made this in a fierce struggle against old revisionism – which denied marxist philosophy by saying one should base oneself in neo-kantism, which is idealism and not dialectical materialism. In political economy, they denied growing pauperization, thus they affirmed imperialism, capitalism, met the demands of the proletariat; they denied plus-value and imperialism. In Scientific socialism they pointed out against class struggle, against revolutionary violence and spread pacifism and parliamentary cretinism. Lenin taught that revolutionary politics of the proletariat was made through its vanguard party. Without its General Staff, the Communist Party, the proletariat cannot fulfill its principal role in the transformation of the world. Thanks to the existence of a Revolutionary Party of a New Type, created and led by Lenin, the Russian proletariat could take advantage of the revolutionary situation and answer the imperialist war with revolutionary civil war. Chairman Mao said: “with the birth of revolutionary parties of this kind, the physiognomy of world revolution has changed”. Revisionism is to revise the marxist principles by invoking new circumstances. Lenin said that revisionism is the contingent of the bourgeoisie in the ranks of the proletariat and that for struggling against imperialism it is necessary to struggle against revisionism because they are two faces of the same coin. Lenin highlights that revisionism tries to divide the trade union movement and the political movement of the proletariat and generates the split of socialism. Furthermore, within this unerring and implacable struggle against revisionism, Lenin puts forward to convert the imperialist war into revolutionary war in the conjecture of World War One, thus unmasking the old revisionists as social-patriots and social-chauvinists; he puts forward that in times of revolution it is necessary to make new organizations because reaction attacks the legal organizations and we must assemble clandestine apparatuses, inclusively for mass work. Then, he furnishes the October Revolution with a Communist Party and through insurrection. Comrade Stalin would continue the work of Lenin and in the process of the construction of socialism in the USSR, he will struggle against opportunism and the treason of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Bukarin. Stalin developed this struggle for 13 years and it is false that he solved things administratively. During the World War, the USSR under the leadership of comrade Stalin had to apply scorched land to defend its territory, the defense of the socialist motherland costed 25 million lives. In the midst of a complex and difficult situation, under the leadership of comrade Stalin, the dictatorship of the proletariat and the triumph of socialism was consolidated. The five years plans that were applied for twenty five years led to the biggest transformation in the relations of production and to the most powerful development of the productive forces in history until now. We assume the position of Chairman Mao on the role of comrade Stalin that he was a great marxist. Furthermore, bearing in mind he was the one who brilliantly defined leninism. We, the communists, today have the task to make an adequate analysis of World War Two, the assessment of the Communist International and particularly to study well its 7th Congress, within this the role of comrade Stalin, the action of revisionism in France, Italy, etc. Chairman Mao Tsetung, while developing marxism-leninism-maoism, raises marxism to its highest summit turning the theory of the proletariat into marxism-leninism-maoism. He fulfilled this task in the midst of a tenacious and persistent struggle, smashing right opportunist lines within the Communist Party of China – here we highlight smashing the revisionist lines of Liu Shao-chi and Teng Siao-ping; and at the international level he led the struggle and defeated contemporary revisionism of Khrushchev. The furnished the democratic revolution in China, the uninterrupted shift to socialist revolution and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR). The GCPR is the most transcendental aspect of marxism-leninism, in historical perspective, that was done by Chairman Mao; it is the solution of the big pending problem of the continuation of revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat; “it represents a new stage, even deeper and wider, in the development of the socialist revolution”. Let us highlight two questions: 1) the GPCR imply a feat in the development of the dictatorship of the proletariat toward rooting the proletariat into Power, which was concreted with the Revolutionary Committees; and 2) the restoration of capitalism in China, after the counterrevolutionary coup in 1976, it is not a negation of the GPCR but simply part of the contend between restoration-counterrestoration and, on the contrary to being a negation, it shows us the transcendental historical importance the GPCR has in the inexorable march of humanity toward communism. In these conditions, the most earthshaking political process was produces and the biggest mass mobilization ever seen on Earth, which Chairman Mao defines the goals of it as follows: “The present Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution is completely necessary and very timely to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat, to prevent the restoration of capitalism and to build socialism”. Chairman Mao affirmed that not having a correct ideological-political point of view corresponds to not having soul, and that the GPCR is a great revolution that has the goal of changing the soul of people, in other words the world view, ideology, raising the proletariat and the broad masses for the struggle for Power, the defense of the dictatorship of the proletariat, world revolution and communism. Thus, we communists have three great swords: our founder Marx, the great Lenin and Chairman Mao Tsetung, our great task is to uphold, defend and apply marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism, placing it at the command and guide of the world revolution. By applying the law of contradiction to the process of the world revolution, the process of sweeping away imperialism and the reaction from the face of Earth, there are three moments – because contradiction reigns over everything and every contradiction has two struggling aspects, in this case, revolution and counterrevolution. Those moments are: 1st Strategic defensive; 2nd Strategic Stalemate; and 3rd Strategic offensive of the world revolution. The strategic defensive of the world revolution, which is opposed to the offensive of counterrevolution, pulls out since 1871 with Paris Commune and ends in World War Two; the strategic stalemate takes place with the triumph of the Chinese revolution until the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and the development of the powerful movement of national liberation; afterwards, revolution enters strategic offensive of the world revolution that moment would be around the decade of 1980 in which we see the war Iran-Iraq, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, the initiation of People’s War in Peru and it is countering the counterrevolutionary offensive of general character, the epoch within the “next 50 to 100 years”; from there on the contradiction between capitalism and socialism – whose solution will bring us to communism – will develop. Chairman Mao taught us that the path is tortuous, but the perspectives are brilliant. Chairman Mao established that imperialism “Make trouble, fail, make trouble again, fail again . . . till their doom; that is the logic of the imperialists”, as the logic of the people is to “Fight, fail, fight again, fail again, fight again . . . till their victory; that is the logic of the people”. Revolution will triumph in the whole world and communism will shine over the Earth sooner than later, depending on the action of the communists. 