The Democratic Socialist Perspective (DSP)’s support for PRD-Papernas and not KPRM-PRD is becoming clearer. I read Stuarts latest reply to me on Friday but I thought I would wait until today in order to see the Green Left article on the PRD split that Stuart assured us was coming and to give the content a chance. I was disappointed that there was no such article in this week’s paper. Instead the only article on Indonesia was one promoting the good work of Papernas in two 300 person strong rallies held in Indonesia.
This is hardly surprising given that Stuarts framework in the name of “not declaring one side ‘revolutionary’ and the other not”, has lead Stuart (and the DSP?) to defacto support PRD-Papernas.
Stuart sets up a straw man of my position and attempts to knock it down by declaring:
“Given that we are not jumping to say this, it follows logically that we will continue our relationship with the PRD. As for the new group, we are not refusing relations, we are testing things out. We are encouraging them to continue sending us their material. We certainly aren't declaring them not revolutionary or anything else James is attempting to imply or push us towards.”
Well Stuart there are actually two PRD’s at the moment and it appears that the DSP is continuing relations with one section but not the other. Why would you continue relations with as you call it the “PRD” meaning PRD Papernas but the best you give to KPRM-PRD is “not refusing relations” and “encouraging them to continue sending us their material.” Accepting their documents just means you haven’t put a blocker on your e-mail, so what? I occasionally read books by Francis Fukiama and get the Zionist organisation Australian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS) to send me material so I can find out what they are thinking but that doesn’t mean I support them.
“Of course, the arguments runs that the new group are the *real* PRD because they are the *real* continuors of the revolutionary program of the PRD. The actually existing PRD is not the *real* PRD because it has betrayed its program and tradition.”
Given the split in the PRD the DSP has had 4 options:
1. To support PRD Papernas as the continuation of the revolutionary PRD
2. To support KPRM-PRD as the continuation of the revolutionary PRD
3. To continue political support with both as the continuation of the revolutionary PRD
4. Declare a plague on both your houses and not support either.
Stuart claims that the DSP has gone for option 3 not 1. But then how does Stuart explain that one side the DSP has political relations with while the other side they just are “open to” political relations with. How does Stuart explain that the DSP supported two PRD-Papernas members attending the Latin America Asia Pacific Solidarity Forum and not a single member of KPRM-PRD? Does Stuart see the DSP having a similar relationship with KPRM-PRD as they currently have with PRD-Papernas?
So yet again we await another week to see a Green Left article on the PRD split/expulsion. As Stuart puts it “Of course we are *continuing* to try and study the situation. So maybe we will have something more concrete to say in the future as we attempt to study what is going on in light of finding out from the comrades there on both sides what the arguments and facts (and interpretations of facts, as always occurs) are and what it means on the ground.”
Which would be nice but given neither the internal bulletin of the DSP nor its paper Green Left have provided anything for their comrades to read I doubt seriously if they are studying the issue.