Arizona communists join Freedom Road Socialist Organization

[Killer Enigma]

Big news for the FRSO announced in Fight Back! this week. If there's finally an exodus of the left wing of the CPUSA and they're looking at FRSO, this could seriously shift the climate for Marxist organizations in the US. The parts about the CPUSA are interesting too, not necessarily because they're new, but because they're coming from young cadre who joined and now left the CPUSA. Thoughts on the article? (http://www.fightbacknews.org/2013/12/20/arizona-communists-join-freedom-road-socialist-organization)


Arizona communists join Freedom Road Socialist Organization
By Tom Burke | December 20, 2013

Tucson, AZ - A significant grouping of communists recently joined the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO). Centered in Tucson, the group ranges from a well-read high school student up to a comrade in his late seventies with lifelong experience in the Communist Party-USA. They include students, workers and educators from a variety of backgrounds and experiences, united in struggle for immigrant rights, workers and unions and against U.S. wars and oppression. Rings of other activists and revolutionaries are now discussing this bold move by the Arizona communists.

The decision to leave the Communist Party and join the FRSO was not taken lightly. It was serious and deliberate. As Jafe Arnoldski said, “We discussed the problems we were facing and three things stood out. One, the social-democratic leadership of the Communist Party has rejected Marxism-Leninism and the historical experiences of socialism at a time when the socialist vision is especially necessary. Two, the Communist Party's program and line misleads the working class with illusions about the Democratic Party, while putting socialism on the back burner for some future ‘stage.’ And three, under the social-democratic line, party discipline and organization have deteriorated, accountability and criticism/self-criticism have collapsed and bureaucratic formalities are the norm.”

The Arizona grouping felt the Communist Party leadership was dismantling everything of value and drifting away from revolutionary politics. Many were especially upset with the dumping of the print edition of the newspaper that existed for generations. So the Arizona comrades debated their options and contacted a local FRSO member. It was suggested they study the FRSO documents at www.frso.org and share their views. Approached by other revolutionary groups, the Arizona group collectively joined the FRSO because it embodies the best traditions of the communist movement in the U.S.

Speaking for the group of Arizona communists as a whole, Arnoldski described their reasons for joining the FRSO: “The FRSO has a dynamic program for revolution in the U.S. which applies the principles of Marxism-Leninism to the concrete national and class struggles and conditions at hand. As well, the FRSO makes use of the mass-line approach to leadership, expanding the political presence of the FRSO in the movements in which it works. The FRSO's organizational norms and practices uphold the principles of democratic centralism and effective Leninist organization.”

Arnoldski emphasized, “Also, I would add, the FRSO is committed to building cooperation and alliances among other Marxist-Leninists, on the road to constructing a new communist party.”

The FRSO sent leaders to meet, discuss and answer questions, both practical and ideological. Cadres also shared our assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the FRSO as it expands to new cities and grows in all regions of the country. Despite facing ongoing U.S. government repression, the FRSO is vibrant and making strides in its party building efforts. The FRSO is growing younger and wiser, while strengthening its internal structures and democratic functioning, and all the while increasing its capacity to lead struggles regionally and nationally.

The new Arizona district organizer summed up their big move, "We want to be a part of an organization that isn't waiting for revolution and socialism. We want to be working with a group who are organizing for revolution and socialism right now through their principled practical work with the masses. We learned through struggle that the Communist Party could not provide us, or the masses, with such an organization and that FRSO has the elements to lead and unite working and oppressed peoples to fight back. We need a new communist party to lead us through revolution and build socialism. We have a world to win!"

[Sasha]

We have a world to win!

not with a website like that you dont.
geocities called, your website escaped.
sheesh, not to be sectarian but if you cant even find a decent webdesigner to make your organisation a half-decent and inspirational website that doesnt bode much good for your mass party let alone your revolution...

[Lily Briscoe]

this could seriously shift the climate for Marxist organizations in the USHow can anyone actually believe this?

[Per Levy]

FRSO, wasnt that one of the leftists organisations that endorsed obama and told its members and supporters to vote for him?

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

FRSO? Great, you can quit fighting for the American bourgeoisie in the Democratic Party and work instead on behalf of the Chinese bourgeoisie in the "Communist" party there.

[consuming negativity]

http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2013/frso_congratulates_mugabe.htm



FRSO congratulates Robert Mugabe, ZANU-PF on Zimbabwe election win


By Freedom Road Socialist Organization

The following message from Freedom Road Socialist Organization was sent to Robert Mugabe, President and First Secretary of the Zimbabwe African National Union - Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) following his victory in the elections.