3. INTERNATIONAL SITUATION Starting from the thesis of Lenin, it is estimated that the economic relations of imperialism constitute the basis of the currently existing international situation. Throughout the whole 20th Century, this new phase of capitalism, its superior and last stage, was completely defined. And that the division of the world into oppressed and oppressor countries is a distinctive feature of imperialism. Thus, to understand the current situation we cannot start from the fundamental contradiction of capitalism because we are in its superior and last phase, imperialism. There are three fundamental contradictions in the today’s world: First contradiction: between oppressed nations, on the one hand, and imperialist superpowers and powers on the other. This is the principal contradiction in the current moment and, at the same time, the principal contradiction of the epoch. The world is divided, in one part there is a big number of oppressed nations, which are colonial or semi-colonial countries, the latter have only formal sovereignty or independence, they are economically, politically and culturally subjugated to imperialism; in the other part, there is a handful of imperialist powers, superpowers or powers, in both cases they are oppressing nations. In the part of the imperialist powers, Yankee imperialism is the sole hegemonic superpower. Russia is still an atomic superpower and there is a handful of second-tier imperialist powers. Yankee imperialism is the largest exporter of capital in the world, which is expressed in enormous unbalance in its economy. In order to keep its hegemony, imperialism is forced to carry out many wars at the same time, despite having military presence in all continents. This leads to enormous economic costs for maintaining its huge military machinery and espionage, the costs of the credits from the past wars and the current wars, support for the war veterans; not to mention the high social cost that is caused in their own land, despise for the life and dignity of the masses from the oppressed nations (Third World), the genocide they apply to subjugate them which nourishes class hatred from all the peoples of the world. The Third World hosts the largest and poorest population, they are subject to imperialist oppression, they live in conditions that do not fit the level of development achieved by humanity, they suffer the demise of their living conditions, of the natural environment and they are stricken by the systematic wars of plunder of imperialism and their local lackeys. A bureaucratic capitalism develops on a semifeudal and semicolonial basis in those countries. It generates the corresponding political and ideological genres and systematically prevents national development, exploits the proletariat, the peasantry and the petty bourgeoisie and restricts the medium bourgeoisie. Not acknowledging the semifeudal character of the oppressed countries and, thus, the necessity for an agrarian war to solve it, ends up denying the necessity of the democratic revolution in those countries, the necessity to develop the People’s War as a unitary war, in which the countryside is principal and the city is a necessary complementary, to end with imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism and semifeudality. World crisis will go on unloading on the oppressed countries and as long as they hold this condition they will still be the loot for the imperialist repartition. The policy of imperialism is further reaction and violence against the oppressed nations for a further national subjugation of wars of plunder and prey. The plan of the imperialists is the partition of the countries in the new repartition, based on the relations of military force and the advance of the occupation of strategic positions. What they seek is not peace but to subjugate the peoples through capitulation with “peace agreements”, which they only formalize what they achieved in the battlefield. The countries of the Third World from Asia, Africa and Latin America, as pointed out by Chairman Mao, are the zones of revolutionary storms and the base for the world proletarian revolution. It is necessary to highlight that the Third World extends even to Europe itself. We reaffirm that the true national self-determination can only be achieved through revolution of a new democracy or socialist revolution, according to each case, through the development of People’s War, to which it is necessary to constitute or reconstitute communist parties of a new type, marxist-leninist-maoist parties capable of leading revolution to its end. Chairman Mao has masterly synthesized all the struggles in the oppressed nations at the following great guideline: “The countries want their sovereignty, the nations want their liberation and the peoples want revolution!” Second contradiction: between proletariat and bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries. The economic crisis in 2008 that began as a finance crisis in the USA was unloaded over the masses in the imperialist countries themselves and in the oppressed nations. Thus it has stricken the proletariat of the imperialist countries, which instigated sharp struggles for the defense of the achievements they conquered throughout the 20th Century. The consequences of this crisis were not overcame, this is why the recovering of employment is at the expense of worse quality, lower wages and larger working day. The recovering is at the expense of increasing the over-exploitation of the class. The contradiction proletariat-bourgeoisie is also worsened as a result of the migratory waves of thousands of war refugees and general poor people who – fleeing from the imperialist war and the ferocious exploitation and oppression en the semi-colonies – are thickening the ranks of the proletariat in the imperialist countries. These migratory waves are a consequence of the system itself and the “humanitarian tragedy” to which they are leading benefits the monopolies in the imperialist countries by reducing the production cost due to reducing the salaries with this working force that has costed nothing to them. At the same time, the imperialists themselves cynically broadcast at their media the danger of “terrorism” of those immigrants and promote chauvinist hysteria, nourish racism and nationalism. Imperialism applies its chauvinist reactionary policy of dividing the class between native workers and immigrant workers to prevent the united class conscious action of the proletariat. To prevent it from organizing itself as a single class with the same interests with a single ideology, a single politics and a single party – the Communist Party. The contradiction in the imperialist countries is also between revolution and counterrevolution, it is not a question of changing of this or that political regime – in other words, the form of government of the bourgeois dictatorship – but to put an end on the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat and the people through socialist revolution which is carried out through People’s War. The contradiction bourgeoisie-proletariat and all the other contradictions within the imperialist nations are sharpening. Also, because all the kinds of infamies that are carried out by the imperialist states against the oppressed nations, particularly by USA imperialism, increasingly backlash within the imperialist countries themselves – this is a feature of the current phase of its decomposition. The imperialist war has necessarily to return home. Furthermore, in their own land, the systematic and continuous murder of the members of the poorest masses by the repressive forces of Yankee state are part of the war against the US proletariat and people, particularly against the black and immigrant from the Third World and their descendants. Facing oppression, the tendency is that the masses upraise in rebellion and turn the guns they were given for the massive genocide in the oppressed nations against their own oppressors. The expressions that confirm such tendency have already taken place. Summing up, the principal is that the movement against the imperialist war will grow, together with the rebellion against the exploitation and oppression of the Class and the increasing poverty of the masses. This s taking