CPUSA moves to dismantle itself?

[Revy]

This circulated on the SP members list. It's called "The Crisis in the CPUSA (http://mltoday.com/en/the-crisis-of-the-cpusa-part-1-664.html)". Apparently, it comes from that site. There's a part 2 (http://mltoday.com/en/the-crisis-of-the-cpusa-part-2-667.html).

There are allegedly moves from the leadership to dismantle or "liquidate" the party. It is being said that the CPUSA will rename itself to "People Before Profits" (a tentative name) so they can not feel ashamed to call themselves the Communist Party USA.

Thoughts?

[Hoggy_RS]

It is being said that the CPUSA will rename itself to "People Before Profits" (a tentative name) so they can not feel ashamed to call themselves the Communist Party USA.

Much the same as what the SWP in Ireland have done. Afraid to scare people of by the use of the word socialist:lol:

[Revy]

Much the same as what the SWP in Ireland have done. Afraid to scare people of by the use of the word socialist:lol:

Haha, look what I've done... :blushing:

The writer says it's comparable to when the old CPGB transformed itself into "Democratic Left".

[Jorge Miguel]

The writer says it's comparable to when the old CPGB transformed itself into "Democratic Left".
In 1991, most of the elected representative of the Workers' Party of Ireland made a similar transformation. A few years ago, they were absorbed into the Labour Party and today most of them are on its leadership.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Without going into the specifics of this particular case, I think if this is true it is another sign of the growing trend toward unity amongst leftists. See the moves by the DSP (Australia) in dissolving itself into the Socialist Alliance, the formation of the Communist Alliance (Australia) incorporating the CP, the NPA in France, the SWP (UK) 'Open letter to the left' advocating a "single, united left alternative" with appraisals from WP (L5I) and AWL, the liquidation of ISG (FI) into Socialist Resistance (UK), etc. as examples of this.

Saying this however, I don't think this unity should be praised in any way shape or form. Firstly because the methods of this unity being advanced are blatantly oppurtunist. And Secondly, because 'the left', in all it's sectarianism or unity remains, despite all the good intentions, fundamentally anti-working class.

[Revy]

Without going into the specifics of this particular case, I think if this is true it is another sign of the growing trend toward unity amongst leftists. See the moves by the DSP (Australia) in dissolving itself into the Socialist Alliance, the formation of the Communist Alliance (Australia) incorporating the CP, the NPA in France, the SWP (UK) 'Open letter to the left' advocating a "single, united left alternative" with appraisals from WP (L5I) and AWL, the liquidation of ISG (FI) into Socialist Resistance (UK), etc. as examples of this.

Saying this however, I don't think this unity should be praised in any way shape or form. Firstly because the methods of this unity being advanced are blatantly oppurtunist. And Secondly, because 'the left', in all it's sectarianism or unity remains, despite all the good intentions, fundamentally anti-working class.
Maybe I should have gone into more details, but I assumed the CPUSA's record was well known...

They wouldn't be transforming themselves for "unity" amongst socialists, the CPUSA supports the Democratic Party. So they don't want to be a vocal Communist Party, they just want to be a club for Democrats and Obama supporters (which they already are). They have a wacky line which interprets Lenin (especially Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder) to support the Democratic Party, if you don't support the Democratic Party, you're "ultra-left" in their view.

But if they do dissolve themselves into another organization, it probably will be something like Democratic Socialists of America (which also supports the Democrats) but they would really be social democrat unity, not socialist unity.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

As an ex-YCL member, I can tell you this is not surprising in the slightest. In fact, I've been wondering when this shrinking group of old Brezhnevites and social-democrats was going to finally shrivel up and die... Ah well, not much love lost.

[RedScare]

It seems like they're just following the trend that a lot of communist parties did after the fall of the Soviet Union.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Without going into the specifics of this particular case, I think if this is true it is another sign of the growing trend toward unity amongst leftists. See the moves by the DSP (Australia) in dissolving itself into the Socialist Alliance, the formation of the Communist Alliance (Australia) incorporating the CP, the NPA in France, the SWP (UK) 'Open letter to the left' advocating a "single, united left alternative" with appraisals from WP (L5I) and AWL, the liquidation of ISG (FI) into Socialist Resistance (UK), etc. as examples of this.

Saying this however, I don't think this unity should be praised in any way shape or form. Firstly because the methods of this unity being advanced are blatantly oppurtunist. And Secondly, because 'the left', in all it's sectarianism or unity remains, despite all the good intentions, fundamentally anti-working class.

How is the NPA anti-working class? :confused:

[Raúl Duke]

This circulated on the SP members list. It's called "The Crisis in the CPUSA (http://mltoday.com/en/the-crisis-of-the-cpusa-part-1-664.html)". Apparently, it comes from that site. There's a part 2 (http://mltoday.com/en/the-crisis-of-the-cpusa-part-2-667.html).

There are allegedly moves from the leadership to dismantle or "liquidate" the party. It is being said that the CPUSA will rename itself to "People Before Profits" (a tentative name) so they can not feel ashamed to call themselves the Communist Party USA.

Thoughts?

This is interesting news...

Although I noticed that, to me, the tone of the article seems to "like blame" the leadership or the individuals involved in CPUSA for this...
They don't seem to look for exact reasons, influences, etc that is leading to this...which would be interesting. We have to know what are the material conditions that leads an organization to head this direction.

[Revy]

This is interesting news...

Although I noticed that, to me, the tone of the article seems to "like blame" the leadership or the individuals involved in CPUSA for this...
They don't seem to look for exact reasons, influences, etc that is leading to this...which would be interesting. We have to know what are the material conditions that leads an organization to head this direction.