To: Comrade Robert Mugabe, President and First Secretary of Zanu PF

From: Freedom Road Socialist Organization, USA

Dear Comrade,

We send our warmest greetings and congratulations on the occasion of your re-election to the Presidency of Zimbabwe. We see this victory of ZANU-PF as an historical victory for the cause of African liberation, and a blow against neo-colonialism and imperialism. We condemn the attempts by the government of the United States to discredit Zimbabwe’s free and fair electoral process.

The long struggle of the people of Zimbabwe, under the leadership of ZANU-PF, to smash the Western-backed white minority rulers was a great inspiration to people in the United States and around the world. We continue to be impressed by the heroic efforts of ZANU-PF to press forward the revolutionary process and to build a country that is self-reliant and independent of Western imperialism.

We salute you, the leadership of ZANU-PF and people of Zimbabwe and we wish you every success in the future.

Fraternally,
Freedom Road Socialist Organization, USA...seriously? :laugh:

I'm not a fan of the CPUSA (is anybody?) but this is just silly.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2013/frso_congratulates_mugabe.htm

...seriously? :laugh:

I'm not a fan of the CPUSA (is anybody?) but this is just silly.

And the Zimbabwean bourgeoisie too ...

[Sinister Intents]

What's so important about this?

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

FRSO, wasnt that one of the leftists organisations that endorsed obama and told its members and supporters to vote for him?

Other FRSO (http://www.freedomroad.org/).

-

Anyway, I think it's interesting to see folk splitting left from the CPUSA. Even if the FRSO isn't my cup of tea, I hope it's indicative of a shift on the left away from loyal-opposition-ism.

[Red Commissar]

Out of curiosity, which of the FRSO's is this? I can't differentiate between them. (edit: whoops, didn't notice the fight back! mention at the beginning) And how big was the CPUSA's presence in Arizona to begin with? I can't say that it'll be a big impact in any event though.

[Prometeo liberado]

this could seriously shift the climate for Marxist organizations in the US

Congrats to the FRSO comrades and all 4 of your new members coming from the CPUSA.
A paradigm shift indeed!

(Really people? This tantamount to getting enraged at the trash in your kitchen so you move it to your bedroom. Problem solved?)

[Prof. Oblivion]

Other FRSO (http://www.freedomroad.org/).

-

Anyway, I think it's interesting to see folk splitting left from the CPUSA. Even if the FRSO isn't my cup of tea, I hope it's indicative of a shift on the left away from loyal-opposition-ism.

No, FRSO.org advocted a vote for Obama in the guise of a "vote against McCain":


The facts are plain; Obama parts ways, to a degree, with Clinton on the Iraq War, free trade agreements and racism. He has a message of hope with wide appeal. However, Obama operates well within the confines of the Democrats and their big business backers. That said, his election will create a better political climate for the anti-war, immigrant rights, labor and national movements. And no matter who is in the White House, it is important for progressives to stay active and to fight for an agenda that places the peoples needs first.

Say no to war, racism, discrimination and reaction!
Vote against McCain!

2008 Presidential Elections: Defeat McCain (http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2008/defeatmccain.htm)

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

No, FRSO.org advocted a vote for Obama in the guise of a "vote against McCain":


The facts are plain; Obama parts ways, to a degree, with Clinton on the Iraq War, free trade agreements and racism. He has a message of hope with wide appeal. However, Obama operates well within the confines of the Democrats and their big business backers. That said, his election will create a better political climate for the anti-war, immigrant rights, labor and national movements. And no matter who is in the White House, it is important for progressives to stay active and to fight for an agenda that places the peoples needs first.

Say no to war, racism, discrimination and reaction!
Vote against McCain!

2008 Presidential Elections: Defeat McCain (http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2008/defeatmccain.htm)

Oh, shit, you're right.

Damn, that's rough. Amerikkka has gotta have the most weakass "Maoists" in the world. I guess that goes a way to explaining why the jump from the CPU$A was so easy.

[Prof. Oblivion]

In 2012 they didn't explicitly advocate voting for Obama but they did have this weird ambiguous official statement which basically said some people should and others should vote third party or something. They seem to think that this is a matter of tactic and not principle, and that the below statement is actually some kind of insightful analysis. To me it just reads like "some people should do some things, others will do others, but remember that change is in the streets!"

Honestly I don't see how this was correct for "this election cycle" and not every single other one. But then again we're not dealing with people that really know what they're talking about lol

What to do?

