Is the RCP USA really that bad?

[Uppercut]

Forgive me for sounding like a mo nothing but I would like some opinions on the rcp USA and Bob avakian. I haven't read any of his books but from judging from a few of his writings and speeches, he definately seems to be a revolutionary intellectual. True, he has a bit if a personality cult around him but do you guys think that it is directly imposed or is it just that his theories really are that good? Is the entire party just one big joke or do they speak some sense once in a while?

By the way, I'm aware that mao had a noticeable personality cult around him too, something I think that should be avoided in the future. Even still, he did some great things in developing Marxism-Leninism. So is Avakian really up to par with the great Marxist thinkers or is he just full of shit living in suspposedly self-imposed exile?

[el_chavista]

... I would like some opinions on the rcp USA and Bob avakian. An outstanding revolutionary for American standards.


True, he has a bit if a personality cult around him but do you guys think that it is directly imposed or is it just that his theories really are that good? What do you expect from a Maoist?


Is the entire party just one big joke or do they speak some sense once in a while?Being a communist in America can't be a joke.

[Os Cangaceiros]

An outstanding revolutionary for American standards.

LOL

Yeah, homeboy puts other names like Eugene Debs and Lucy Parsons to shame.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Bob Avakian is a reasonably engaging motivational speaker. But sadly, he thinks he is a Deep and Original Theorist, which he is not and never will be.

The RCP puts together front organizations with more interesting focus and more panache than most left organizations. (Debra Sweet is both personally fabulous and organizationally a powerhouse, I must say). But sadly, it once claimed to be a Maoist organization, which it is not anymore.

[bcbm]

they're a waste of time, don't bother.

[Raúl Duke]

RCP USA puts a lot of rhetorical focus, and I mean a lot, on their leader Bobby. There's more focus on the Bob Avaikain/Leadership rhetoric than any normal and fruitful discussion about problems/issues faced by members of the U.S. working class.

For some reason he's (self) exiled outside of the U.S., for seemingly no reason at all but perhaps to give the impression to his followers that he's so great, effective, and "dangerous" that he has to be in exile from the U.S. authorities.


So is Avakian really up to par with the great Marxist thinkers or is he just full of shit living in suspposedly self-imposed exile? Up to par? From what little I gathered, Avakian adds very little and what he has said isn't very original. I think he's really full of shit and if he wants to do something good for communism it will probably be to resign and/or disband the RCP cult of personality.


True, he has a bit if a personality cult around him but do you guys think that it is directly imposed or is it just that his theories really are that good? Is the entire party just one big joke or do they speak some sense once in a while?

They do speak some sense once in a while...but than again there's this old saying about how even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while (doesn't stop the fact that it's blind). Plus the sense they do speak/find is also available from other organizations that are more 'normal' and perhaps more effective than the RCP.

The unwarranted self-importance in their rhetoric however is a great big joke, considering that almost no one outside of the left has heard of the RCP or Bob and even in the Left, among anarchists and Marxists-Leninists, the RCP is a bit of a joke (less than the CPUSA though).

[Adi Shankara]

They're historical revisionists and loonies, and Avakian himself plagiarizes Karl Marx and Bakunin to the extreme--they also think Pol Pot was "a pretty nice guy", All Communism up until Avakian was inferior (since they didn't follow the revolutionary, yet to be discussed idea of "new Synthesis" :laugh:) and they really believe that Avakian is going to lead a revolution, despite the fact that, I'm 19 years old, and he hasn't done anything my entire life...nor has he done anything in anyone's lifetime really...

[28350]

Meh. They're not bad.
I'd prefer them over the Democrats, or the CP (how redundant).
But yeah, ideologically they're kind of bankrupt.

[Robocommie]

They do speak some sense once in a while...but than again there's this old saying about how even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while (doesn't stop the fact that it's blind).

Yeah, and a broken clock is right twice a day. :lol:

[Revolution Colorado]

If the RCP isn't a good millitia group then what about the Progressive Labor Party.

[Proletarian Ultra]

If the RCP isn't a good millitia group then what about the Progressive Labor Party.

Their political line is insanity: jump directly to moneyless communism with no intervening socialist stage in between. 'Anarcho-Stalinist' is a pretty good description, although 'Pol Potist' fits as well. On the other hand I've met a couple PLP'ers (before I was really clued in enough about their ideology to ask them about it) and they seemed thoughtful, committed and not-glassy-eyed. They're also hard-f'ing-core. Not too long ago a middle-aged schoolteacher from PLP got arrested for punching a Grand Wizard in the face in the middle of a Klan rally.