Well, all these parties were part of the Comintern. I might start a flamewar over the implications of that, but I'll go ahead and say that the Comintern exercised a great deal of control ( at least starting in the late 20s) over its affiliate parties.

So these parties were so heavily connected to whatever was happening in the USSR. Stalin rose to power, and all of them became Stalinist. Stalin died, the USSR no longer was Stalinist , so all the parties changed that. And then, when the bureaucracy allowed capitalism, well, that about explains it. Gorbachev's (openly) shifting to social democracy (although Gus Hall opposed Gorbachev, others in the party supported him).

Their support of the Democrats started in 1988, Gus Hall thought that Jesse Jackson would win the primaries (although the source I'm reading doesn't say if they chose to endorse Dukakis). And then after that they supported Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Obama. So it's clear that in the midst of the imminent collapse of the Soviet Union, the economic reforms, we see some changes being made to their politics.

There you go, there's my theory.....

[Wanted Man]

Well, all these parties were part of the Comintern. I might start a flamewar over the implications of that, but I'll go ahead and say that the Comintern exercised a great deal of control ( at least starting in the late 20s) over its affiliate parties.

So these parties were so heavily connected to whatever was happening in the USSR. Stalin rose to power, and all of them became Stalinist. Stalin died, the USSR no longer was Stalinist , so all the parties changed that. And then, when the bureaucracy allowed capitalism, well, that about explains it. Gorbachev's (openly) shifting to social democracy (although Gus Hall opposed Gorbachev, others in the party supported him).

I don't think you'll manage to start a flamewar. But you might want to do even the most basic research into the history of the communist parties and their "heavy connections" which you blame on the Comintern (which was disbanded in 1943 ;)). Seriously, spend 15 minutes skimming Wikipedia articles or something, and you'll know more already.

Anyway, I found the article interesting. Like many of the eurocommunist parties (another strange anomaly in stancel's "Comintern theory" ;)), the leaders will find it in their interests to liquidate the party and become some kind of bourgeois think tank or pressure group.

[Revy]

Yeah, but they still maintained ideological connections to the USSR, don't you think? That's more what I meant. That's what they looked toward.


While the Communist parties of the world no longer had a formal international organization, they continued to maintain close relations with each other, through a series of international forums. In the period directly after dissolution of Comintern, periodical meetings of Communist parties were held in Moscow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow). Moreover World Marxist Review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Marxist_Review), a joint periodical of the Communist parties, played an important role in coordinating the communist movement up to the break-up of the Socialist Bloc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Bloc) in 1989-1991. (Wikipedia)


from the Encyclopedia of the American Left (http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/parties/cpusa/encyclopedia-american-left.htm)
Relative to these major losses, the expulsions of “Left” and then “Right” deviationists was less destructive in terms of numbers or influence immediately lost. Only in the needle trades did the expelled carry many members out of the Party with them, and those were mainly a thin stratum of leaders. The long-term impact of the expulsions, however, was considerable. The actions were judged to be the result of direct Soviet interference in leadership of the American Party and reflected struggles about the direction of the USSR rather than that of the United States. Those driven from the Party charged that its basic policies were now being set by the Comintern and that the Comintern reserved the right of final approval of Party leadership. These accusations reinforced popular perceptions of Communism as an inauthentic national movement.


Two international events of 1956 brought new chaos to the Party: the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian Revolution and revelations of Stalin’s misdeeds at the Twentieth Soviet Congress. Individuals long faithful to the Party now felt betrayed and wondered privately and openly if their political lives had been built upon self-delusion.


Self-appointed reformers centered around the Daily Worker briefly sought an internal transformation into an open, democratic movement. An unprecedented wave of collective self-criticism appeared in the pages of the Party’s national organ. The departure of many like-minded members, filled with despair or disgust, contributed to their defeat by doctrinaire loyalists.

The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as leader of the USSR in 1985 gave American Communists an unexpected, if also sometimes unnerving burst of new interest and new issues. With the Cold War fast fading and the USSR increasingly seen as the superpower most committed to ending the nuclear arms race, the CP could claim vindication for its long-term foreign-policy orientation. As many Americans voiced enthusiasm for Gorbachev’s reforms, the CP stood to gain more public visibility.

[Davie zepeda]

I am still working with cpusa and yes there's problems going on but so far the name thing has not come to mind, but the paper no longer exist once the vocal opposition for labor against the capitalist class. Oh yeah alot of comrades fought agasint that obama crap we just said wait and see and he's prove us right, now if we can only get that leadership to believe in socialism and not some quasi liberal fuck!

[Red October]

If they disband, what will happen to their million dollar office? Maybe some anarchists can squat it :rolleyes:

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

No qualms with that idea.

[Raúl Duke]

If they disband, what will happen to their million dollar office? Maybe some anarchists can squat it :rolleyes:

Are these offices located in NYC?

I'll might consider doing that by or after 2012...

:D

[sanpal]

I see in this tendency the direct result of absence of developed model of transition from capitalism to communism and realistic ways of abolishing of the monetary system in programmes of all communist parties. As a result - rupture with the communist ideology in favour of socialism, market socialism or social-democracy.

[Intelligitimate]

From the article:


The ideological unity of the party is a thing of the past. De facto there are two trends, the dominant one, is that of the rightward-moving top leadership. The other trend, struggling, is the Marxism-Leninism of many members and leaders.

I hope this is the straw that finally breaks the camel's back, and the Marxist-Leninist trend breaks away from them. I think they would either join FRSO or PSL, or form their own thing.