We know that many activists in unions, the African-American, Chicano and other oppressed nationality movements, and sections of anti-war protesters and immigrant rights activists are likely to continue to vote for the lesser of two evils. However, we think the conditions are right in this electoral cycle to emphasize instead the nature of the two party, one ruling class system and talk about why what we have is not democracy and not good enough. We do think it is still important for progressives to go to the polls to oppose concrete attacks on democratic rights, such as Voter ID and anti-gay amendments. In terms of voting in the presidential election, it is better to vote against Romney, especially in swing states. In other states like California, the Republicans are unlikely to win. In these cases, it would be positive to have a strong third party vote total.
http://frso.org/about/statements/2012/frso-election-2012-statement.html

[Red Shaker]

If this group in Arizona is truly looking for a revolutionary alternative to the CP-USA, this switch will only demoralize them.

[RedHal]

yes this FRSO also advocated lesser evilism Obama and were rewarded by the by getting infiltrated by an undercover spook and then raided by the FBI.

[KurtFF8]

Other FRSO (http://www.freedomroad.org/).

-

Anyway, I think it's interesting to see folk splitting left from the CPUSA. Even if the FRSO isn't my cup of tea, I hope it's indicative of a shift on the left away from loyal-opposition-ism.

(edit, oh I just saw someone else posted this as well) No, it was both FRSOs:


The 2012 presidential election: In the midst of economic hard times, hope is in the people’s struggles, change is in the streets (http://www.fightbacknews.org/2012/8/12/2012-presidential-election-midst-economic-hard-times-hope-people-s-struggles-change-street)






What to do?

We know that many activists in unions, the African-American, Chicano and other oppressed nationality movements, and sections of anti-war protesters and immigrant rights activists are likely to continue to vote for the lesser of two evils. However, we think the conditions are right in this electoral cycle to emphasize instead the nature of the two party, one ruling class system and talk about why what we have is not democracy and not good enough. We do think it is still important for progressives to go to the polls to oppose concrete attacks on democratic rights, such as Voter ID and anti-gay amendments. In terms of voting in the presidential election, it is better to vote against Romney, especially in swing states. In other states like California, the Republicans are unlikely to win. In these cases, it would be positive to have a strong third party vote total.
Anyway back to the OP. I'm curious as to why there was an article written about this and published on their site for the public. Members from branches sometimes switch organizations, and it isn't as if the CPUSA itself merged with FRSO.

[hashem]

FRSO (fightback) is a good example of reactionary socialism.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

FRSO (fightback) is a good example of reactionary socialism.

This thread is a bit heavy on the FRSO-bashing, I get that, but it would be sweet if we could push this in a productive direction.

I'd be curious if you could elaborate your post a bit, since one gets the sense you have a developed critique here. What, more precisely, do you mean by reactionary socialism, and how do FRSO (fightback) embody it? Would you say that FRSO (freedomroad.org) don't? Why or why not?

[Homo Songun]

I do think this is a big deal. Keep in mind, the CPUSA is still the biggest socialist group in the USA, in terms of assets and members. Yeah, CP > ISO.

Now, the CP (once?) made a claim to be the vanguard of the US working class. And it does have a prestigious record of struggle, at least historically speaking. And while the party has been revisionist for a very long time, over the last several years the bureaucratic post-Gus Hall leadership has actually been liquidating the party press, the traditional party structures, any remaining ideological content, and so on.

But at the same time, the leadership is tightly holding onto the name and assets, at least for the time being, obviously for whatever power and wealth it can still afford them. For example, there are probably significant pieces of real estate, lots of bequests, and so on. (And, youngsters today might not realize this, but being "the Party" in a given country entailed all kinds of junkets and recognitions internationally for the leaders of said Party.)

These moves have been going on for a while, and have been causing a lot of discontent internally. But it seems to me like the party is really only coming off the rails as of late. Could it be that all these quantitative changes are finally engendering the qualitative leap? Just based on Internet postings and such alone, in the past year or so, we have seen:

* The Houston branch split off.
* The Oklahoma district expelled.
* And now, the CP loses Arizona.

And these are just the branches and districts, not factions or individuals as such.

There really isn't any truly Marxist-Leninist vanguard party in the States today. But at the same time, you have this historical entity that has inherited the form of that, sans much of the content. It has to collapse on its own contradictions at some point. Are we seeing the beginnings of such a process?

[La Comédie Noire]

They now have enough members to rent out a moon bounce and not have it seem pathetic.

[hashem]

This thread is a bit heavy on the FRSO-bashing, I get that, but it would be sweet if we could push this in a productive direction.

I'd be curious if you could elaborate your post a bit, since one gets the sense you have a developed critique here. What, more precisely, do you mean by reactionary socialism, and how do FRSO (fightback) embody it? Would you say that FRSO (freedomroad.org) don't? Why or why not?