[Uppercut]

Thanks for the posts, comrades. I think I'll just Tay away from them and look to either PSL or the PLP. At least they put a decent emphasis on people and comradeship rather than messianic leaders. I've spoken to a representative from PSL a while back and they seem very down to earth. Of course, I need to learn more about the PLP as well.

One last question though: I heard that kasama project (which I am a fan of) is a front group for the RCP. Is this true? Or are they independant? Thanks in advance, comrades.

[Raúl Duke]

The Kasama group I think is independent from the RCP, but some of their people I think are ex-RCP.

[Robocommie]

Thanks for the posts, comrades. I think I'll just Tay away from them and look to either PSL or the PLP. At least they put a decent emphasis on people and comradeship rather than messianic leaders. I've spoken to a representative from PSL a while back and they seem very down to earth. Of course, I need to learn more about the PLP as well.

The PSL is definitely down to Earth, and so far everyone I've met attached to them are really nice folks, too. If I end up joining a party, they'll be it.

[Adi Shankara]

One last question though: I heard that kasama project (which I am a fan of) is a front group for the RCP. Is this true? Or are they independant? Thanks in advance, comrades.

They are independent, but they have the same lunatic ideas though; that direct communism can be achieved without an intermediate stage, that Pol Pot was a victim, and not a genocidal maniac, and they read a little to heavily into Mao to (for me at least) be considered "normal". Not saying Mao's works don't have purpose, but one has to ask themselves; how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

[Wanted Man]

I don't think the RCP are "that bad", just difficult to take seriously. That's a different thing altogether. I do think they have some interesting figures in the party, who should really step out of the shadow of Avakian.

Kasama is not so much a coherent organisation, with a specific political "line". It is instead a useful website for generally good articles and discussion. It was started by an RCP member who left the party in disillusionment, writing the 9 Letters (http://kasamaproject.org/pamphlets/9-letters/) about the RCP.

[Broletariat]

They are independent, but they have the same lunatic ideas though; that direct communism can be achieved without an intermediate stage, that Pol Pot was a victim, and not a genocidal maniac, and they read a little to heavily into Mao to (for me at least) be considered "normal". Not saying Mao's works don't have purpose, but one has to ask themselves; how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

Quick question. Isn't that an essentially Anarchist idea?

[Adi Shankara]

Quick question. Isn't that an essentially Anarchist idea?

It's an extreme Maoist idea--anarchists thinks that (from what I hear, I could be wrong), without the state, communism will be achieved because people at their most basic want equality and a classless society, whereas Mao and Pol Pot believed in forcing society to give up culture completely to start a "revolutionary new culture".

[Broletariat]

It's an extreme Maoist idea--anarchists thinks that (from what I hear, I could be wrong), without the state, communism will be achieved because people at their most basic want equality and a classless society, whereas Mao and Pol Pot believed in forcing society to give up culture completely to start a "revolutionary new culture".
Most Anarchist stuff I've heard of calls for attacking Capitalism while attacking the State.

[The Red Next Door]

Thanks for the posts, comrades. I think I'll just Tay away from them and look to either PSL or the PLP. At least they put a decent emphasis on people and comradeship rather than messianic leaders. I've spoken to a representative from PSL a while back and they seem very down to earth. Of course, I need to learn more about the PLP as well.

One last question though: I heard that kasama project (which I am a fan of) is a front group for the RCP. Is this true? Or are they independant? Thanks in advance, comrades.

No, but they are made up of Ex-RCPers.

[Proletarian Ultra]

It's an extreme Maoist idea

No it's not. If anything Maoism is a rightist deviation - with New Democracy before Socialism before Communism. RCP - goddamn you for making me defend them again - does not advocate a direct transition to communism.

[Sam_b]

Ah, the weekly RCP thread. This one isn't bad, I give it 7/10

[RED VICTORY]

how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

This is so true. We all have to understand that we must achieve advanced capitalism and industrialization before socialism can even be attempted. Peasantry straight to communism equals failure. Our revolutionary heros the world over inspire our zealous attitude though.

[RED VICTORY]

So many splinter groups and parties looking in the same direction with similar goals and yet still the minor differences set us back and disrupt our chances at unity. We may be our own worst enemy. Yes socialism has always had an intellectual persona but the workers need to be involved even more than the philosophers. Groups like the RCP and PSL, CPUSA, need to find a common ground(while still maintaining their individual beliefs) so that our movement can succeed.