[cb9's_unity]

I didn't read the whole article but when I saw the headline i pretty much shouted in joy. It will be a good day when these liberals finally take off their red cloak.

I saw an interview with Sam Webb and he was asked if the Communist Party was elected to the congress what they would do. He literally just said they would give more money to the working class. Nothing about abolishing the capitalist class or changing current social conditions. They even talk like god damn liberals, it will be a relief when they actually join them.

[heiss93]

This is blown out of proportion. They are moving to a website peoplebeforeprofits, but the CPUSA, YCL, PWW, PA sites will still be hosted there. I wouldn't equate a website domain name with liquidation.

The hardliners are a small minority, if anything Sam Webb is to the left of the CPUSA cadre

[chegitz guevara]

Their support of the Democrats started in 1988, Gus Hall thought that Jesse Jackson would win the primaries (although the source I'm reading doesn't say if they chose to endorse Dukakis).

Actually, the CPUSA has been supporting the Democratic Party since 1935, when Stalin ordered them to support Roosevelt in the 1936 election.

[Revy]

Actually, the CPUSA has been supporting the Democratic Party since 1935, when Stalin ordered them to support Roosevelt in the 1936 election.

but what about their Communist presidential campaigns in the '70s and '80s?

[Seven Stars]

Once they're gone, perhaps some comrades worthy of the name communist will take the title (imagine that when someone search "communist party in the U.S." or needed a speaker on a TV or radio show to explain the communist position they got in touch with actual communists!).

My thoughts exactly.

[Axle]

"People Before Profits"? At least the name fits them a little better than "communist".

[Zeus the Moose]

but what about their Communist presidential campaigns in the '70s and '80s?

The Communist Party ran a presidential in the 1936 elections as well, but much of their energy went towards supporting Roosevelt in some fashion (most notably in New York via the American Labor Party.) The move of not running candidates at all is fairly recent; the CPUSA ran some candidates as CP candidates up until the early 1990s. Even today, there are Communist Party members who run for election, but they do so as Democrats. The two examples I can think of is Denise Winebrenner-Edwards, who ran as a Democrat for the Wilkinsburg, PA, city council (and got elected), and Rick Nagin, who runs for city council in Cleveland (non-partisan elections, does not run as an open Communist or communist.)

The point is, however, that it's been longer than just the past decade that the CP has been lampreying itself to the Democrats. The complete abandonment of independent political action begin during the Hall years (in addition to entering the in-formation Labor Party in the 1990s and arguing against running candidates), but it seems to be the culmination of policies that even the people arguing against the potential dissolution of the CPUSA are in favour of.

[Ohnoatard]

The Communist Party will die out soon.. They have like 300 Members left. They even supported Bourgeois puppet Obama for president, nuff said

[Kassad]

Communist Party USA dissolving would be like the Democratic Party being dismantled. They're both capitalist parties, so you're not going to see me get upset over it.

[FreeFocus]

The CPUSA should've "dismantled" itself a long, long time ago. It's a disgrace and embarrassment.

[Charles Xavier]

The liquidators did this to our party but failed, but managed to steal a lot of our properties and assets fucking bastards!

These are counter-revolutionaries! Save the CPUSA!

[Q]

The liquidators did this to our party but failed, but managed to steal a lot of our properties and assets fucking bastards!

These are counter-revolutionaries! Save the CPUSA!
Given the history of the CPUSA of the past 70 years, why?

[Bright Banana Beard]

Please do, this will drag many Marxist-Leninists into many another parties such as PoWR, FRSO (both), PSL and CL/WPA.

[Charles Xavier]

Given the history of the CPUSA of the past 70 years, why?


The CPUSA may not be a good place for Marxist-Leninists today. But theres a couple things the CPUSA has that every other marxist party doesn't. It is the only truly national communist party, it has a lot of resources which if the Marxists in the CPUSA lose the fight will go into the private hands of these liquidators. It is the original communist party in the US, none of the other parties have organic ties to the CPUSA. It has the most important international affliation for communist and worker parties currently, Its membership, ties to the trade union movement, and the lack of a CPUSA will result in an intense ideologically struggle that will spill all across north America. If the CPUSA had correct leadership, the CPUSA would have outflanked every other Marxist party in the state, but currently as a tailist and non-fighting party, workers will find alternative parties, which are all over the place. CPUSA may not be much today but it represented the Anchor in the socialist movement in the US, with its fall, things will drift all over the place. Ideological deviations are all over the place and without a true Marxist alternative right now, the working class has added years to struggle if the CPUSA were to fall into building a new truly national party.

[Q]

The CPUSA may not be a good place for Marxist-Leninists today. But theres a couple things the CPUSA has that every other marxist party doesn't. It is the only truly national communist party, it has a lot of resources which if the Marxists in the CPUSA lose the fight will go into the private hands of these liquidators. It is the original communist party in the US, none of the other parties have organic ties to the CPUSA. It has the most important international affliation for communist and worker parties currently, Its membership, ties to the trade union movement, and the lack of a CPUSA will result in an intense ideologically struggle that will spill all across north America. If the CPUSA had correct leadership, the CPUSA would have outflanked every other Marxist party in the state, but currently as a tailist and non-fighting party, workers will find alternative parties, which are all over the place. CPUSA may not be much today but it represented the Anchor in the socialist movement in the US, with its fall, things will drift all over the place. Ideological deviations are all over the place and without a true Marxist alternative right now, the working class has added years to struggle if the CPUSA were to fall into building a new truly national party.
I think you're romanticising the role of the CPUSA here. If it really has 300 members left, like Ohnoatard stated, it is far from a national party. It may still have some resources in the sense of offices, but there is nothing vitally lost in that. I don't see how the CPUSA of today is an "anchor" of the left movement. Sure, it has credits from its past, but today it is an insiginificant organisation. Its downfall will not seriously affect the American left movement.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

In my 8 years of going to countless protests, demonstrations, strike pickets, and leftist conferences, I have only seen the CP-USA in-the-flesh 4 times in my entire life. I would hardly consider them "influential" in ANY movement, labor union or otherwise.