place in all imperialist countries. Third contradiction: interimperialist. Just as Lenin taught us, imperialism is not one, there are different imperialist countries. In other words, there are imperialist powers and superpowers which divides the world among them according to their relations of economic, political and military strength; relations of strength that changes all the time and develop through collusion and contend. The United States currently bears the condition of sole hegemonic superpower. After the disintegration of the social-imperialist USSR in 1991, the economic weight of imperialist Russia was reduced and so did their military power, but it still maintains its character of atomic superpower. In turn, the other imperialist powers, like Germany, England, France, Japan, China, Austria, the Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, Canada, Italy, Spain, etc., altogether are also a handful of oppressing countries. Since the decade of 1990, they are contending for a new repartition of the oppressed countries that were subjected to social-imperialist USSR. Since then, all the events of some relevance, be them bellicose or non-bellicose, in Eastern Europe, in the former Soviet Republics of Central Asia, the so-called Amplified Middle East (the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Northern Africa, etc.) are included in this contend for the new repartition of those countries. The current world situation is marked by the plan of Yankee imperialism to develop its war of aggression through blood and fire. Their main strategic objective is to snatch the condition of atomic superpower from Russia, hold down social-imperialist China and push it to opening its economy bit by bit. Alliances with other imperialist powers are used for that purpose, according to convenience, as with Germany, France, England, etc., to subvert order in the zones of influence that has a high strategic value for Russia and imposes economic sanctions as a threat to all imperialist powers. In its turn, Russia makes efforts to maintain its zones of influence, especially in Ukraine, Syria and Iran. As for the imperialists, be them alone or in coalitions, they are against an oppressed country or many of those countries from the Third World, at this moment not only the principal contradiction expresses itself, but also the third contradiction is expressed – among the imperialists themselves. Yankee imperialism uses “divide and rule” against other imperialist powers. The imperialists violates as they wish their own treaties, their own international rules – the principle of non-aggression – because the law is for the other to follow. This is why peace and harmony between imperialists are old stories told again, as those of “superimperialism” and “ultraimperialism”, which spread reactionary concepts such as “neoimperialism”, “neocolonialism”, “neoliberalism”, “globalization”, “geopolitics”, etc., those are pseudo-theories that mainly points against democratic revolution and the struggles for national liberation and are used by both imperialists themselves and by revisionists. The imperialist dispute in absolute and collusion is relative. This determines the circumstantial and temporary character of the imperialist alliances; this is why one cannot speak about “imperialist blocks”, this is revisionism. Thus the European Union is not a block, or an “European imperialism”, but an alliance of countries of Europe, under hegemony of Germany, in contend and collusion with France that tries to increase its power, to stop Yankee imperialism. The imperialist powers of the second tier struggle to convert themselves into new superpowers and start contending for world hegemony to occupy the place that is today displayed by Yankee imperialism and to impose through a new world war a new repartition of the world that is already divided into a new world order. Regarding the contradiction between socialism and capitalism, which corresponds to the whole era of the world proletarian revolution, in the current situation, is expressed and develops in the ideological and historical terrain. From the terrain of the reaction, this contradiction manifests itself as the general counterrevolutionary offensive, which is weakening and is currently pointed against the national liberation wars through the so-called “war against terrorism”. We oppose it with the marxist-leninist-maoist revolutionary counteroffensive, which develops with People’s War. In the terrain of revolution, the contradiction between socialism and capitalism expresses itself in that socialism lives as an idea in the struggles of the proletariat and the peoples of the world, in the ongoing combats and People’s Wars in India, Peru, Turkey and the Philippines, and the restless propaganda and increasing two lines struggle among the marxist-leninist-maoist parties and organizations for unifying the ICM under the guidance of maoism and the application of People’s War. In 1962, Chairman Mao indicated: “The next 50 to 100 years or so, as of today, will be a great epoch of radical change of the social system in the world, anepoch that will shake the earth, anepoch with which no other previous historical epoch can be compared. Living in such an epoch, we must be ready to fight a great struggle whose forms will have many different characteristics from the past.” All of that, on the one hand, impulses the greater reactionarization of the bourgeois state (big landowners-bureaucratic state serving imperialism in the oppressed countries) to counter the revolutionary situation in uneven development in the whole world. Its expression is the advance toward the absolute centralization of power in the Executive power – be it as presidential absolutism or as fascism – according to the particularities of the different countries. The centralization of power to face revolution and for the imperialist war of aggression. The objective situation at world level develops, fundamentally, as a worsening of the general crisis of imperialism – which even the reaction itself needs to acknowledge. It is the deepening of its collapse. The huge richness that is socially produced incessantly grows as the private appropriation of such richness is done by a handful of imperialists and the big bourgeois and landowners of the Third World. The result of all this are sharper crisis and shorter cycles within the general and last crisis of imperialism, which pushes all the imperialist states to wage wars of prey for a new repartition. Just as Chairman Mao has pointed out in 1958, “imperialism is still alive and Yankee imperialism, as the sole hegemonic superpower and counterrevolutionary world gendarme, is the principal enemy of the peoples of the world; it still does as it pleases in Africa, Asia and Latin America; it still occupies colonies by force, establishes its military bases in all parts of the world and imposes a war of plunder; it continues to oppress the people’s masses in its own country”. All that is even more acute now 60 years later. But the same situation is also becoming further unbearable and it is inevitable that sooner or later more than 90% of the world population would rise against imperialism and the reactionaries. All that in fierce struggle and in uneven development, it is already going on as a New Great Wave of the World Proletarian Revolution. Since the beginning of this epoch, the crisis of imperialism and bureaucratic capitalism sharpens in the whole world. Whenever its decomposition deepens, all the contradictions sharpen; which develops further the revolutionary situation in uneven development in the whole world. The situation is expressed by the great activity of the masses, its explosiveness makes all reactionaries and their revisionist lackeys tremble. It is expressed everywhere at great explosions never seen before. The objective situation meets at fast pace with the subjective factor, principally the process of the Communist Parties, as marxist-leninist-maoist, principally maoist parties of a new type to initiate new People’s Wars. Thus a new moment opens, a period of revolutions as part of this new great wave of the world proletarian revolution, within the period of the “50 to 100 years” in which includes the strategic offensive of the world revolution. This situation determines the tasks, the strategy and the tactics of the Communist Parties in the whole world. 4. INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST MOVEMENT We reaffirm ourselves in the full validity of the Manifesto of the Communist Party from 1848 (including all its preface and notes written by Marx and Engels, especially the preface of 1872), which is the start of the birth and cornerstone of the International Communist Movement. It established the fundamental principles and the Program of the proletarian revolutionaries. Given that our great founders, Marx and Engels, made that great calling and lemma “Proletarians of all countries, unite!”, that lemma for combat inspires the struggles of the proletariat in the whole world and guides through the path of emancipation. The flames of revolution that were started by Marx and Engels have set the world on fire, permanently changing the course of world history. Marx said: “The experience of the past teaches us, that forgetting the fraternal ties that must exist between the workers of the different countries and that should encourage them to support each other in all their struggles for emancipation, is punished by common defeat of its isolated efforts.” Lenin established that true proletarian internationalism requires: “first, the subordination of the interests of the proletarian struggle in a country to the interests of this struggle on world scale; second, that the nation that is reaching the triumph over the bourgeoisie is capable and willing to make the greatest national sacrifices for the overthrow of international capital.” Chairman Mao raised internationalism in its deepest sense when affirming: “it is the spirit of communism”. Thus, the History of the International Communist Movement is a glorious process of struggle, through which the communists of the world have struggled and struggle to unify themselves serving the achievement of the unalterable goal: the communist society. Three internationals were built in this heroic struggle: The First International, or International Worker’s Association (IWA), was founded by Marx and Engles in 1864 in a fierce struggle against the anarchist, the Blanquists and other positions to establish that the ideology of the proletariat was only one – marxism – it is solid and and scientifically welded with the international nature of the proletariat and its revolutionary party, laid the ideological basis of the proletarian revolution. The moment the International was infiltrated and surrounded of opportunists who attempted to usurp it, Marx put forward that it would be better to end with the IWA that to see it murdered by unity without principles. The Second International, based on marxism, was founded by Engels in 1889 and served the multiplication of worker’s socialist organizations and parties, especially in Europe and North America. After the death of Engles, Bernstein’s and Kautsky’s revisionism assaulted the leadership of the Second International and it degenerated into opportunism, it was finally bankrupt during the First World War, when their leaders opposed themselves to struggle against the imperialist war under the pretext of Defensism (defense of the motherland). They refused to turn it into revolution, they supported the imperialist war and the bourgeoisie of their countries, they voted for the credits of war at the parliament, turned into social-traitors, social-chauvinists. The founding of the Third International, in March 1919, was the result of a long struggle by the left of the ICM that was developed under the Great Leadership of Lenin and the Bolshevik Party. A struggle against all revisionism and opportunism of the member parties of the Second International – who were adapted to the old order. Lenin conceived and funded the Third International as a war machine to carry out the World Proletarian Revolution and the construction of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The founding of the Third International constitutes a great leap in the history of the International Communist Movement. The Third International – Communist International (CI) or Comintern – existed for 24 years, seven world congresses were held during that time until its dissolution in 1943. It had to develop in a complex context represented by the loss of its founder and principal leader – the Great Lenin – in 1924, the great challenges of te construction of socialism in the USSR, the rise of fascism to Power in many countries of the world – especially in Europe – and the beginning of the Second World War. Its existence was strongly influenced by the intense and hard two line struggle that was developed within the Bolshevik Party which lasted 13 years, in which the left, under the leadership of comrade Stalin, had to tenaciously struggle to unmask and smash trotskyism, bukarinism, and the right opportunist clique of Kamenev-Zinoviev, among other gangs and black lines, against the efforts to undermine the dictatorship of the proletariat in the USSR, their attempts to usurp the leadership of the CI and controlling apparatuses to impose their policies n many sections – nefarious actions that caused grave harm. Because of that, the CI suffered right and “left” deviations – particularly within the period between the 5th and the 7th Congresses – and it has issued some erroneous advises and directives that caused some harm to revolutionary parties and processes. However, the principal was that comrade Stalin led – developing the two line struggle – the left within the Communist International preventing the revisionist usurpation and smashed the trotskyist and zinovievist influence at its leadership. Under the correct and justified leadership of comrade Stalin, it kept its red color, marxism-leninism prevailed and revisionism could not raise its head. The 7th Congress in 1935 was of particular transcendence due to the circumstances of the moment and the challenges it faced. This important Congress had to answer to new and far-reaching problems in the midst of a difficult and complex situation. The 7th Congress established the tactic of World Antifascist Front and People’s Front to defend the dictatorship of the proletariat and develop the proletarian revolution while combating the counterrevolutionary offensive of fascism. With that, for the first time in the history of the ICM the international proletariat and the people’s masses of the whole world could e united under the same flag, the same policy, the same plan and under the same leadership, with a single combating army, providing shape for Lenin’s task of working as a true war machine for the World Revolution. Under his leadership, hundreds of millions of masses have risen as a great torrent of steel against fascism, for revolution and in defense of the USSR. The Chinese revolution stands out, which changed the correlation of forces in the struggle against imperialism and the reaction worldwide, favoring socialism and the proletariat and oppressed peoples. Under the leadership of the Third International, in dozens of countries, not only in Europe but also in Asia, the communists carried out heroic armed struggles as guerrilla warfare, like in the Spanish Civil War. In those countries in which revolution could not triumph, the cause for that was principally because there were no sufficiently mature and prepared communist parties, based on marxism-leninism. Despite that, as history shows, its struggle contributed to the defeat of fascism, and the communists have shown to the whole world the communist high valor and heroism, not allowing the morale of the class to be broken. By applying the resolutions of the 7th Congress, the CPCh, led by Chairman Mao, knew how to carry out the Front policy specified to the necessities of Revolution in China, applying independence and self-decision, defeating Japanese fascism and continuing with the liberation war until seizing power in the whole country, defeating the local ruling