[redasheville]

The key insights that come from Revleft are: RCP are a personality cult and that the CPUSA are not really communists.

[Adi Shankara]

The key insights that come from Revleft are: RCP are a personality cult and that the CPUSA are not really communists.

oh yeah, don't forget that other insight that Tibet was a genocidal Lamaist dictatorship where everyone lived in "hell on earth", and the minute the Chinese "communists" came to "liberate" them, Tibet turned into the happiest place on earth, and peace bloomed in the region and now they have achieved a complete workers state :laugh:

[Chimurenga.]

the minute the Chinese "communists" came to "liberate" them, Tibet turned into the happiest place on earth, and peace bloomed in the region and now they have achieved a complete workers state :laugh:

I'm pretty sure I've never heard a Maoist say anything remotely like this.

[Adi Shankara]

I'm pretty sure I've never heard a Maoist say anything remotely like this.

just jesting; I mostly was trying to make a joke, but I see it doesn't carry well over the net.

[RED DAVE]

Ah, the weekly RCP thread. This one isn't bad, I give it 7/106/10. No references to Avakian t-shirts.

RED DAVE

[redSHARP]

i rather support the CPUSA than the RCP (and that is fuckin bad!), in NYC they are an endangered species, everyone is out to push them out of town.

[The Hong Se Sun]

Look OP Ive talked to 3-4 (because one left) RCP members and they were all very down to earth nice people that believed in giving all the power to the people. So we can all sit around and attack and make fun of them or we could stop the in-fighting, work with them and try to move forward and who knows maybe some of them will change their mind and leave the RCP.



Yeah, and a broken clock is right twice a day. :lol:

That is clever Ive never heard that one before.

[genstrike]

To learn everything you need to know about Bob Avakian and see his latest portrait, simply visit this website: http://memegenerator.net/Blob-Avakian

[bailey_187]

They are independent, but they have the same lunatic ideas though; that direct communism can be achieved without an intermediate stage

No, they dont.



Not saying Mao's works don't have purpose, but one has to ask themselves; how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

Mao's works do have purpose, but you clearly never fucking read Mao if you think he said we should go straight to communism. He didnt even say third world countries should go straight to socialism, let alone fucking communism.
I mean, you being the history buff you are should know that Maoist China regarded itself as "an intermediary socialist state" from the late 50s, and before then "new democracy".
Stop prentending you know what your talking about.

[redSHARP]

The key insights that come from Revleft are: RCP are a personality cult and that the CPUSA are not really communists.


hey!!! the CPUSA is a real communist party. they will help the masses rise up to destroy capitalism right after they are done voting for democrats.:laugh::laugh:

at least they were cool people....

[Invincible Summer]

They are independent, but they have the same lunatic ideas though; that direct communism can be achieved without an intermediate stage
...

Not saying Mao's works don't have purpose, but one has to ask themselves; how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

Ummm... you don't really have a clue do you? :lol:

You seem to be talking about anarchists. Hell, Maoists are accused of being "state capitalists" most of the time.

[Kassad]

Comrade, you should check out Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Fight Back) if you're in line with MLM politics.

Freedom Road Socialist Organization (Fight Back!) members definitely do not call themselves Maoists from what I've seen. They uphold the Chinese Revolution and a lot of Mao's theoretical contributions, but they totally repudiate his claim that the Soviet Union was capitalist and the theory of social-imperialism that Mao upheld. It really depends how much the person upholds Mao, since FRSO is quite critical of Mao at times.

[Adi Shankara]

Mao's works do have purpose, but you clearly never fucking read Mao if you think he said we should go straight to communism. He didnt even say third world countries should go straight to socialism, let alone fucking communism.
I mean, you being the history buff you are should know that Maoist China regarded itself as "an intermediary socialist state" from the late 50s, and before then "new democracy".
Stop prentending you know what your talking about.

Then what the hell was the "Great Leap Forward" and Mao's version of the "Theory of Productive Forces"? hint: it was more than just an attempt to meet industrial quotas. Mao literally thought communism would be achieved a few years after the "leap".

[Lolshevik]

do they support the UCPN-(M), the Philipine Maoists, etc?