FRSO (fightback) supports a bourgeois policy in USA and reactionary and fascist regimes in other countries. such policy will defame true worker socialism in the eyes of American workers. what will American workers think of socialism when they see a "socialist" organization supports reactionary governments of Iran, North Korea and such backward and reactionary regimes? if these reactionary "socialist"s are not exposed, wouldn't he prefer to support his own capitalist government instead of fighting for socialism?

im not supporting FRSO (freedomroad.org), but they are bourgeois democrats at worst, not servants of fascists.

[Killer Enigma]

Re: Shmuel Katz

A late reply, but my thinking is exactly the same. The CPUSA has an upcoming Congress, and the buzz around it from the left-wing in the organization is that big changes are coming. I know some great folks in the CPUSA who do very solid organizing, but they're also a long way from Marxism, much less Marxism-Leninism (which Sam Webb explicitly disavows). I think the changes will be a further lurch towards the right - difficult for some of us to imagine, but very possible and likely, in my opinion.

I've seen a lot of people join the CPUSA because it's still internationally recognized as the leading communist party in the US. This is changing, of course, in no small part because of the series of polemics by other, better CP's around the world (initiated by the Greeks). For instance, you see a lot of immigrants who come to the US as reds and join the CP, not knowing the organization's serious degeneration. If the CP continues to lose members and either radically restructures or - in a huge turn of events - folds, it actually puts a lot up for grabs in terms of the Marxist left. People make fun of the CPUSA and their significance on this board, and I suspect it's because of the average age of the posters and lack of experience in organizing (not meant as a pejorative; just an observation). As you mentioned, the CPUSA is, sadly, still an important part of the left.

FRSO picking up what sounds like a substantial amount of new members is a big deal, especially given where they organizationally came from. FRSO grew out of the New Communist Movement and owes its legacy largely to that, but acquiring a big chunk of members whose organizational legacy goes further back into the historic CP of the 1930s does a lot to make their organization broader, at least in terms of the left. Even now in 2014, the divide between the NCM groups and the old Marxist left is still of some consequence. For instance, in all of the foldings and dissolutions at the end of the NCM, the FRSO, the RCP, and the LRNA never absorbed, nor were they absorbed by, any older Marxist groups. This is a significant development.

[Killer Enigma]

All of the bashing from people isn't very interesting, especially when it's rehashing critiques of the FRSO's electoral line or their lines on China, the DPRK, Iran, etc. Again, the focus on these questions in the most banal terms as opposed to the actual, real world impact something like this has on the US Marxist left owes itself to the average age of participants on this form (not a pejorative; just an observation) and a lack of organizing experience. For instance, it makes sense in an echo chamber to scream about FRSO's anti-imperialism and say that it will torpedo their efforts, but clearly the FRSO is growing. If you're not involved in organizing, that probably doesn't even enter into your calculus, much less something you really care about. I'm interested in the perspectives of those on revleft who actually do.

[Geiseric]

I do think this is a big deal. Keep in mind, the CPUSA is still the biggest socialist group in the USA, in terms of assets and members. Yeah, CP > ISO.

Now, the CP (once?) made a claim to be the vanguard of the US working class. And it does have a prestigious record of struggle, at least historically speaking. And while the party has been revisionist for a very long time, over the last several years the bureaucratic post-Gus Hall leadership has actually been liquidating the party press, the traditional party structures, any remaining ideological content, and so on.

But at the same time, the leadership is tightly holding onto the name and assets, at least for the time being, obviously for whatever power and wealth it can still afford them. For example, there are probably significant pieces of real estate, lots of bequests, and so on. (And, youngsters today might not realize this, but being "the Party" in a given country entailed all kinds of junkets and recognitions internationally for the leaders of said Party.)

These moves have been going on for a while, and have been causing a lot of discontent internally. But it seems to me like the party is really only coming off the rails as of late. Could it be that all these quantitative changes are finally engendering the qualitative leap? Just based on Internet postings and such alone, in the past year or so, we have seen:

* The Houston branch split off.
* The Oklahoma district expelled.
* And now, the CP loses Arizona.

And these are just the branches and districts, not factions or individuals as such.

There really isn't any truly Marxist-Leninist vanguard party in the States today. But at the same time, you have this historical entity that has inherited the form of that, sans much of the content. It has to collapse on its own contradictions at some point. Are we seeing the beginnings of such a process?

The CPUSA supported the US army during WW2! It used to be a Stalinist puppet party now it's lost its purpose to exist.