classes and their imperialist masters and completing the revolution of a New Democracy, uninterruptedly going into socialist revolution. The creative application of marxism-leninism and the line established by the 7th Congress to the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution led to the development of a more comprehensive and complete understanding of united front and fully developing the military theory of the proletariat: People’s War. The problems and deviations that took place in many countries were principally the application, the main responsibility falls to the communist parties, who are the responsible ones for the application of the International line to their respective countries. Departing from what was put forward by Chairman Mao, in order to establish a justified assessment of this experience, it is necessary to draw a clear demarcation line between those who were still within marxism from those who fell into revisionism, still in the former group we need to differentiate the mistakes of principles from the mistakes made within the practical work. Furthermore, Chairman Mao develops the five laws of the united front and regarding the three fundamental instruments of revolution and their interrelation. In some countries like Italy and France, due to the right opportunist positions at the leadership of the communist parties, after carrying out armed struggle of heroic resistance against Nazi-fascism, these parties moved away from the orientations of the CI and the fundamental principles of marxism-leninism, their leadership capitulated before their bourgeoisie while centering in the defense of the demo-liberal regime and betrayed revolution, degenerating into a most extreme and rotten revisionism. At a world level, under the leadership of comrade Stalin, the Antifascist Front was brilliantly applied, the center was the defense of the dictatorship of the proletariat represented by the USSR. Through that, the dictatorship of the proletariat faced fascism and World Revolution advanced. The victory of the antifascist war was a victory of socialism, a victory of the international proletariat and the oppressed peoples of the world over imperialism and world reaction, a victory of marxism-leninism over revisionism. Whith the victory of the antifascist war, the imperialist camp was weakened and the proletarian revolution grew stronger. Thanks to the glorious role of the red army and the wars of resistance, revolution has expanded through Eastern Europe and Central Europe reaching part of Germany, thus increasing the socialist camp. Remarkably, with the victory of the Chinese revolution in 1949, the correlation of forces between revolution and counterrevolution at the international arena changed in favor of world Revolution, which advanced into the stage of strategic stalemate, a powerful socialist camp and a powerful movement of national liberation in the colonies and semi-colonies emerged. This is why we consider that the 7th Congress was an important marxist-leninist congress that armed the proletariat with a justified and correct political line to fight fascism and advance with the World Proletarian Revolution. Although the Communist International and comrade Stalin made some mistakes on the course, the problems of grave deviations and betrayals were caused by revisionism in the leadership of those parties and that cannot be credited to comrade Stalin, the CPSU or the Communist International. When gleaning the history of the ICM and the Proletarian Revolution, we see that comrade Stalin knew how to firmly and ingeniously apply, in the midst of a complex and difficult situation, the definition of Lenin of true proletarian internationalism and to subject the particular and national interests to the interests of the international proletariat as a whole, putting the defense of the World Proletarian Revolution and the cause of communism in first place. In 1943, the CI self-dissolved and the ICM entered a period of relative dispersion, which was principally generated by the splittist and treacherous action of contemporary revisionism. Modern or contemporary revisionism was a counter-current represented by Browder, Tito, Togliatti, Thorez and principal Khrushchev and the infamous 20th Congress of the CPSU where the his clique usurped the leadership of the CPSU, degenerating it into a revisionist party and destroying the dictatorship of the proletariat, undermining the basic principles of the unity of the International Communist Movement. The task of the communists to unify at world level, after the Second World War and the death of comrade Stalin, is done in a fierce struggle against contemporary revisionism, in which Chairman Mao rises as a growing Great Leadership of the World Revolution. In 1957 and 1960, two international conferences of communist parties and worker’s parties take place in Moscow. The declarations of these conferences correspond to the development of the two line struggle in the ICM at that moment, considering the big weight that the CPSU had, and reflected the correct handling of the struggle done by the left led by Chairman Mao and the CPCh, applying the principle of acting with reason, advantage and not exceeding. The 22nd Congress of the CPSU was held in 1961, it was systematized the positions of modern revisionism in it. Chairman Mao, leading the Communist Party of China, defined the essence of new revisionism, which he systematize in the “three peacefuls” and the “two wholes”. Khrushchev distorted Lenin’s thesis of peaceful coexistence which differentiates the relations between states from those within the states, to put forward a “peaceful coexistence” as a general line for the International Communist Movement. For Khrushchev, the problem was to avoid war because, according to him, the atomic weapons did not distinguish exploited from exploiters, which was why men had to join each other in order to prevent disappearance of humanity. The “peaceful transition” put forward that revolution did not need revolutionary violence, but one could replace a social system with another through the “peaceful way”, through elections, through parliamentarism. As for the “peaceful emulation”they defended that in order to destroy the imperialist system, the socialist system should make an emulation to show the imperialists that the socialist system was superior and thus the imperialist would change into socialism. The revisionist thesis of the “state of the whole people” was meant to deny the class character of the state and was concretely against the dictatorship of the proletariat. The “party of the whole people” in another machination that denied the class character of the Party as a Party of the proletariat. Thus, Khrushchev advocated that the 22nd Congress of the CPSU was the new program of the communists and substituted the Communist Manifesto with the bourgeois lemma of “liberty”, “equality” and “fraternity”. The Manifesto is the program of the communists and its denial has sparked and sharpened the struggle between marxism and revisionism. On June 14, 1963, the “Proposition on the General Line of the International Communist Movement”, also known as the “Chinese Letter”, followed by “The 9 Comments”, in which Chairman Mao and the CPCh brilliantly unmasked and smashed contemporary revisionism in all its facets. Only with the deep demarcation produced by the Great Polemic, led by Chairman Mao and the Communist Party of China, the International Communist Movement was able to raise the process of reunification around the Great Leadership of Chairman Mao and his contributions to the World Proletarian Revolution. Chairman Mao developed this struggle simultaneously to the struggle against the right opportunist line within the CPCh which had usurped important apparatuses of the Party and the state. Chairman Mao and the CPCh considered that, in such circumstances, it was not adequate to conform a new Communist International because the ideological and political basis, which should be marxism-leninism-mao tsetung thought then, was not defined. Particularly the Worker’s Party of Albania, led by Enver