[Saorsa]

Then what the hell was the "Great Leap Forward" and Mao's version of the "Theory of Productive Forces"? hint: it was more than just an attempt to meet industrial quotas. Mao literally thought communism would be achieved a few years after the "leap".

No, he didn't.


oh yeah, don't forget that other insight that Tibet was a genocidal Lamaist dictatorship where everyone lived in "hell on earth",

No Maoist has ever accused the Tibetan landlord theocracy of being genocidal. But theocratic Tibet certainly was a hell on earth.


and the minute the Chinese "communists" came to "liberate" them, Tibet turned into the happiest place on earth, and peace bloomed in the region and now they have achieved a complete workers state

No Maoist has ever said that.


They're historical revisionists and loonies, and Avakian himself plagiarizes Karl Marx and Bakunin to the extreme

Wtf, plagiarizes Bakunin? Are you serious?


--they also think Pol Pot was "a pretty nice guy",

You've put that in quotation marks, so show me the quote where Avakian called Pol Pot a "pretty nice guy".


They are independent, but they have the same lunatic ideas though;

The Kasama Project doesn't have any kind of 'party line'. And they certainly don't have the same ideas as the RCP.


that direct communism can be achieved without an intermediate stage,

Provide a shred of evidence for this, or admit you're talking shit.


that Pol Pot was a victim, and not a genocidal maniac,

What Mike Ely was saying in that article about Cambodia, and what everybody else except for you seems capable of understanding, is that there is more to what happened in Cambodia than just a bunch of evil crazies killing millions for fun. Mike was pointing out that the massive US bombing campaign created the famine which led to the vast majority of deaths, and that we should actually analyse the situation in its entirety rather than parroting imperialist propaganda. This really isn't that complex - I don't quite understand why you're struggling with it so much.


and they read a little to heavily into Mao to (for me at least) be considered "normal".

The dividing line between normal and abnormal is how much Mao you read? Since when was being a revolutionary communist in the imperialist West 'normal'?


Not saying Mao's works don't have purpose, but one has to ask themselves; how many times has communism tried to be achieved without an intermediary socialist state and failed? It's like people have no patience at all.

It's bizarre that someone like you, who knows so little, think he can talk shit about so many things and nobody will notice. You're not impressing anyone, all you're doing is looking like an uninformed loudmouth and a general idiot. All the informed communists reading this thread, whether they are Maoists or not, will be well aware that Mao never advocated an immediate transition to communism. That is not a Maoist idea and it never has been.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Stop being an arrogant twat and try to be a bit more humble. Spend more time in the Learning section asking *questions*, rather than providing incorrect answers.


It's an extreme Maoist idea-

No, it's not.


whereas Mao... believed in forcing society to give up culture completely to start a "revolutionary new culture".

No, he didn't.

[Saorsa]

do they support the UCPN-(M), the Philipine Maoists, etc?

No, they don't. That was a major reason behind the Kasama split. The RCP only supports tiny groups overseas that praise Bob Avakian. It ignored Nepal for years then denounced it, and I see no evidence that the party is doing jackshit to support the Indian and Philippino comrades.

There's some truth to the common description of the RCP as 'Trotskyist'. They take the same flawed and arrogant approach.

[this is an invasion]

http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/2009/12/14/2/us_cx_nats_pits_bucket_600.jpg:thumbup1:

[Shokaract]

they also think Pol Pot was "a pretty nice guy"

I don't think this is true. It looks like the RCP's view is that, in light of the extensive bombing of and suffering inflicted on Cambodia by the USAF, the "U.S. imperialists have no right to speak on what is good for Cambodia--and no right to judge those who fought them." An old article suggests that the RCP's position is that Pol Pot's actions need to be evaluated without the poisoning effect of the Western media's simplistic and anti-communist accusations of genocide (challenged by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman).

The article also points out that Pol Pot was not an "ultra-Maoist" as the Western media has liked to portray him and that he aligned himself with and "embraced" the Dengist government. It also notes the Khmer Rouge's nationalist tendencies, the lack of organizational cohesion, and the increase in political executions.


It is clear that Khmer Rouge politics were heavily colored by an intense Khmer nationalism. There were apparently attempts to forcibly suppress the language, religion and culture of minority nationalities--such as the Moslem Cham people. Vietnamese people living in Cambodia were reportedly treated very harshly. Vickery's report that national minorities as a whole were categorized as "depositees" suggests that such policies were not just local errors.