[Killer Enigma]

These are all facts you can dig up on wikipedia. I'm not defending the extreme deviations of the CPUSA by any stretch of the imagination. All I'm saying is if you organize in almost any major city in the country, you're going to run into at least one person from the CPUSA (usually more at that). And the benefit they've gotten from their extreme tailism and revisionism is that they're usually pretty close to the more "establishment left," running the gamut from prominent trade union bureaucrats to NGOs in the peace/African American/immigrant rights movement. They don't really lead, per se, but they're usually somewhat integral to work. That's why it's important to still think about the CPUSA because while the average poster on revleft may think of it as "that sell-out party that supports Obama," they're not pigeon-holed by that in most activist circles.

All of that said, they're losing a lot of members who are actual Marxists and want to fight the class struggle, rather than tailing Democrats. Hence why it's significant news for the FRSO to pick up so many members.

[Le Socialiste]

These are all facts you can dig up on wikipedia. I'm not defending the extreme deviations of the CPUSA by any stretch of the imagination. All I'm saying is if you organize in almost any major city in the country, you're going to run into at least one person from the CPUSA (usually more at that).

I'm curious as to what cities you're referring to, because I've been doing work in and around the city I currently live in for a little over two years now - and I've yet to encounter a single CPUSA member. I'll be honest, I think the role and importance of the CPUSA has declined significantly since its heyday in the 1930s and 40s, to the point in which it's fairly negligible.

Edit - But that's just an observation.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

(DISCLAIMER: I am kinda buzzed right now so take everything I saw with a bit of salt)

I want to comment briefly on the speaker in the article: Jeff Arnoldski. This person was a comrade of mine for a long time. We first met when we joined a Trotskyist youth group. He was very professional, knew his theory, and was a dedicated revolutionary. However, he switched tendencies so many time I lost count- he started as a Trot, moved towards Titoism, then Anti-Revisionist Marxism-Leninism, then, for a very mild period, Maoism, followed by (traditional) Marxism-Leninism; at this period he joined the CPUSA's revolutionary faction in an attempt to swing it to revolutionary views. Seems not to have worked out. Now it looks like he has sided with Market-Socialists.

I am not saying anything against his character or credentials as as a anti-capitalist revolutionary, but I am saying that his shifting tendencies and views are not a new thing. As such, this event (since, I believe, he was the organizer for the defecting branch), should not be taken as anything other than a mild change in national U.S Vanguardist organization.

[Killer Enigma]

I'm curious as to what cities you're referring to, because I've been doing work in and around the city I currently live in for a little over two years now - and I've yet to encounter a single CPUSA member. I'll be honest, I think the role and importance of the CPUSA has declined significantly since its heyday in the 1930s and 40s, to the point in which it's fairly negligible.

Edit - But that's just an observation.
I'm sure there's exceptions. But there's probably some CPUSA member floating around wherever city you're in. What I've seen from the folks I know is that they have huge "membership lists" that consist of a lot of disconnected numbers or people who signed up on the website but have no interest in organizing. Also, a lot of the CPUSA folks are closed members so you might meet one or two and have no idea (again, owing to their tailist line - it's not like they're incredibly discernible from really progressive Democrats).

What I'm getting at is that there's a disconnect between the people on this board and the actual organizing scene. For instance, you see a disproportionate number of anarchists on here, but I've encountered increasingly fewer anarchists doing any organizing at all. Young people, especially students, gravitated towards anarchism during the first couple years of the Bush administration, but now the majority of people coming out of youth movements trend towards social democracy. However, those who are more radical than that are generally Marxists. Again, I'm talking about general trends and I'm sure people have different experiences. All of it goes to say, though, the CPUSA may be a down-trending organization, but they're still relevant, at least more so than the random individual anarchists who post online and don't do a whole lot besides that.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Pure delusion

[Revy]

Quoting the FRSO: "In terms of voting in the presidential election, it is better to vote against Romney, especially in swing states. In other states like California, the Republicans are unlikely to win. In these cases, it would be positive to have a strong third party vote total."

http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2012/frso-election-2012-statement.html

Carefully worded, but it would support, or at least approve of, revolutionaries voting for the Democratic Presidential candidate to prevent the Republican candidate from winning. So how is this so different from what the CPUSA believes? Oh, FRSO is more explicitly Stalinist.

[Prometeo liberado]

Quoting the FRSO: "In terms of voting in the presidential election, it is better to vote against Romney, especially in swing states. In other states like California, the Republicans are unlikely to win. In these cases, it would be positive to have a strong third party vote total."

http://www.frso.org/about/statements/2012/frso-election-2012-statement.html

Carefully worded, but it would support, or at least approve of, revolutionaries voting for the Democratic Presidential candidate to prevent the Republican candidate from winning. So how is this so different from what the CPUSA believes? Oh, FRSO is more explicitly Stalinist.