Hoxha, did not accept mao tsetung thought and wanted an international solely based on marxism-leninism, without considering the new development that it had, because essentially Hoxha was opposed to mao tsetung thought. With the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in Chine, the influence of Chairman Mao increasingly develops throughout the world. The CPCh centers in very urgent problems such as recovering power in the People’s Republic of China from the revisionist usurpation of Liu Siao-chi and Teng Siao-ping, and on how to continue revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. On that way, within the national and international class struggle against revisionism, Chairman Mao is converted into the great master of the proletariat and into Great Leader of the World Revolution and his thought turns into the third stage of marxism, even though the struggle for its definition and acknowledgment would only be given later. The UMIC is a step of great importance in that same path. Chairman Mao dies on September 1976 and the Chinese revisionists made a counterrevolutionary coup attacking Chairman Mao and his thought. Thus, the unity of the marxists entered in grave and complex problems. With the death of Chairman Mao and the revisionist usurpation in China by Teng and his accomplices, we communists became dispersed in the world, without a center nor a base for the World Revolution; counterrevolution has shown its claws to deny Chairman Mao and the validity of Marxism-leninism-mao tsetung thought and unleashed the triple revisionist attack of Teng Siao-ping (Chinese revisionism), Hoxha (Albanian revisionism) and Brezhnev (Russian revisionism). The counterrevolutionary coup in China 1976 opened a new period of deep dispersion in the ICM, on which a general counterrevolutionary offensive was unleashed by Yankee imperialism that centrally and mainly centered its attack to snatch the soul of revolution – its ideology, marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism. On the Fall of 1980, thirteen communist parties and organizations signed a declaration “To the marxist-leninists, the workers and the oppressed of all countries” which called the communists to unite around marxism-leninism and uphold Chairman Mao, but not considering it a new stage, thus not having universal validity, a work that was mainly conducted by the Revolutionary Communist Party of USA. In 1984, its 2nd Conference was held, it decided on founding the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). In its founding declaration, it was affirmed that it was guided by marxism-leninism-mao tsetung thought. The RIM meant a step forward in the path of reunification, this is why it is necessary to make a correct and justified evaluation of this experience. For that, it is necessary to analyze the process of the two line struggle within the RIM and the role that each party played. Like all revolutionary body, the left, center and right were defined within the development of the two line struggle in its core. In the decade of 1980, the Communist Party of Peru (PCP), under the Great Leadership of Chairman Gonzalo, upheld, defended and applied maoism as the third, new and superior stage of marxism in the International Communist Movement. The principal contribution of Chairman Gonzalo to the International Communist Movement was having defined maoism in a complete and scientific way by upholding, defending and applying it with the initiation and development of the People’s War in Peru which was initiated in May 17, 1980. This event was of fundamental importance for the World Proletarian Revolution and the International communist Movement because it has proven the validity of maoism and the People’s War. After its heroic fall on September 11, 2021, murdered after resisting for 29 years in absolute isolation regime in the dungeons of imperialism and the reaction, his name was permanently inscribed at the gallery of the great titans of the international proletariat. Through the action of the PCP within the RIM, it went as far as acknowledging maoism as a new stage of marxism in 1993. The RIM lasted a little more than 20 years from its foundation in 1984 until it went into liquidation in 2006 by the treason of Prachanda to the People’s War in Nepal and the pretension of the RCPUSA of making this body be subjected to the revisionist “new synthesis” of Avakian. Its formal dissolution was made in 2012. its existence reflected the two line struggle in the International Communist Movement. The RIM served the world proletarian revolution and the task of struggling for the reunification of the communists when the left, in hard struggle, was able to maintain the struggle for imposing maoism as the sole command and guide of the world revolution at its core. However, with the arrest of Chairman Gonzalo in 1992 and soon after the blows suffered by the People’s War in Peru – which have hindered the action of the left within the ICM – the RCPUSA converging with the right opportunist line, revisionist and capitulationist (ROL), took advantage of the complex situation to attack the left and advance on his petty hegemonism – first spreading the revisionist, opposed to marxism-leninism-maoism, so-called “new synthesis” in a hidden form, then openly. The RIM was entering into greater lack of cohesion. This was aggravated when the RCPUSA with Avakian at its head, in partnership with Prachanda, in collusion and contend, after publishing the Declaration: For a Century of People’s Wars from RIM (2000), they started to deny it and both of them fell into path of revisionism increasing their attacks against maoism, in the following years, the contend for the hegemony between both revisionist currents and figures, not only in the RIM but at the level of the whole ICM, also the ideological, political and organizational dis-cohesion of the RIM was sharpening. Finally, the revisionist hegemonist positions were imposed in the Committee if the RIM. As a consequence, the RIM ceased to play a positive role and degenerated, entering bankruptcy and liquidation. Today, when a New Great Wave of the World Proletarian Revolution is produced in the world with the ongoing People’s Wars in India, Peru, Turkey and the Philippines, and its preparation in many other countries, with the heroic struggles of national resistance and people’s resistance around the whole world emerge, when the general crisis of imperialism and its drowning are hugely intensified., it is necessary and urgent to raise the two line struggle at the core of the ICM to a superior level in order to establish and develop its necessary, justified and correct General Political Line and to strengthen this New Great Wave through the spark of revolution with People’s War in many countries and further advances wherever they are already being waged, as well as in the antiimperialist revolutionary movement under the hegemony of the proletariat. This is why it is necessary to deepen the ideological and political struggle on the basis of the justified and correct assessment of the historical experience of the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat in general. An assessment that particularly synthesizes the experience of the application of the third stage of marxism, which is maoism. The struggle to impose marxism-leninism-maoism, principally maoism as the command and guide of the world revolution is long, complex and difficult. Marxism has never advanced without a hard struggle, but in the end maoism is guiding the New Great Wave of the World Proletarian Revolution that has already started and needs to be impulsed in order to sweep away imperialism and the reaction from the face of earth through People’s war, in order to carry out democratic revolutions, socialist revolutions and proletarian cultural revolutions – according to each case – and transit toward the shining and golden communism. It is particularly necessary to keep deepening the struggle against the new revisionism, in its different expressions, because although they were unmasked and smashed in the ICM, they still have influence through the right