To what degree did organizational and political weaknesses in the Angkar contribute to incorrect and uneven policies? Vickery and other sources report that the centralized connections between Khmer Rouge of various regions were extremely loose--and that widely different polices were carried out in the country's seven main Khmer Rouge regions. This suggests that lack of strong party organization may have been a serious problem in this movement.

To understand what happened in Cambodia it would be important to evaluate the line associated with Pol Pot that eventually emerged out of intense internal struggles within the Angkar/CPK after the seizure of power. As a unified command was consolidated, the Angkar/CPK attempted to quickly abolish all money, wages systems, marketplaces, religion, and private ownership of land and productive forces.


Vickery suggests that the implementation of these new consolidated policies coincided with a change in the use of political execution. Before 1977, he writes, extreme punishment was mainly used against officers and officials associated with the crimes of the old regime. After 1977, he believes the numbers of executions rose and involved more punishment of both "new" people and "base" people who ran afoul of the new campaigns and the new authorities. Again, more investigation would be needed to evaluate the truth of such reports, and to understand the extent to which incorrect methods were used to enforce the policies of the new power.

[bailey_187]

Then what the hell was the "Great Leap Forward" and Mao's version of the "Theory of Productive Forces"? hint: it was more than just an attempt to meet industrial quotas. Mao literally thought communism would be achieved a few years after the "leap".

You are clueless idiot. Every Maoist or Mao supporter on this forum is telling you that "straight to Communism" is not an Maoist idea. Why do you, someone who clearly knows fuck all about Mao other than a bit of wikipedia skiming think you know better? Go to any Maoist site; Kasama, RCP, World Peoples Resistance Movement, A World To Win, FIRE Collective, Bannedthought, DemocracyandClassStruggle, MLMRSG and whatever else there is. None of them will call for going straight to Communism. The only semi-Maoist group that do is the PLP, which criticises Mao as a revisionist for not arguing for going straight to Communism.

the GLF was about massivly increasing industry, allowing for China to "catch up with Britain". Mao rejected the "Theory of productive forces", he didnt have a "version" of it.

[Brother No. 1]

What Mike Ely was saying in that article about Cambodia, and what everybody else except for you seems capable of understanding, is that there is more to what happened in Cambodia than just a bunch of evil crazies killing millions for fun. Mike was pointing out that the massive US bombing campaign created the famine which led to the vast majority of deaths, and that we should actually analyse the situation in its entirety rather than parroting imperialist propaganda. This really isn't that complex - I don't quite understand why you're struggling with it so much.

At least Mike Ely isnt a complete shit on Cambodia then, but never let him talk about Marxism or the USSR or Cuba. :lol:


oh yeah, don't forget that other insight that Tibet was a genocidal Lamaist dictatorship where everyone lived in "hell on earth",

From what I've read it wasnt into genocide. But, it was a theorcracy that had serfs inside its borders. So it was like Czarist Russia, unless you like that.



and the minute the Chinese "communists" came to "liberate" them, Tibet turned into the happiest place on earth, and peace bloomed in the region and now they have achieved a complete workers state

So, ending the theocracy and trying to develop the state, but then didnt tibet already HAVE Serf rebellions who decided to create the Tibetan Autonomous republic.
Even now Tibet is still being developed (some 3 months ago they finally connected the train lines in Tibet).

[Kayser_Soso]

Forgive me for sounding like a mo nothing but I would like some opinions on the rcp USA and Bob avakian. I haven't read any of his books but from judging from a few of his writings and speeches, he definately seems to be a revolutionary intellectual. True, he has a bit if a personality cult around him but do you guys think that it is directly imposed or is it just that his theories really are that good? Is the entire party just one big joke or do they speak some sense once in a while?

By the way, I'm aware that mao had a noticeable personality cult around him too, something I think that should be avoided in the future. Even still, he did some great things in developing Marxism-Leninism. So is Avakian really up to par with the great Marxist thinkers or is he just full of shit living in suspposedly self-imposed exile?

You'd probably be better off abandoning Maoism altogether. One on hand there are the Third Wordlists, who always seem to be privileged young people living in the First World for some reason, and on the other there are the cultists like the RCP. The RCP is also rather hypocritical for getting involved in the World Can't Wait: Drive out the Bush Regime campaign. The very essence of this movement can't help but to garner support for the Democrats, or suggest that Democrats are somehow "better" than Republicans. Hell, if I thought it would run the country so far into the ground that American workers might wake the hell up for once, I'd endorse Sarah f#$king Palin.

