Your opinion on CPUSA?

[RO17]

What is your opinion on CPUSA? On their FAQ it seems pretty coherent with my beliefs.

Peace. Respect the environment. Empower workers. Fight imperialism. Fight all forms of oppression such as racism and sexism. Etc.

So why is it hated and what is their tendency, Leninist, Trotskyist, etc.

I would like to call myself a Leninist but I really lean towards Luxemburgism (though there is almost no movements for this tendency).

So what do you think?

[Five Year Plan]

Perhaps you'd care to search through the other 500 threads on this subject, before starting another one. You can find a handful of them at the bottom of the page, under "similar threads."

[Fourth Internationalist]

What is your opinion on CPUSA? On their FAQ it seems pretty coherent with my beliefs.

Peace. Respect the environment. Empower workers. Fight imperialism. Fight all forms of oppression such as racism and sexism. Etc.

All of those are so vague that they are meaningless. Also, the "peace" part means they're against revolution, which amounts to maintaining the current order of oppression and exploitation in the name of "peace."


So why is it hated and what is their tendency, Leninist, Trotskyist, etc.

They are Stalinist-reformists, and support the Democrats in the USA.


I would like to call myself a Leninist but I really lean towards Luxemburgism (though there is almost no movements for this tendency).

Luxemburg was a supporter of the Bolsheviks (essentially a Bolshevik herself in principle). She isn't a separate tendency, despite the small differences between she and Lenin (chiefly on the national question).

[RedAnarchist]

They're nothing more than social democrats who should just go ahead and join the Democrats.

[blake 3:17]

The Canadian CP came out a couple of years ago and called the CPUSA on its useless reformism.


It is in this context that we now comment on recent developments and debates which have been taking place in our neighboring party, the CPUSA. For several years now, our Central Committee has received inquiries from many concerned members about political and organizational changes in that party, and the renunciation by leading cadres of such fundamental Marxist concepts as "the dictatorship of the proletariat", "democratic centralism" and "proletarian internationalism."

The concerns raised have dealt with a number of interrelated issues, such as various statements issued by the CPUSA dealing with international questions, especially on the Palestinian struggle, and on the U.S. wars of occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan; on trade union policy which many feel is insufficiently critical of class collaborationism in the leadership of the AFLCIO (which has a direct bearing on Canada given the large presence of AFLCIO affiliates in the Canadian Labor Congress); on the assessment of the role and class position of the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party and the absence of any independent electoral presence of the CPUSA in its own name; on various pronouncements by leading figures of the CPUSA on changing the party name, in describing the multitrillion dollar government bailouts as "a dose of socialism", etc.; and in organizational decisions to cease the print editions of People's Weekly World and Political Affairs, the layoffs of Party and YCL organizing staff, the internetbased 'open door' approach to party recruitment, etc.

Although deeply concerned about many of these developments, our Central Committee has until now refrained from comment. However, in light of the publication earlier this year of the article "A Party of Socialism in the 21st Century" by CPUSA Chair Sam Webb, our Central Committee finds it necessary to clarify our Party's views on certain critical questions which have been raised. Although the various theses presented in this article refer, in the first place, to a proposed reorientation of the CPUSA itself, its title and text read as if these ideas should form the 'template' of the political approach of Communist parties in general, or certainly at least in other advanced capitalist countries such as Canada. This assumption was confirmed when comments from other fraternal parties were actively solicited by the CPUSA, a highly unusual practice.

We are aware of the formal responses given to this article by the Communist Parties of Greece (KKE) and Mexico. Our Party is in substantive agreement with the main criticisms of this document expressed by these two parties. We consider that the political line advanced in "A Party of Socialism in the 21st Century" constitutes a fundamental departure from MarxistLeninist theory and practice. The pursuit of such an approach will objectively lead to the liquidation of the CPUSA as a revolutionary party of the working class in that country.

Source: http://marxistupdate.blogspot.ca/2011/10/critiques-of-sam-webbs-cpusa.html

[Bolshevik Sickle]

They're nothing more than social democrats who should just go ahead and join the Democrats.

Too many Americans view Communism and Socialism as the evil boogeyman (McCarthy Era still lives on) to view the CPUSA seriously.

[Mather]

What is your opinion on CPUSA?

As things stand today, the CPUSA is a reformist and social democratic party who substitute their lack of support amongst the working class by tailing and supporting the Democrats. In this they are no different from the other official communist parties such as the PCF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Communist_Party) in France or the CPB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Britain) in Britain.

Given that the CPUSA has been around since 1919 and that it has never recovered the support it had amongst the working class in the 1920s/30s/40s, I doubt there is much of a future for the CPUSA.


Peace.

Communists do not struggle for peace nor can a genuine peace ever be realised under a system as violent and as oppressive as capitalism. Peace under capitalism means peace for the ruling class alone. Pacifist appeals to peace both disarm and distract the working class from it's historic task of revolution, which as history has taught us is anything but peaceful.


Empower workers.

As the CPUSA has turned it's back on the idea of the working class seizing the means of production, my guess is that their idea of empowering workers means begging the ruling class to throw us a few more crumbs from the table.


Fight imperialism.

The CPUSA don't advocate revolutionary defeatism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_defeatism) so this is another term that is so vague that it becomes meaningless.


Fight all forms of oppression such as racism and sexism.

The liberal wing of the ruling class (such as the Democrats etc...) also supports a whole range of socially liberal and progressive measures such as gay marriage etc... While communists support progressive causes it is a mistake to think that we have a monopoly on these causes as these are causes which have support from a significant section of the ruling class as well. I would also say that progressive causes waged under the rule of capital can only go so far and if we are to get to the root of the problem of things like racism, sexism and homophobia then we have to surpass capitalism itself.


So why is it hated and what is their tendency, Leninist, Trotskyist, etc.

The CPUSA are not Trotskyists. The party is Marxist-Leninist and belongs to the tradition known as official communism, that is those parties that always took the official line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union all the way till 1991.


I would like to call myself a Leninist but I really lean towards Luxemburgism (though there is almost no movements for this tendency).

Then the CPUSA is the wrong party for you.


So what do you think?

My advice would be to sit back and not rush yourself into joining this or that party on a whim. Keep looking and you may come across a party or organisation that is more agreeable with your own politics. If there is no party that suits you then there are plenty of other organisations based around various campaigns and issues that you could get involved with. Just don't feel compelled to join a party because you feel it is the only game in town or that you have little else to choose from.