Stalin. Stalin. Stalin. Always the reliable go to in times of theoretical uncertainty. Your politics don't agree with mine? Fuck you you're a Stalinist. Didn't go your way? Blame the Stalinist. A merger of leftist? Goddamnit who let Stalin in the door?
Like an endless barrel full of unfit, unread and out of touch rats trying to bleed each
other dry for a shot at, any shot at any sort of relevance. Constantly dragging the limbs of a long since dead boogeyman as its guiding standard. Stalin., off the cliffs of Dover.Stalin, howl the homeless of skid row.Stalin, walking with the lost boys of Africa.
He's much like me playing Basketball. Can't stop us, can't even hope to contain us.
Stalin as the eternal culprit. What is wrong with you people?

[KurtFF8]

I'm sure there's exceptions. But there's probably some CPUSA member floating around wherever city you're in. What I've seen from the folks I know is that they have huge "membership lists" that consist of a lot of disconnected numbers or people who signed up on the website but have no interest in organizing. Also, a lot of the CPUSA folks are closed members so you might meet one or two and have no idea (again, owing to their tailist line - it's not like they're incredibly discernible from really progressive Democrats).

But didn't you say earlier that the CPUSA remains an important part of the Left? I would hardly equate "you can maybe find a CPUSA member in a bunch of cities" to "they are important for the Left." At least beyond hopefully recruiting those folks into a different organization.

I think that the biggest "advantage" that the rest of the Left would get from the CPUSA "finally" calling it quits would be the realm of international connections that you mentioned before. Although much of the international Left wouldn't see a "clear successor" to the CPUSA in a way. Perhaps FRSO is trying to promote itself as that with articles like this one (other than that I'm not sure why an organization would write an article about something like this)


but they're still relevant,

I don't mean this as a "challenge" but in what sense are they relevant still?

[Killer Enigma]

Have you done much work in the labor movement? You'll run into CPUSA cadre all the time, usually working as staff but occasionally as rank-and-file workers. Their importance is relative to the greater importance of the US Left, which is to say, not much. But people underestimate the CPUSA at their own peril. They're still larger than almost every other socialist organization on the left.

[KurtFF8]

Have you done much work in the labor movement?

Yes, and I have yet to run into anyone in CPUSA.


You'll run into CPUSA cadre all the time, usually working as staff but occasionally as rank-and-file workers. Their importance is relative to the greater importance of the US Left, which is to say, not much. But people underestimate the CPUSA at their own peril. They're still larger than almost every other socialist organization on the left.

They are indeed large, but as you've mentioned most of their membership is "on paper" rather than active cadre.

I'm not saying that the CPUSA is non-existent within labor and the Left, but I do think you're overstating their presence and importance.

[Prof. Oblivion]

All of the bashing from people isn't very interesting, especially when it's rehashing critiques of the FRSO's electoral line or their lines on China, the DPRK, Iran, etc. Again, the focus on these questions in the most banal terms as opposed to the actual, real world impact something like this has on the US Marxist left owes itself to the average age of participants on this form (not a pejorative; just an observation) and a lack of organizing experience. For instance, it makes sense in an echo chamber to scream about FRSO's anti-imperialism and say that it will torpedo their efforts, but clearly the FRSO is growing. If you're not involved in organizing, that probably doesn't even enter into your calculus, much less something you really care about. I'm interested in the perspectives of those on revleft who actually do.

I don't think "growing" is really relevant. If I turn 10 cents into 20, I've grown by 100%, yet I still can't afford a McDouble even. Even if you have a local circle comprised of ten active members, that's absolutely nothing in comparison to anyone else. Only on the revolutionary left is that considered a significant feat.

[Red Shaker]

My experience with the FRSO is that they are pretty good union organizers, but that they do not introduce the workers that they are organizing to revolutionary politics. Since they do not do this, they are very limited in what they can accomplish in the labor movement.

[Prometeo liberado]

My experience with the FRSO is that they are pretty good union organizers, but that they do not introduce the workers that they are organizing to revolutionary politics. Since they do not do this, they are very limited in what they can accomplish in the labor movement.

I have actually heard Bill Gallegos , who pretty much runs L.A. FRSO, all but admit to this fault of theirs.

[redguarddude]

While the CP is no longer the largest US left group, it does have substantial assets. These assets include ownership of a good size office building in New York. Most estimates from recent ex CP members place their membership at several hundred. At the time of the split with Committees of Correspondence in 1991 The CP had 2500 and lost 900 to Committees of Correspondence. Prior to 1991, during the 1970's and 1980's anyone active in the major US cities, would not be able to avoid meeting CP members. They even had a presence in Utah.