Well of course the world DID wait, the Bush regime left on its own, and World Can't Wait is now a useless memory.

[Rusty Shackleford]

So many splinter groups and parties looking in the same direction with similar goals and yet still the minor differences set us back and disrupt our chances at unity. We may be our own worst enemy. Yes socialism has always had an intellectual persona but the workers need to be involved even more than the philosophers. Groups like the RCP and PSL, CPUSA, need to find a common ground(while still maintaining their individual beliefs) so that our movement can succeed.


I have to give the RCP some credit for being dedicated to the struggle, no matter how crazy some of their stuff is. they are a well disciplined org(possibly has a lot to do with that whole new synthesis deal... and... bob.) I was at a demo where the only communist organizations out there were the PSL and the RCP. decent bunch, real decdicated, and friendly.

there are some huge differences between the organizations though.

first of all... the PSL doesnt show up at events all wearing sam marcy shirts.

the RCP people at the last demo were almost all wearing a bob avakian shirt. i think there was one shirt in the group that was just Marx Lenin and Mao. im not fucking kidding.

the PSL is at its core ML with no real deviation from Leninism(like Trotskyism or Stalinism for example) meaning we wont just become straight up MLM-Avakian Thought-ists.

We already kind of have our own mass organizations we belong to.

RCP - World Cant Wait
PSL - ANSWER Coalition
any coordinating would probably have to start at the mass org level.

but what am i talking about. ive only been around the PSL for 4 months. that last bit was mostly speculation.

and the CPUSA... no... just no...


anyways... i dont hate the RCP or have any real issues with them besides the whole Bob Avakian thing. they are a dedicated group of revolutionaries but that whole bob avakian is like logic repellent.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0ZRnirp_1fQ/SrONb4zkOVI/AAAAAAAAC5g/7QMIwTEfpHk/s320/10417_584175984744_26308079_34354178_1916218_n.jpg&imgrefurl=http://invereskstreet.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html&usg=__bwKmK5C0nBg95beGAX3XL5zXMNw=&h=222&w=320&sz=25&hl=en&start=0&sig2=_8bwYXZSQzC9Ja5ijNAG7A&tbnid=OgAP9M3FPlzHbM:&tbnh=168&tbnw=217&ei=jD1RTO6JHor0swPyqKziCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbob%2Bavakian%2Bt-shirt%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26b iw%3D1280%26bih%3D829%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=905&vpy=111&dur=340&hovh=176&hovw=255&tx=146&ty=132&page=1&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0ZRnirp_1fQ/SrONb4zkOVI/AAAAAAAAC5g/7QMIwTEfpHk/s320/10417_584175984744_26308079_34354178_1916218_n.jpg&imgrefurl=http://invereskstreet.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html&usg=__bwKmK5C0nBg95beGAX3XL5zXMNw=&h=222&w=320&sz=25&hl=en&start=0&sig2=_8bwYXZSQzC9Ja5ijNAG7A&tbnid=OgAP9M3FPlzHbM:&tbnh=168&tbnw=217&ei=jD1RTO6JHor0swPyqKziCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbob%2Bavakian%2Bt-shirt%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26b iw%3D1280%26bih%3D829%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=897&vpy=103&dur=455&hovh=177&hovw=256&tx=102&ty=113&page=1&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0

[chegitz guevara]

The new constitution of the RCP requires members to report their thinking to the Party. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know about the organization, nothing will.

[Chambered Word]

The new constitution of the RCP requires members to report their thinking to the Party. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know about the organization, nothing will.

:lol: Source?

[chegitz guevara]

http://www.revcom.us/Constitution/constitution.html

Article 1, Membership

Section E.


E. Party members actively report to their units, and to leadership, what they are learning and thinking. This includes their wrangling with questions of theory and strategy and big developments in the world, reflections on culture or science, as well as their summation of experience gained in particular work and the thoughts and views of the masses. Party members have the responsibility to systematically and scientifically analyze all this in reports, and to participate in developing strategic conceptions for different arenas of the party’s work.

[Chambered Word]

That's a bit fucked up, not that I expect better from cults.

[Kayser_Soso]

http://www.revcom.us/Constitution/constitution.html

Article 1, Membership

Section E.

Holy shit....

I hope this is a wake-up call for members and prospective members of the RCP-USA. If only there were some real Marxist-Leninist party in the US.

[chegitz guevara]

It was a wake up call. Why do you think the RCP evaporated?