The “Revolutionary Internationalist Movement” is an important theme to understand to take correctly Maoism as the revolutionary ideology in our epoch.

Our ideology, dialectical materialism, is improving itself each day that past. This is because its carrier, the working class, grows stronger everyday; its praxis is always deeper, the study of dialectical materialism gets always more profound.

Nevertheless, this process produces and needs as the same time a revolutionary avant-garde, studying theory in the most serious and correct way, following Lenin's teachings in “What is to be done?”

It is only in understanding this that can be understood the historical value of the “Revolutionary Internationalist Movement” -RIM-, founded in 1984. This international structure consisted mainly in two declarations: the first one to defend historically Mao Zedong, the second one in 1993 to call to uphold Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

As this is our ideology, we should appreciate the RIM, but this would be wrong: the RIM played an historical negative role for us in France.

The main problem, as it is well known, is that the RIM never existed practically. All its ideological and political responsibilities were abandoned to a “Committee of the RIM”, who published a review, A world to win.

This review gave informations about people's wars, notably the one in Peru, but revealed its nature as Gonzalo was arrested in 1992, in helping the reactionary propaganda about a so called capitulation of the leader of the PCP.

In the same way, A world to win pretended to be very radical, but attacked the armed struggle in Europe on a non scientific basis, whereas its committee was doing legal public work in London, England.

Then, A world to win fell in the hands of prachandism, helping this reactionary trend to develop internationally. What the Rim produced was either pro-Avakian structures, or post-prachandist structures.

It means that A world to win never had a stable line, apart a romanticist support for people's wars, without that the ideological content is presented and seriously explained. A world to win had few supporters in France in the beginning of the 1990's, but they broke up very soon because of cosmopolitanism.

In fact, the position of the CoRIM or even the RIM was wrong, because the genuine revolutionaries can only come from the class struggle of a given country. It means that A world to win should have engaged discussions with different avant-gardes in different countries, on concrete points.

The fact that the RIM was not able even to recognize the existence of climate change is an important proof of the cosmopolitanism and the negation of changing reality. In fact, we must see also that the CoRIM, but even the RIM, never arbored the flag of dialectical materialism in such, falling more and more in classical leftism.

The reason for the failure of the RIM is easy to understand: the teachings of the Communist Party of Peru were recognized only on some points and only in words, whereas central teachings like the question of thought have been rejected.

The reason for the failure of the RIM is that the red fraction did not triumph. The bend in the road of the PCP has broke the process.

To go beyond the RIM means to understand of the PCP, which is precisely the historical revolutionary force that permitted the RIM to be known and to have a function.

CPMLM, France

September 2013