Even as a YCL member at 13, I was essentially the only member in Nashville and was all but ignored by the local leadership, who were too busy with the Clinton-Gore 1996 campaign at the time. Needless to say, their lack of ANY form of action definitely contributed to my leaving them for Anarchism and eventually Maoism.

[n0thing]

They were already a total joke. Who cares?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I see in this tendency the direct result of absence of developed model of transition from capitalism to communism and realistic ways of abolishing of the monetary system in programmes of all communist parties. As a result - rupture with the communist ideology in favour of socialism, market socialism or social-democracy.

Comrade, The draft formal program I have doesn't have a "developed model of transition" in regards to explicitly addressing the labour credits question. Such a program is best left to a prominent faction advocating the social-proletocratic program.

However, hints of this developed program are hinted in this program section just before the principles part, particularly the last demand:

In spite of the aforementioned considerations, it would be easier to do away with the transnational rule of bourgeois law before realizing the extension of at least some of the considerations for the benefit of the working class, such as:

1) Eliminating information asymmetry by first means of establishing full, comprehensible, and participatory transparency in all governmental, commercial, and other related affairs;
2) Matching the globalized mobility of labour with the unconditional establishment of equal rights for all ordinary people and real freedom of movement through instant legalization and open borders, thereby precluding the extreme exploitation of immigrants;
3) Legally considering all workplaces as being unionized for the purposes of collective bargaining and strikes, regardless of the presence or absence of formal unionization in each workplace;
4) Abolishing all public debts outright, suppressing excessive capital mobility associated with capital flights, ending the viability of imperialist conflicts and not just wars as vehicles for capital accumulation, and precluding all predatory financial practices towards the working class – all by first means of monopolizing all central, commercial, and consumer credit in the hands of a single transnational bank under absolute public ownership;
5) Applying not some but all economic rent beyond that of land towards exclusively public purposes;
6) Establishing an equal obligation on all able-bodied individuals to perform socially necessary labour, be it manual or mental; and
7) Extending litigation rights to include class-action lawsuits and speedy judgements against all non-workers who appropriate surplus value atop any economic rent applied towards exclusively public purposes.

[al8]

I see in this tendency the direct result of absence of developed model of transition from capitalism to communism and realistic ways of abolishing of the monetary system in programmes of all communist parties. As a result - rupture with the communist ideology in favour of socialism, market socialism or social-democracy.

Your absolutely correct. It is the common discust of a clear vision - it is said to be utopian, ultra-left, mechanical etc.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Maybe I should have gone into more details, but I assumed the CPUSA's record was well known...

No, there's no need for it really. I am aware for the CPUSA's politics and practice, past and present.


They wouldn't be transforming themselves for "unity" amongst socialists

Yes, reading through the articles now (where I had previously only skimmed over, note that I did not mention the specifics of this case in my above post), it doesn't seem that this 'liquidation' is taking the form of a unity organisation or coalition, which, as I noted, has been a trend. To be honest, the evidence offered up to support the argument that the CPUSA is moving to dismantle itself is unconvincing. In this respect, the article isn't interesting at all, though that is to be expected given the subject matter.

[Davie zepeda]

If you can name me any other party in the US right now that can do anything better than the cpusa give me the name. I'm only 21 and so far the party has be disorganized but i can hardly blame them right now, trying to reinvent themselves at the same time trying to keep the liberals in the party from taking over it's difficult. The only answer i can truly give is even thou i am in one of the worst organization, dose not mean im am not willing to take action or work with other factions. I myself am about to create my own chapter in my college based off the black panther militants .

[Kassad]

There's a lot of parties in the United States that have made Communist Party USA's presence in the anti-war, labor and socialist movement appear minute. In all honesty, I think each socialist party seems to have something that they spend the majority of their time working on, such as how the Party for Socialism and Liberation is really active in anti-war affairs, Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Fight Back!) is really active with unions and the labor movement and the International Socialist Organization has a huge presence on campuses. I mean, the only people who really think Communist Party USA is actually a revolutionary party are probably its members. Any other revolutionary socialists will say they're nothing more than a radical sect of the Democratic Party.

[Communist]

The CPUSA has really been an historical tragedy for many years. Their early history is inspiring, but it's been in steady decline for four decades. What they're doing now is just appalling, to say the least, and since many of the honest communists have moved on, any hope of rescue seems nearly impossible. I hate to say it, but perhaps the CPUSA should just dissolve to avoid further ruination of the perception of United States communists. As others have said, whenever the media want a "communist" they call the CPUSA, which is horrendous misrepresentation.

[gorillafuck]

If you can name me any other party in the US right now that can do anything better than the cpusa give me the name.
International Socialist Organization, Party For Socialism And Liberation, Socialist Party USA, Workers World Party, I'd say there really aren't any parties that aren't at least little bit better than the CPUSA


I'm only 21 and so far the party has be disorganized but i can hardly blame them right now, trying to reinvent themselves at the same time trying to keep the liberals in the party from taking over it's difficult.
Too late.