When discussing Freedom Road Socialist Organization, it's important to mention which one. There are two. One is referred to as FRSO Fightback. I don't know about the other one.Create one, two, three, many Freedom Road Socialist Organizations!

[Killer Enigma]

I hate to bump this thread again, but I like where this discussion could go. This recent polemic against the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) by the CPUSA (http://www.politicalaffairs.net/world-communist-parties-debate-strategy-for-the-road-ahead/) is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of the international importance of the degenerate revisionist organization in the US. For those who don't want to read it, it's a response to a polemic that the KKE wrote (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/communist-party-of-greece-kke-polemic-with-cpusa/) criticizing Sam Webb's collection of theses diminishing the importance of a vanguard party and abandoning Marxism-Leninism. That sounds like stale reading to some of you, but it has very real consequences for the left in the US. For instance, if the CPUSA no longer considers itself a vanguard - nor a vanguard necessary - what keeps them aligned in name with the communist movement? Is it possible that the CPUSA in a few years might not even be called that anymore, or they might follow the AFL-CIO's lead in becoming a big tent progressive left organization, slightly to the left of MoveOn?

There are fewer than 400 members in the CPUSA, but now that we know the ISO has fewer than 500 members despite their claims, that still makes the CPUSA one of the largest organizations on the Marxist left. Consider, what if even a quarter of those cadre followed the lead of the Arizona comrades and joined the FRSO?

Edit: and I should add, the quarter I'm talking about are the Marxist-Leninists still in the CPUSA. They're clearly a minority, but about every four CPUSA clubs I encounter around the country has an ML orientation, so I'm assuming 1/4. That's a pretty big deal.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

There are fewer than 400 members in the CPUSA, but now that we know the ISO has fewer than 500 members despite their claims, that still makes the CPUSA one of the largest organizations on the Marxist left. Consider, what if even a quarter of those cadre followed the lead of the Arizona comrades and joined the FRSO?


Then it would mean nothing. Absolutely nothing. These same 400-500 cadre seem to have been pissing backwards into their own tent for many years, decades even. If they join another organisation, why would that change?

There is pretty much close to zero class-wide relevance to pretty much all of this discussion, as interesting as it is in historical and theoretical context.

[Os Cangaceiros]

There are fewer than 400 members in the CPUSA, but now that we know the ISO has fewer than 500 members despite their claims, that still makes the CPUSA one of the largest organizations on the Marxist left. Consider, what if even a quarter of those cadre followed the lead of the Arizona comrades and joined the FRSO?

...there'd be another ineffectual left-wing organization with a few hundred members?

[audiored]

It is just sad that this seems to be the most significant communist organization in Tucson. Every time I start to think about finding an organization to associate with, I realize there is no point.

[Homo Songun]

Besides Arizona, Texas, and Oklahoma, it looks like the CPUSA has been shedding chapters in NYC and LA (http://ideologicalfightback.com/cpusa-expels-austin-hogan-transit-workers-club/) as well. Will the upcoming convention in June be the Party's last???


There should be alarm bells all across the left this week as the Transit Workers Club of the New York District Communist Party was expelled by one man: Bill Davis. The Austin Hogan Club was the shop club of the CPUSA in NYC. Its members worked primarily for the Metro system. Bill Davis had this to say in a letter addressed to the expelled members: “Enclosed is a check for $96.00 that was submitted on 12/3/13 as dues. It can’t be accepted as dues since the people involved are not members of the Party.” Notice here that the dues were sent in on 12/3/13 and the CPUSA’s response is dated March 20, 2014, some 3 months later. Does it take the CPUSA 3 months to process dues payments? The letter goes on to say that “[T]he Austin Hogan Club has demonstrated in many ways and on many occasions that it does not respect the Communist Party, its duly elected Leadership and enacted policies. The club has not participated in any of the events and activities of the Party nor has it supported the national or district policies of the Party, including those related to transit.”

In response, the leadership of the Austin Hogan Club issued this response: “the NY District has purged our Transit Club, Austin Hogan Club of the CPUSA. We will continue to send Pre-Convention documents to the Party in keeping with the Pre-Convention period. And, we will send them to other comrades; both those who are still in the Party and those who chose to step away. ”

This purging is in line with the factional leadership’s unwritten policy of “dropping” “expelling” or simply not accepting dues as payment as spelled out in the CPUSA Constitution. First, the Gus Hall communist club in New York was dropped from membership. Then the Arts and Entertainment Club was dropped from membership by Mr. Bill Davis himself! Then the Houston, Texas community club was dropped and its members purged. This was followed by the Los Angeles Metro Club, and now the Austin Hogan Club. Instead of building up the party, the paid agents of imperialism are driving out honest comrades, usurping power, and moving the party away from Marxism in the direction of social-democracy.

