(The following interview with Peruvian revolutionist Hugo Blanco appeared in the December 4, 1975, issue of the Lima weekly Marka. The translation and footnotes are by Intercontinental Press.]
Question. What changes do you find in the situation of the peasantry?
Answer. I have returned to Cuzco after a thirteen-year absence, and I have noticed great changes. The big landowners as such have practically disappeared. However, at the same time it is clear that the peasantry continues to live as miserably as before. This is one obvious contradiction. When you talk at greater length with the peasants, you realize that the form of exploitation has changed. Before, exploitation was more feudal; now it is capitalist exploitation. Now the struggle of the peasantry is a struggle against capitalism and the capitalist state.
I think that the basic demand now is no longer "Land or death" as it was then. Now it is "Socialism or death."
Q. What are your views on the leadership and program of the CCP?
A. With regard to the centralization of the peasants, when I reached Peru-despite the differences I had on some points with the compañeros leading the CCP-I told them directly that it seemed to me that the CCP was the biggest and most important centralizing organization the Peruvian peasantry had had in its entire history. There is no doubt of this. There have been more explosive periods than this, for example, the period of 1962-63, but in terms of organization and centralization, the peasantry has never had a body of this type.
We Trotskyists support the CCP for two principled reasons. First, because it is an independent organization. And that is essential. We don't raise any questions about the political positions of the CCP. In fact, our fundamental criticism of the CNA2 is not that it supports the government but that it is dependent on the government. It is a question of principle with us not to be part of such a state organization. On the other hand, in an organization that is dependent on the rank and file, we can disagree with the leadership but we will discuss our differences inside the organization. One point of difference that I have raised is on the character of our revolution. We say it must be a socialist revolution.
Q. What are your views on what is happening in Cuzco?
A. While they had named the Lares Agrarian League after me, in Cuzco it was being said that I was in Sinamos and with the FARTAC. Now the FARTAC and Sinamos are telling the peasants that since I went abroad, I reached an agreement with the Yankees to turn the land over to the big landowners. In addition, the ultraleftists and some leaders who fought us at the time of La Convención (1958-63) are now attacking us as supporters of Sinamos. They accuse the CCP of the same thing, of serving the government, and so on.
That is, among the peasantry of Cuzco there are two divisive forces. One is made up of the government supporters who, with create artificial money from Sinamos, organizations. The other is the ultraleftists, who try to lead an organization and if they can't, leave and form their "miniconfederation" with five peasants and five Quechuaspeaking students. We are confident that the ranks of the peasantry will know how to defeat these two divisive forces.
Q. At the current time, when the reactionaries are mounting an anti-Communist offensive and the government is forming a defense front, what is your opinion on the goal of forming an anti-imperialist front?
A. There is talk of threats from the ultraright. You see the offensive against Equis, Oiga, and all those magazines. But I believe that the fight to defend the interests of the masses and the fight against a threatened right-wing coup follow the same course. That is, the way to fight against the threat of a coup is to fight for a general amnesty, for the defense of the economic demands and democratic rights of the people. The fact that the government holds to its antidemocratic policies and continues repressing the people favors the putschist right wing. And if there is a coup it will be because the government paved the way for it.
The experience of history shows that bourgeois governments prefer to be eliminated by another, more reactionary bourgeois government rather than permit the masses to advance and radicalize. But that does not mean we should be sectarian toward people who follow the government and who believe what it says. To such persons we must raise demands that we can achieve together. If these people think that all their problems are caused by infiltrators, then they should help us to win and maintain democratic rights.
Moreover, we must overcome the sectarian stage in the building of fronts-where each party or group wants to impose its program on other groups and wants to maintain a ruinous hegemony over the front. It is much more correct to begin with two or three points. For example, the CCP is now raising the demand for a general amnesty-that is, freedom for the political and social prisoners; the rehiring of those fired; and trial courts. All of us who are in agreement with these three points should march together.
It is better to raise what we have in common and not try to get everyone to hold the same positions, since this will end up with the creation of as many fronts as there are parties. This does not mean there will be no ideological debate and political clarity. The CCP is carrying out united-front actions in an unsectarian way and I hope it will continue to do so. The unity of all forces will arise from these initial points to encompass other points, insofar as the dynamic of the struggle pushes the front onward.
With regard to the Frente de Defensa de la Revolución, it seems to me to be an organization to defend the positions of the government en bloc-as much against its rightist enemies as against the masses. If, for example, the FDR were for the defense of the 200 miles,® or for things that had been nationalized not being returned, or for the haciendas not being returned to the big landowners, it seems to me that my party should be in that front. But that is not the case. To enter the FDR you have to be in agreement even with the tanks that attacked Querecotillo, with the entire policy of the government in general.
Notes
1. Confederación Campesina del Perú (Peruvian Peasant Federation).
2. Confederación Nacional Agraria (National Agrarian Confederation).
3. Sistema Nacional de Apoyo a la Movilización Social (National Network for Supporting Social Mobilization), the bureaucratic apparatus set up by the government to control the mass movement.
4. Federación Agraria Revolucionaria "Túpac Amaru II" del Cuzco (Tupac Amaru II Revolutionary Agrarian Federation of Cuzco).
5. FDR-Front for the Defense of the Revolution.
6. The 200-mile territorial limit.