[heiss93]

These same old tired criticisms of the CPUSA go back to the 1930s. The Trots wrote all this back then. So its not like there is going to be a major change or liquidation. This is blown out of proportion. It just a newspaper and website name. All this is is old Trot and Maoist complaints, not any new development.

The CP is here to stay

[Communist]

All this is is old Trot and Maoist complaints, not any new development. The CP is here to stay

Well, except now it's Marxist-Leninists complaining, the same current that the CPUSA still somehow claims to be a part of. (As of yesterday, anyway).

[KurtFF8]

I am still working with cpusa and yes there's problems going on but so far the name thing has not come to mind, but the paper no longer exist once the vocal opposition for labor against the capitalist class. Oh yeah alot of comrades fought agasint that obama crap we just said wait and see and he's prove us right, now if we can only get that leadership to believe in socialism and not some quasi liberal fuck!

Interesting, when I visited the CPUSA during the Democratic Primaries, almost all of the members in the office were wearing Obama pins.

[chegitz guevara]

These same old tired criticisms of the CPUSA go back to the 1930s.

Maybe so, but the criticisms posted in the OP come from a member of the CPUSA. There is a lot of dissent inside the CPUSA, but, being a democratic centralist organization, it means nothing. It's really amazing the CPUSA manages to combine the worst aspects of democratic centralism and social democracy in one organization.

Anyway, comrades in the YCL tend to be more interested in revolution, though, sadly, many have fallen into the trap of rejecting any criticism of the USSR and Stalin. Mention any facts, show any proof from the Soviet archives, and out come Ludo Martins and Grover Furr. They are as immune to facts as followers of Sarah Palin, but at least they are on our side.

[Zeus the Moose]

Mention any facts, show any proof from the Soviet archives, and out come Ludo Martins and Grover Furr.

Ludo Martens I've heard about. Grover Furr is a new one, and after doing some internet searches, I'm astonished that someone so apparently linked to the PLP has existed so close to me, and yet I didn't know about it until now (I grew up 20-30 minutes away from Montclair.)

[Revy]

As I pointed out before, at the 2001 CPUSA National Convention (http://www.cpusa.org/index.php/article/articleview/86/1/32/), Jarvis Tyner (Executive Vice Chair) had a rather interesting view.


We are working for the establishment of a united multiracial labor-based independent people's electoral party that could ultimately challenge and win against the dominant capitalist parties, in every state in the union. We consider it a necessary goal, on the road to Socialism. While we have real progress towards such a goal and some promising 3rd party developments, we do not have such a party today.

What does this show us?

It shows us that despite their long-recorded history of support for the Democrats, this most recent period (2004-present) is the most ideologically destructive period in the CPUSA's recent history.

Because back in 2001, they had "sharp criticisms" of the Democrats. But now as we see, there is no going back now because the very prospect of raising "sharp criticism" of the Democrats or especially their new found god Obama is going to be impossible.

In 2001, it was acceptable to raise the possibility of a workers' party that could fight against the Democrats and Republicans. Arguing such a thing in 2009 would probably get you expelled.

[MarxSchmarx]

What a pity. However, they attract too many idealistic people to their ranks, only to suck their vitality to linger on as a historical curiosity. It is a sign of the times that they need to shape up or go the way of the triceratops.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Ludo Martens I've heard about. Grover Furr is a new one, and after doing some internet searches, I'm astonished that someone so apparently linked to the PLP has existed so close to me, and yet I didn't know about it until now (I grew up 20-30 minutes away from Montclair.)

I thought the PLP was a post-Maoist organization that developed their mass membership concept before I came to similar conclusions. :confused:

[LeninKobaMao]

Whatever. The CPUSA are a bunch of revisionist Kruschevites anyways.

[heiss93]

This whole "crisis" is over newspapers and a website. There hasn't been any major changes. A lot of hoo-ha over nothing. Reports of the CPUSA's demise are greatly exaggerated.

[chegitz guevara]

I thought the PLP was a post-Maoist organization that developed their mass membership concept before I came to similar conclusions. :confused:

Progressive Labor began as a split from the CPUSA in the years following Kruschev's revelations and the Sino-Soviet split. They agreed with Mao that the new leadership in the USSR was revisionist, and so, were the first Maoists in the US. They broke with Mao in 1969, though, when the PRC began cozying up to the US. PL is basically an unreconstructed Stalinist group.

[Charles Xavier]

There's a lot of parties in the United States that have made Communist Party USA's presence in the anti-war, labor and socialist movement appear minute. In all honesty, I think each socialist party seems to have something that they spend the majority of their time working on, such as how the Party for Socialism and Liberation is really active in anti-war affairs, Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Fight Back!) is really active with unions and the labor movement and the International Socialist Organization has a huge presence on campuses. I mean, the only people who really think Communist Party USA is actually a revolutionary party are probably its members. Any other revolutionary socialists will say they're nothing more than a radical sect of the Democratic Party.

There would be no PSL though if the CPUSA had correct leadership and line. But now people instead of going to the CPUSA they are going to fighting organization such as the PSL and other organizations, the problem right now there is no national marxist organization with deep lies to the labour movement. The CPUSA are not enemies of the working class, its leadership is. I hope that the fighting members of the CPUSA can save the party in the 2010 party convention, if they don't the liquidators win, it will be a robbery of years of work by honest communists. Liquidators tried to do the same here in Canada in 1990 with the Cecil Ross society, they stole our printer, our hall and our office among other things, but we kept our party. They were a little different, they tried to create a press without the party, which was bound to fail. While here you have the CPUSA having a Party without a press.