and “left” opportunist positions, centrist positions, liquidationist positions, etc. and they harm the unity of the ICM as a whole because they are the main danger to the ICM. 5. WE ASSUME THE FOLLOWING BASIC PRINCIPLES * The Contradiction – sole fundamental law of the incessant transformation of eternal matter; * The masses make history and rebellion is justified; * Class struggle, dictatorship of the proletariat and proletarian internationalism; * Integration of the universal truth of marxism-leninism-maoism with the concrete practice of revolution on each country; * The necessity of the marxist-leninist-maoist Communist Party that firmly apply independence, self-decision and self-reliance; * Inseparably and implacably combat imperialism, revisionism and the reaction; * Conquest and defend power with People’s War; * Two line struggle as an impulsing force for party development; * Constant ideological transformation and always putting politics at the command; * Serve the people and the world proletarian revolution; * Absolute selflessness and justified and correct style of work; * Going against the tide. The 1st Unified Maoist International Conference is a base and inexorably marches toward the reunification of the communists in the ICM – a war machine – a machine of combat that raises the unfading flags of marxism-leninism-maoism and the invincible People’s War!! Coordinating Committee for the Unified Maoist International Conference (CUMIC) Geschrieben von pakr 05. Januar 2022

Geschichte der Antipsychiatrie

Sylvia Zeller Zur Geschichte und Entwicklung der Psychiatriekritik, der Antipsychiatrie und der begrifflichen Verwendung des Begriffs Antipsychiatrie Die moderne Irrenanstalt als Kind der Aufklärung Um 1800 entstanden die ersten modernen, staatlichen Irrenhäuser. Nach eigenem Selbstverständnis waren es Reformprojekte, geprägt vom Geist der Aufklärung, welche mit dem ausdrücklichen Versprechen kulturellen Fortschritts auf Basis des Vernunftgebrauchs auftrat und ein neues Menschenbild propagierte. Dieses sollte zu einem Paradigmenwechsel im Umgang mit psychosozialen Abweichlern führen. Die nunmehr gegründeten Anstalten folgten im Gegensatz zu den Verwahr-, Disziplinierungs- und Verwaltungspraktiken der früheren feudalen Toll- und Arbeitshäuser einem neuen Leitbild nach Förderung, Anregung und Behandlung der Insassen. Die Unvernunft sollte durch vernünftiges Handeln überwunden werden, „denn zu meinen, man müsse nur die irrational unberechenbaren Triebe und Begierden unter die Kontrolle des Rationalen bringen, war natürlich überall charakteristisch für die Aufklärung.“ (Hannah Arendt in: Über die Revolution) Wissenschaftliche Erklärungsversuche und Medizinalisierung in Bezug auf menschliches Verhalten bekam Aufwind, denn es erschien wünschenswert, auch soziale und psychische Phänomene in kausale Modelle und Gesetzmäßigkeiten zu systematisieren. Indem abweichendes, d.h. als unlogisch oder unvernünftig wahrgenommenes Verhalten als Krankheit eingestuft wurde, erschien es heilbar und damit zu eliminieren. Die Aufklärung trat mit dem Anspruch auf, den Menschen von seinen religiösen und ständischen Determinierungen zu befreien. Die französische Revolution legte die Grundlage für die Idee der Gleichheit aller Menschen und damit der Menschenrechte. Allzu rasch wurde jedoch das Postulat nach einer rechtlichen Gleichstellung ineins gesetzt mit der Vorstellung einer anthropologischen, wesensmässigen Gleichheit aller Menschen. Wer durch „anderes“ Verhalten auffiel, wurde nun zunehmend in eine neu erfundene Gruppe der „Unvernünftigen“ gesteckt. Mit der Aufklärung begann auch die Herausbildung einer bürgerlichen Öffentlichkeit und entsprechender Gesetzgebungen. So wurden etwa Unterbringungen von Patienten in psychiatrische Anstalten nach dem Preußischen Landrecht von 1794 und der Allgemeinen Gerichtsordnung von 1795 gerichtlich angeordnet und dazu Gutachten „sachverständiger“ Ärzte eingeholt. Mit diesen Veränderungen begannen die Anstalten zugleich auch Gegenstand öffentlicher Diskussion und Kritik zu werden In England hatte es bereits im 18. Jahrhundert vereinzelt Proteste von Insassen gegen die Behandlungsmethoden in Anstalten gegeben. Die weltweit erste Selbstorganisation ehemaliger Insassen (Society for the Protection of Alleged Lunatics) gründete sich hier nach mehreren Irrenhaus-Skandalen im Jahr 1840. Die daraus hervorgehende Alleged Lunatics‘ Friend Society markiert das Jahr 1845 als den Beginn von Psychiatriekritik als politischer Bewegung und den Bestrebungen Betroffener, als politische Akteure im Sinne kollektiver Selbstvertretungen anerkannt zu werden. Forderungen der Vereinigung waren die Verbesserung der Unterbringung, angemessene Verpflegung, aber auch Stärkung der Patientenrechte wie freie Arztwahl und Unterstützung durch Anwälte. Die Zustände in den Irrenhäusern und die Praxis von Einweisungen wurden mehr und mehr Bestandteil öffentlicher Debatten auch in ganz Europa und Nordamerika und von Juristen, Journalisten, Ärzten und ehemaligen Patienten aufgegriffen. Das Anstaltssystem als solches wurde infrage gestellt es kam zur Gründung weiterer anstaltskritischer Organisationen und zu ersten politischen Erfolgen und Reformen. Entstehung des Begriffs Antipsychiatrie Es war die Amerikanerin Elisabeth P.W. Packard, die in ihren Schriften 1868 das erste Mal das Präfix „anti“ in Zusammenhang mit Psychiatriekritik verwendete. Sie rief zur Gründung einer Selbsthilfeorganisation auf, die sie Anti Insane Asylum Society benannte. Elisabeth Packard wandte sich gegen die Macht der psychiatrischen Einrichtungen, nachdem sie von ihrem eigenen Mann ohne Erstellung eines Gutachtens, lediglich aufgrund ihrer ihm unliebsamen politischen und religiösen Ansichten ins Jacksonville Insane Asylum gebracht und dort drei Jahre eingesperrt worden war. Auch nach ihrer Entlassung musste sie Einschließung und schlimmste Behandlung durch ihren Ehemann erdulden. Sie widmete sich nach einem spektakulären Gerichtsverfahren Packard gegen Packard ihr ganzes restliches Leben lang dem Kampf für Frauenrechte und gegen die Verbringung von Menschen in bestehende Anstalten und konnte mit ihrem Engagement etliche Gesetzesänderungen zur Stärkung von Patientenrechten, die sogenannten Packard Laws, bewirken. 1895 nahm der Naturforscher Henryk M. Bannister in einem Aufsatz über die Frage von Home Treatment -wofür E. Packard sich eingesetzt hatte- versus klinischer Behandlung den Begriff des „anti-asylum“ wieder auf, was Burkhart Brückner als Beleg dafür wertet, dass das Thema mit dieser Apostrophierung seit Elizabeth Packard kontinuierlich Bedeutung im öffentlichen Diskurs der USA hatte. Bannister sprach sich allerdings entgegen der Forderungen von Packard für eine konsequente Anstaltsbehandlung aus. 1893 erschien unter dem Titel L’Anti-Aliéniste (Der Anti-Irrenarzt) eine Patientenzeitung in einer bekannten Pariser Anstalt. Mit Reformforderungen, Satiren und Polemiken gegen die Anstaltsärzte fand diese Zeitschrift Anschluss an den Geist des französischen Irrenrechtsaktivismus, der sich etwa mit dem Namen des Politikers Léon Gambetta verbindet. Im letzten Viertel des 19. Jahrhunderts erschienen in Europa und auch im deutschen Kaiserreich eine Fülle von Schriften, die sich gegen den Umgang mit als psychisch krank eingestuften Menschen wandten. Kritisiert wurden Missstände in den Anstalten und „widerrechtliche“ Einweisungen. Die Gesetzeslage im Kaiserreich war uneinheitlich. Zwangsunterbringungen liefen beispielsweise in Preußen (dem größten deutschen Staat) trotz entsprechend anderslautender Gesetzgebung, noch um 1900 in der Regel de facto rein polizeirechtlich, das heißt ohne Mitwirkung eines Gerichtes ab. 1891 erschien eine Protestschrift mit dem Titel An die Vernunft von dem Hamburger Schiffer Adolf Ahrens, die die „Unvernunft“ der begutachtenden Ärzte anprangerte und entsprechende Gesetzesänderungen einforderte. Der schwäbische Landwirt Wilhelm Kuhnle wurde wegen sogenanntem „Querulantenwahn“ vier Jahre gegen seinen Willen psychiatrisch behandelt und verlangte 1894 seine Rehabilitation als Opfer politischer Verfolgung. Georg Wetzer gründete ebenfalls als Betroffener 