“Given the underhanded and deceitful way in which the NY District has uncomradely treated our club, a club with excellent attendance [a club that functions in a Leninist manner], with solid transit experience and very good influence in transit matters in our union and NYC, we don’t expect a response from them. The very few who remain in the NY District are not known for direct discussions. There has not been an official District-wide meeting since the last convention.” We at the National Council of Communists have to ask, is this the proper practice of “democratic centralism”?

“The upcoming pre-convention District meeting is the first,” states the club’s statement. “They clearly do not want us at that meeting. We are ready to meet if they do hold a hearing on our appeal.”

So what does the future hold? Our party has been hijacked by Quislings and imperialist agents. There is little hope of saving it. “Clearly the 23rd Street leaders, soon to be the Halstead Street leaders, have a lock down on the June convention. Their choice of leadership leaves out most of the more active Districts from participation. That leadership is very narrow and small. It does not reflect the Party, that is, those who are still in and those who are looking at June to see what happens.”

[Homo Songun]

In a familiar vein. However, Jarvis Tyner was something like Sam Webb's associate when Webb ran the party. (At the last convention in 2014 the CPUSA elevated John Bachtell to the helm. Anybody know more about that vote?)



I come before you today with a heart full of a love for our party and all comrades. Because I love our party I have deep concerns about the current political and organizational direction we are headed in.

[...]

If it is our financial situation that threatens our existence, let’s discuss it. Lets develop a plan. It certainly does not call for a “panic move” like selling our NY building. Our building is the largest source of income we have and the most solid foundation for our future financial stability. If we sell the building, a potentially grave crisis will exist in our future.

I understand that we have a problem of age and energy among our most committed and experienced members. I am for positive advances in the work of the party but we should not dismantle the political and organizational essence of our party because some of our veterans are demoralized or just tired. I understand that but like a lot of us I know this Party can attract more youth and can be built and we are doing it.

I do not believe we are on our last leg as a Party...

In my view, that the estimate is not helping us move forward. It is helping to rationalize major political and organizational retrenchments of our Party when this is a time when a revitalized and growing CPUSA is needed.

But, let me say this, even if we were facing the projected collapse of our Party I believe we must not give up and not abandon longstanding Party norms, but mobilize our membership and supporters and fight our way out of it just as this Party has done numerous times for over 96 years.

[...]

3. I am for the new initiative to build a communist students organization. But why should it mean we have to liquidate the organization of the YCL among non-college youth. If a district wants to build the YCL why can’t it? By the way, in my opinion, that is a decision that should have been made at the 30th Convention but it was not. The same with the dropping Leninism which was pushed as a tactical change (Americanize our basic language) but in life, as the youth proposal shows it was a rejection of the Leninist concept of the organizational independence of the youth league.

[...]

4. I am for finding the forms to aggressively organize the over 2,000 at large Internet members but I am also for the restoration of Party organizational norms. So we cannot just talk that talk but “Walk that Walk” a lot better. We are a party of action and we need organized clubs, districts and commissions. We need dues collection and well-organized fund drives. We need recruiting drives and public meetings all across the country.

[...]

And why can’t we have a regular modest organizational newsletter that would report on the good work of the party across the country?

5. I am for the on-line People’s World that is considered a movement newspaper but at the same time why can’t it also be the newspaper of the Communist Party? The current experience with the PW in the labor movement, and with the “Better world Awards Luncheons” shows that this can be done and our core constituencies will support us. We need a fighting Party with a mass paper, not a mass newspaper with a weak or worse no Party… That is if we are to remain a revolutionary working class Party….

When you couple these proposals with the push to change the name of the party (which must be a convention decision also) I ask, have we concluded that we cannot build the Communist Party USA today? And again, is this the conclusion of a group of people who are tired? Certainly it is not a conclusion we have come to together.

A lot of comrades feel that we are backing into a phased liquidation of this great party of ours. Are we giving up the leading role of the working class and industrial concentration and the centrality of fight against racism? Our efforts at recruitment among people of color and workers might suggest perhaps we are. I hope I am wrong on this but it looks to me like some leading comrades have given up on the party having a public face and feel that we have to hide the party. If that is true, it is the biggest problem we face.


Full: http://newyorkcp.blogspot.ca/2015/11/its-in-our-hands-on-direction-of-cpusa.html