The failure of the CPUSA's membership to save its party in its 2010 convention makes it clear that another party will have to step in and be built. Years of work will have to be redone. Right now already there is a number of competing parties within the USA, I hope there will be an adaquet replacement of the CPUSA soon if the convention fails.

[Communist]

This site (http://cpusanationalboard.blogspot.com/2009/02/communist-party-usa-supports-barack.html) is a parody of the CPUSA National Board, at least I think it is...

[chegitz guevara]

:lol: It's hard to tell.

[Q]

This site (http://cpusanationalboard.blogspot.com/2009/02/communist-party-usa-supports-barack.html) is a parody of the CPUSA National Board, at least I think it is...
Wow, that stuff is unreal. I was thinking about quoting the most hilarious parts, but that would involve pretty much copy-pasting the site... :bored:

[heiss93]

The CPUSA welcomes freedom of criticism under democratic centralism, but Alan Maki who runs the parody website crossed the line by working hand in hand with far-right groups like AIM to expose Obama as a Marxist.

[Communist]

...who runs the parody website crossed the line by working hand in hand with far-right groups like AIM to expose Obama as a Marxist.

I'm not following you here.
The person who runs the website is obviously unhappy with the direction of the CPUSA. Yet this person is a conservative? Or works with conservatives?
How can anyone expose Obama as a Marxist when he so clearly is not?
And this certainly is not the point of the parody site, in fact the opposite. Care to elaborate a bit more on this? Thank you.

[heiss93]

Alan Maki runs the parody website.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxk2C

Strange Bedfellows: Alan Maki & Cliff Kincaid (23-7-08)
In a blatant misappropriation of Obama campaign resources, "communist" blogger Alan Maki is colluding with "conservative" blogger Cliff Kincaid in a disinformation campaign designed to portray Barack Obama as communist-influenced [1]. Accuracy In Media's Kincaid has been running this redbaiting campaign since he published "Obama's Communist Mentor" [2] in February 2008, in which Kincaid exaggerated the influence of "communist" Frank Marshall Davis (1905-1987) on teenage Obama. "Frank" was mentioned in Obama's "Dreams From My Father.'

On July 3, 2008, Kincaid published "Communist Party Backs Obama" [3], partially based on Alan Maki's deceptive blog on the my.barackobama.com website [4]. Kincaid extensively quotes Maki based on the Frank Marshall Davis connection:

[QUOTE]
"Meanwhile, admitted CPUSA member Alan Maki, writing on the official Barack Obama website, in the "community blogs" section under an "Obama 08" banner, has mentioned the unmentionable. That is the role of CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis in mentoring Obama during his formative high school years in Hawaii."

"Although fine print at the bottom of the page says that "Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign," the information provided by Maki is deadly confirmation that a hard-core CPUSA member played a key role in helping raise Obama. It is a story that most media, including some "conservative" news outlets, have shied away from."

"Announcing the "Frank Marshall Davis roundtable for change" on the Obama website, Maki, a Democratic Party activist and casino worker organizer, explained, "Reading Barack Obama's book I learned about his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis." He went on, "Of course, as we all know, Frank Marshall Davis was a Communist and he had a very good understanding of the underlying source of problems which all too often goes unstated and unchallenged and remains hidden because of the high fear-factor level in this country; I am referring to capitalism―a thoroughly rotten system. Frank Marshall Davis also understood through his thorough studies of the situation that socialism provided the only workable alternative to capitalism."

Saying that he has been "active in the Minnesota DFL and the Democratic Party most of my life," Maki still wants to know about the specifics of the "change" Obama is promising."

Maki goes on to say, "There really isn't much for us to learn about 'change' from Obama, but there is quite a bit to be gleaned from the writings of Frank Marshall Davis and I thank Barack Obama for bringing him to my attention… now I can say that Frank Marshall Davis is in many ways my mentor, too."
[END QUOTE]

On July 14 Kincaid confirmed that Alan Maki is not an Obama supporter, thus rendering his my.barackobama.com blog [4] fraudulent. Kincaid published "Was Jesse Jackson a Media Tool for Barack Obama" on the Post Chronicle website [5]. A partial quote:

[QUOTE]
"Veteran Communist and Democratic Party activist Alan Maki tells me that, despite announcing a Frank Marshall Davis discussion group on an official Obama community blog website, he wants it known far and wide that he doesn't support the candidate and wouldn't walk across the street to vote for him. Maki, an organizer of casino workers in Minnesota, thinks Obama and McCain are too close to Big Business, including the casino industry."
[END QUOTE]