1907 die Liga zur Wahrung der Interessen von Geisteskranken, welche die Internierungspraxis und der Feststellung von Geisteskrankheit kritisierte und den Begriff „Antipsychiatrie“ verwendete. Vor dem Hintergrund der Entstehung von Reformbewegungen auf verschiedenen gesellschaftlichen Feldern ab etwa 1890 kam es im Jahre 1909 zur Gründung vom Bund für Irrenrechts-Reform und Irrenfürsorge durch den selbst anstaltserfahrenen Heidelberger Kaufmann Adolf Glöcklen, was schließlich zur Begriffsbildung „antipsychiatrische Bewegung“ führte. Der Arzt Bernhard Beyer nämlich betitelte die hauseigene Zeitschrift der neugegründete Vereinigung 1909 polemisch als „antipsychiatrisches Zentralorgan“. Solche und ähnlich lautende Beiträge wurden von einigen Ärzten formuliert, um der sich aus ihrer Sicht allzu lautstarken und sich stark ausbreitenden psychiatriekritischen Bewegung entschieden entgegenzutreten. „Antipsychiatrie“ war damit zu einem polarisierenden Kampfbegriff geworden, der Kritik am psychiatrischen System abwehren und verunglimpfen sollte; eine adäquate Beschreibung der Vielfalt der Positionen innerhalb der Irrenrechts-Bewegung war und ist er sicherlich nicht. Darin liegen vermutlich auch die Gründe dafür, dass dieses Label von psychiatriekritischen Strömungen eher nicht verwendet wurde, diese verstanden sich selber eher als „Reformer“. Antipsychiatrische Positionen in den 1960er und 1970er Jahren und die Entwicklung der Sozialpsychiatrie Der Begriff der Antipsychiatrie taucht dann wieder ab den 60er Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts auf und bekommt Konjunktur mit dem Eintritt in die kulturellen und akademischen Diskurse. Der aus Südafrika stammende Arzt David Cooper entwickelte in London Vorstellungen einer antiautoritären Psychiatrie, bei der PatientInnen ihre Behandlung selbst bestimmen sollten. Als Marxist folgte er der Überzeugung, dass Wahnsinn und Psychose gesellschaftlich induziert seien und ihnen somit nur durch eine Revolution beizukommen sei. Er begriff seinen Aufbau einer therapeutischen Gemeinschaft (Villa 21) als Gegenpraxis zur Anstaltsbehandlung und bezeichnete seine Vorstellungen dezidiert als antipsychiatrisch. Er ist jedoch nahezu der einzige Vertreter psychiatriekritischer Richtungen geblieben, der dieses Label ausdrücklich für sich in Anspruch genommen hat. Der britische Psychiater Ronald David Laing untersuchte insbesondere die Prozesse der Systematisierung psychischer Krankheit und der Diagnostizierung von Patienten und spricht den Psychiatern das substanzielle Verständnis für die Genese und die Beschaffenheit psychischer Erkrankungen ab. Franco Basaglia stellte in dieser Zeit nicht nur die herrschenden Zustände in den psychiatrischen Anstalten in Frage und verfolgte Konzepte therapeutischer Gemeinschaften, sondern erreichte schließlich auch die Auflösung der bisherigen Anstalten zugunsten von ambulanten Behandlungen und dezentralen Einrichtungen und eine Reform der Psychiatrie in Italien im Jahre 1978 zugunsten einer als Sozialpsychiatrie oder auch Gemeindepsychiatrie bezeichneten Richtung, die sich selbst als Reformbewegung begriff. Basaglia, selber Psychiater, verstand sich ausdrücklich nicht als Vertreter einer antipsychiatrischen Bewegung und suchte nach Wegen, „mit der Institution gegen die Institution“ zu arbeiten. Mit dem niederländischen Psychiater Jan Foudraine und seinem Werk Wer ist aus Holz? Neue Wege der Psychiatrie von 1973 drückt sich nochmals der zeittypische Shift in der Betrachtung von psychischer Erkrankung weg von medizinisch-psychiatrischer hin zu einer stärker sozialpsychiatrisch-psychotherapeutischen Perspektive aus. Später ergänzte Foudraine seine Ansichten um spirituelle Erklärungsversuche im Rekurs auf die Lehren des Yoga-Meisters Jiddu Krishnamurti. Michel Foucault und Thomas Szasz Psychiatriekritik, wie sie sich heute darstellt, ist nicht zu denken ohne zwei wichtige Vordenker, nämlich Michel Foucault und Thomas Szasz. Foucault schrieb von 1955 – 1959 an seinem Werk Wahnsinn und Gesellschaft. Ausgehend vom herrschenden Diskurs in aufgeklärten, rationalen Gesellschaften begreift er den Wahnsinn als das „Andere der Vernunft“, somit als Metapher für alles, was von der sich selbst für „vernünftig“ haltenden Gesellschaft ausgegrenzt wird und unter Kontrolle gebracht werden soll. Foucault beschreibt den Prozess der Trennung der Ausdrucksformen des „Wahnsinns“ von denen der „Vernunft“ diskursanalytisch und als Prozess zunehmender Stigmatisierung abweichenden psychosozialen Verhaltens als „geistige Krankheit“, wie es in seinem griffigen Satz Ausdruck findet: „Die Vernunft, das ist die Folter.“ Sieht Foucault in der zunehmenden Ausgrenzung der als psychisch krank Diagnostizierten die Entstehungsvoraussetzung für moderne Irrenanstalten ab dem Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts, beschreibt er den Aufstieg des Arztes als moralische Instanz und die Verwandlung der Anstalt in einen medizinischen Raum, so geht Thomas Szasz in seinen Analysen noch um einen entscheidenden Schritt weiter, indem er die Ausweitung der medizinischen Autorität weit über die Grenzen der Anstalt hinaus konstatiert. Szasz wandte sich entschieden sowohl gegen die Antipsychiatrie als auch dagegen, selbst mit diesem Label in Verbindung gebracht zu werden. Mit seinem Hauptwerk von 1961, The Myth of Mental Illness, führte er ins Feld, dass Konzepte psychischer Normalität oder Verrücktheit in keinem Fall objektivierbar und somit rein willkürliche Behauptungen seien. Die Einschätzung hinsichtlich der psychischen Funktionstüchtigkeit eines Patienten trifft der behandelnde Psychotherapeut oder Psychiater. Dabei spielen dessen eigene, persönliche Normvorstellungen eine entscheidende Rolle. Dem gesamten Diagnose- Prozess ist inhärent, dass das Verhalten und die Äußerungen von Patienten nicht etwa nach medizinischen, sondern nach ethischen und sozialen, zudem historisch bedingten Maßstäben, beurteilt werden. Menschen, die zu einem gewissen Grade von moralischen oder juristischen Gesellschaftsnormen abweichen, werden damit aus der menschlichen Gesellschaft ausgeschlossen und in die Kategorie „psychisch krank“ einsortiert. Folgerichtig lehnt Thomas Szasz den Begriff der psychischen Krankheit generell ab und wurde, selbst Psychiater, zu einem leidenschaftlichen Gegner jeglicher, gegen den Willen des Patienten durchgeführten, psychiatrischen Maßnahmen wie Zwangseinweisungen und Zwangsbehandlungen. Er wies darauf hin, dass diese zudem staatlich, nämlich gesetzlich und polizeirechtlich durchgesetzt werden und gegen die Menschenrechte verstoßen. Die Kooperation und Verschränkung von staatlichen Organen und Psychiatrie sieht Szasz als Grundlage der Herausbildung eines „therapeutischen Staats“ mit Ausstrahlungskraft in immer mehr Lebensbereiche und fordert daher eine strikte Trennung von Psychiatrie und Staat. Im therapeutischen Staat werden jeweils aktuell unerwünschte und immer weitere Denk- und Handlungsweisen (von Drogenkonsum bis Rassismus, die Liste kann endlos weitergehen) als behandlungsbedürftige Krankheitssymptome betrachtet, als etwas, das Menschen unwillkürlich zustößt und damit wiederum unzählige neue Therapien und Behandler auf den Plan ruft. Diese Entwicklung untergräbt die individuelle Verantwortung und Mündigkeit von Bürgern und spielt immer weiterem staatlichen Paternalismus in die Hände. Mit seinem, dem politischen und emanzipatorischen Liberalismus, verpflichteten Ansatz ist Thomas Szasz damit als Psychiatriekritiker derjenige, der am deutlichsten und unmissverständlichsten das Recht des Einzelnen auf den eigenen Körper und zugleich die jeweils eigene Verantwortung dafür eingefordert und durchdacht hat. Hier veröffentlicht: https://www.zwangspsychiatrie.de/zur-geschichte-und-entwicklung-der-psychiatriekritik -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dies sind Nachrichten des Werner-Fuß-Zentrums Vorbergstr. 9a, 10823 Berlin http://www.psychiatrie-erfahrene.de Geisteskrank? Ihre eigene Entscheidung! Informieren Sie sich: http://www.patverfue.de Bitte daran denken: Bei der Koalition gegen Zwangspsychiatrie – gewaltfreie Psychiatrie jetzt unterschreiben, siehe hier