As of July 15, Kincaid's "Communist Party Backs Obama" article, partially based on the fraudulent Alan Maki blog, has over 58,000 Yahoo Search hits.
I have found no indication that Davis ever taught radical political or economic theory to Obama. Instead, Obama tells of Davis's attitude towards higher education and race relations. I believe that Maki's motivation is clear: He considers capitalism to be a "thoroughly rotten system," and is exploiting Obama’s good will towards Frank Marshall Davis for his own convoluted purposes.
Through his "Roundtable For Change" proposal, I believe that Maki is attempting to parlay Obama's respect for Davis's social insight into Obama's support for Maki's war on capitalism. Through his "Obama's Communist Mentor" disinformation, I believe that Cliff Kincaid is attempting to parlay Obama's respect for Davis's social insight into Obama's respect for Davis's "communist" inclinations. They both use disinformation. They talk to each other, which suggests mutual interests. Perhaps the left and right wings have met in the depths of hell and forged a compact against Frank Marshall Davis and Barack Obama. Their common interests include: 1. Opposition to Obama.
2. Using Maki’s blog for their own political agendas.
3. Communication with each other.
4. Use of Maki quotes in Kincaid’s reports..
5. Exaggeration of Davis’s influence over Obama.
6. Using conservative blogosphere terms like “mentor” in this context, and falsely attributing it to others.
7. Misrepresenting reality to support their positions.
Their mutual use of “mentor” is especially curious, because I can find no use of it (in this context) that predates the conservative blogosphere. Trevor Loudon apparently used it first in March 2007. Cliff Kincaid uses it in February 2008, and falsely attributes it to CPUSA member Gerald Horne. Alan Maki uses it and falsely attributes it to Barack Obama. False attribution is a common disinformation technique. Since he did not get it from Barack Obama, then he must have gotten it elsewhere. The only other apparent blogosphere sources are conservative bloggers. By the process of deduction, he most likely adopted it from conservative bloggers like Loudon and Kincaid. Therefore, he most likely reads the conservative blogosphere. If Maki reads the conservative blogosphere enough to have known about conservative claims regarding Obama’s “mentor,” then he should have known that Kincaid was strongly anti-communist BEFORE he spoke with him. Holding multiple conversations with him becomes even MORE suspicious. This suggests that Alan Maki willingly entered into this relationship with his putative ideological enemy. He knew (or should have known) that Kincaid would exploit his “Roundtable for Change” blog as ammunition against Barack Obama BEFORE his reported conversations with Kincaid, yet he willingly cooperated with Kincaid. This cooperation suggests a serious conflict of interests for Alan Maki. I challenged Maki's characterization of my father, Frank Marshall Davis, in the comments of his post [4]. I also challenged his association with Cliff Kincaid, and especially his use of the term "mentor" because it has been used extensively by Kincaid's redbaiting campaign.

Unable to answer my questions, Alan Maki suddenly accused me of engaging in a "racist, anti-Semitic hate campaign," and deleted my (and other) critical comments. He fraudulently attributed their removal as being "Deleted by admin," but contradicted himself in his July 14 post by declaring "I am deleting all of your entries." He thereby implicated my.barackobama.com website administration in this deception.

[chegitz guevara]

Some comrades just don't get it.

Little tip, bashing on Maki doesn't make his parody blog of the CPUSA, and less funny. The fact that Maki worked on the Obama campaign while still being a member of the CPUSA also doesn't help your case of the CPUSA being anything more than a wing of the Democratic Party.

I believe this is what the kids refer to as, own goal.

[heiss93]

If you read the passage you'll see that Maki in now way "worked" for the Obama campaign he just made use of the blog, to parrot the vicious slanders of the right and to misrepresent himself as a CPUSA supporter and speak for the CPUSA. The CPUSA leadership of course could not publicly respond to this renegade as that would further embarrass Obama.

Some of his blog is funny, but its author is not a legitimate critic but a wrecker.

[Communist]

If you read the passage you'll see that Maki in now way "worked" for the Obama campaign he just made use of the blog, to parrot the vicious slanders of the right and to misrepresent himself as a CPUSA supporter and speak for the CPUSA. The CPUSA leadership of course could not publicly respond to this renegade as that would further embarrass Obama. Some of his blog is funny, but its author is not a legitimate critic but a wrecker.

"Embarrass Obama"? Who the heck cares if an imperialist politician is embarrassed? The CPUSA leadership, I guess.
How can anyone wreck what Webb has already demolished?
I'm just not getting it.

[chegitz guevara]

I generally don't like bashing on other socialist organizations, but I make allowances for those who overtly support capitalism. Any socialist who supports an imperialist politician should be tarred and feathered.

The biggest thing the CPUSA could do to help the socialist movement is to stop pretending to be socialists, and let some real communists have the party.

[Revy]

I generally don't like bashing on other socialist organizations, but I make allowances for those who overtly support capitalism. Any socialist who supports an imperialist politician should be tarred and feathered.

The biggest thing the CPUSA could do to help the socialist movement is to stop pretending to be socialists, and let some real communists have the party.

Sam Webb & Co. would have to abdicate their thrones...I don't see that happening.
.
The good thing if they changed their name would be someone else could use the name "Communist Party" without it looking like a paradox.

I wonder if they give false records of their number of members to make themselves seem relevant. They claim to have 3000 members, a gargantuan number, but I wonder if they count ex-members, both living and dead, to keep that number high.

[Robocommie]

I agree with the idea of using the new name "Communist Party" if the CPUSA changes theirs.

Maybe we could use the name for a coalition party of all the many varied socialist parties in the US right now. We could really use some unity.

[Kassad]

These are the same people who said that Uncle Sam can aim nuclear warheads at North Korea all day and night, but the second that North Korea attempts to develop weapons to defend itself, they're being 'reckless' and disturbing world peace by promoting weapon expansion. I honestly can't believe there are still defenders of this liberal party. I mean, what do they even do anymore? They have no activist presence. They don't have any links to the labor movement anymore. Is going on FOX News and 'defending' Cuba the only thing that their members do? Really, in all honesty, they make the Green Party look revolutionary.

[KurtFF8]

I agree with the idea of using the new name "Communist Party" if the CPUSA changes theirs.

Maybe we could use the name for a coalition party of all the many varied socialist parties in the US right now. We could really use some unity.

That would be nice indeed. Perhaps the CPUSA is indeed standing in the way of unity of the left. Even in places like Japan (see the current thread on that CP) that have strong Communist Parties: the party is problematic.

But in America it's just absurd. Although I think it being abolished wouldn't change much in terms of the left in America. Only other organizations coming together under that banner would actually change something (and if it were a truly unified coalition, and God knows that would be quite difficult to pull of in the US)

[GregoryAButler]

If you read the passage you'll see that Maki in now way "worked" for the Obama campaign he just made use of the blog, to parrot the vicious slanders of the right and to misrepresent himself as a CPUSA supporter and speak for the CPUSA. The CPUSA leadership of course could not publicly respond to this renegade as that would further embarrass Obama.

Some of his blog is funny, but its author is not a legitimate critic but a wrecker.

So Alan Maki is a "wrecker"?

I hope he's not one of those "trotskyiste fascist wreckers" that Henry Yagoda (look him up on wikipedia) used to talk about (and have shot) so much back in the day!

Look, I was in the YCL/CPUSA from 1985 to 1996 - and 90% of what I did was help the Democratic Party win elections

So Maki is right on the money about saying the CPUSA is in the Democrats back pocket - and it has been since 1936!

[heiss93]

The CPUSA was right! The DPRK's nuclear program should be criticized precisely on anti-imperialist grounds. It has been the driving force behind fascist militarism in Japan even more so than rising China. The recent elections offer a new direction and I hope NK doesn't do anything stupid to endanger all of Asia and ruin this historic moment.

On the topic of Maki there is a qualitative difference between the criticisms of MLtoday and Maki. The MLtoday site has a strong anti-revisionist stance similar to Maki's, and I feel that to some extent they are misrepresenting the situation as there have been no recent major changes to suggest liquidation. But on the other hand I think they are genuine Marxist-Leninists even if their party criticism is un-Leninist. Maki on the other hand actively tried to sabotage the efforts of the CPUSA during the Obama campaign. He joined forces with the ultra-right John Birch-type conspiracy nuts. He parroted the words of Loudon's New Zeal blog! So he can't be taken as a legitimate critic.

[Revy]

The CPUSA was right! The DPRK's nuclear program should be criticized precisely on anti-imperialist grounds. It has been the driving force behind fascist militarism in Japan even more so than rising China. The recent elections offer a new direction and I hope NK doesn't do anything stupid to endanger all of Asia and ruin this historic moment.

Is this a joke?

[GregoryAButler]

The CPUSA was right! The DPRK's nuclear program should be criticized precisely on anti-imperialist grounds. It has been the driving force behind fascist militarism in Japan even more so than rising China. The recent elections offer a new direction and I hope NK doesn't do anything stupid to endanger all of Asia and ruin this historic moment.

On the topic of Maki there is a qualitative difference between the criticisms of MLtoday and Maki. The MLtoday site has a strong anti-revisionist stance similar to Maki's, and I feel that to some extent they are misrepresenting the situation as there have been no recent major changes to suggest liquidation. But on the other hand I think they are genuine Marxist-Leninists even if their party criticism is un-Leninist. Maki on the other hand actively tried to sabotage the efforts of the CPUSA during the Obama campaign. He joined forces with the ultra-right John Birch-type conspiracy nuts. He parroted the words of Loudon's New Zeal blog! So he can't be taken as a legitimate critic.

Alrighty then...

So, it's "anti imperialist" to oppose the efforts of a Third World country to defend itself militarily against US imperialism?

Sorry - I think you got it 180 degrees backwards

As for Comrade Maki - ever heard of something called sarcasm?

The CPUSA is pathetically revisionist and has been for decades (when I finally learned what Marxism really was, I got the hell out of there with a quickness) - Maki gives the CPUSA the exact amount of respect that institution deserves - absolutely none!

As for sabotaging the efforts of the CPUSA - considering those efforts involved supporting the Democratic Party, they deserved to be sabotaged!

[Outinleftfield]

Were not losing anything. Ever since the Soviet Union crumbled away the CPUSA has done the safe thing and endorsed the Democrats as the lesser of two evils instead of fielding its own candidate. Its become a reformist party.

But looking at capitalist countries like Moldova and Cyprus where the Communist Party has a majority I doubt a communist party can ever make a difference by winning elections, and looking at the failures of the USSR, China, etc even by taking power. The party model of achieving socialism doesnt work.

[Revy]

The party model of achieving socialism doesnt work.

It worked in Russia in 1917...:p

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

Sam Webb & Co. would have to abdicate their thrones...I don't see that happening.
.
The good thing if they changed their name would be someone else could use the name "Communist Party" without it looking like a paradox.

I wonder if they give false records of their number of members to make themselves seem relevant. They claim to have 3000 members, a gargantuan number, but I wonder if they count ex-members, both living and dead, to keep that number high.

I am close friends with an older woman whose father was on the Central Committee of the CP-USA for decades, and then she herself was on the CC for 5 years (before leaving for Maoism) as the head of the Communist Party of Georgia. She said that, indeed, when a person leaves the Party, they do not strike you off the membership rolls because they want to pad their membership numbers: technically, she is still a member of the CP-USA despite her nasty split with them, and I'm technically still a member of the YCL even though I haven't done anything with them in nearly 10 years.

Shows more than a little desperation, I'd say. XD

[sanpal]

Were not losing anything. Ever since the Soviet Union crumbled away the CPUSA has done the safe thing and endorsed the Democrats as the lesser of two evils instead of fielding its own candidate. Its become a reformist party.

But looking at capitalist countries like Moldova and Cyprus where the Communist Party has a majority I doubt a communist party can ever make a difference by winning elections, and looking at the failures of the USSR, China, etc even by taking power. The party model of achieving socialism doesnt work.

The deal is not in "the party model of achieving socialism" but in "uncommunistic" of "communist" party (see p.2 #21 in this thread)