Marx, Engels and the party

[Djehuti]

"Since 1852, then, I have known nothing of ‘party’ in the sense implied in your letter. Whereas you are a poet, I am a critic and for me the experiences of 1849-52 were quite enough. The ‘League’, like the société des saisons in Paris and a hundred other societies, was simply an episode in the history of a party that is everywhere springing up naturally out of the soil of modern society.
/.../
I have frankly stated my views, with which I trust you are largely in agreement. Moreover, I have tried to dispel the misunderstanding arising out of the impression that by ‘party’ I meant a ‘League’ that expired eight years ago, or an editorial board that was disbanded twelve years ago. By party, I meant the party in the broad historical sense."
Karl Marx. Link (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1860/letters/60_02_29.htm).



"Today the German proletariat no longer needs any official organization, either public or secret. The simple self-evident interconnection of like-minded class comrades suffices, without any rules, boards, resolutions or other tangible forms, to shake the whole German Empire to its foundations.
/.../
The international movement of the European and American proletariat has become so much strengthened that not merely its first narrow form — the secret League — but even its second, infinitely wider form — the open International Working Men’s Association — has become a fetter for it, and that the simple feeling of solidarity based on the understanding of the identity of class position suffices to create and to hold together one and the same great party of the proletariat among the workers of all countries and tongues"
Friedrich Engels. Link (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1885hist.htm).





We can also ask Pannekoek:
"The old labour movement is organized in parties. The belief in parties is the main reason for the impotence of the working class; therefore we avoid forming a new party - not because we are too few, but because a party is an organization that aims to lead and control the working class./.../Essentially the party is a grouping according to views, conceptions; the classes are groupings according to economic interests. Class membership is determined by one's part in the process of production; party membership is the joining of persons who agree in their conceptions of the social problems."


...or Bordigas clear division in a "formal" and a "material/historical" party:
"Therefore the concept of class must not suggest to us a static image, but instead a dynamic one. When we detect a social tendency, or a movement oriented towards a given end, then we can recognise the existence of a class in the true sense of the word. But then the class party exists in a material if not yet in a formal way. A party lives when there is the existence of a doctrine and a method of action."
Link (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/lobby/3909/bordiga/bvptoc.html).


"This distinction is in Marx and Engels and they were right to deduce from it that, being through their work in the line of the historical party, they disdained to be members of any formal party.
/.../
Marx says: party in its historical meaning, in the historical sense, and formal, or ephemeral, party. In the first concept lies the continuity, and from it we have derived our characteristic thesis of the invariance of doctrine since its formulation by Marx; not as the invention of a genius, but as the discovery of a result of human evolution. But the two concepts are not metaphysically opposite, and it would be silly to express them by the poor doctrine : I turn my back on the formal party, as I go towards the historical one."
Link (http://www.marxists.org.uk/archive/bordiga/works/1965/consider.htm).

[redstar2000]

Interesting quotes...especially the one from Engels. :)

Insofar as communists "need" an organizational form, I favor a loose "movement-style" organization.

The quasi-military "disciplined party" accomplished nothing for us in the end...and the futility of electoral parties was amply demonstrated in 1914.

When the revolutionary proletariat organizes itself...then I will be in favor of whatever forms it chooses.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[red_che]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2006, 04:30 AM
Interesting quotes...especially the one from Engels. :)

Insofar as communists "need" an organizational form, I favor a loose "movement-style" organization.

The quasi-military "disciplined party" accomplished nothing for us in the end...and the futility of electoral parties was amply demonstrated in 1914.

When the revolutionary proletariat organizes itself...then I will be in favor of whatever forms it chooses.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif
I can say you twisted the quotes again and missed entirely the points of Marx and Engels.

Never did Marx or Engels wanted a loose organization of the proletariat.

[anomaly]

I think he says 'loose' to differentiate the organization he has in mind from the militant Leninist parties with 'democratic centralism'. In this sense, the organization certainly would be 'loose'.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2006, 01:19 AM
I can say you twisted the quotes again and missed entirely the points of Marx and Engels.

Never did Marx or Engels wanted a loose organization of the proletariat.
Actually, it's worse than that. The Marx quote, for example, is a defense against the slanderous accusation that he was part of a secret communist society, and that his lectures and writings were part of a secret conspiracy. The Engels quote was part of a longer statement about how there was no longer a need in Germany for a secret propaganda society that has to educate working people about the fact they are exploited. Neither of these quotes have anything to do with Marx or Engels rejecting the need for a political organization of working people -- a party.

As for Pannekoek and Bordiga, comrades are welcome to draw their own conclusions about these two useless petty bourgeois.

Miles

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2006, 09:01 AM
As for Pannekoek and Bordiga, comrades are welcome to draw their own conclusions about these two useless petty bourgeois.

How are either "useless" or "petty-bourgeois"? ....I assume you mean that their theories were petty-bourgeois in nature?

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Armchair Socialism+Mar 3 2006, 12:08 AM--> (Armchair Socialism @ Mar 3 2006, 12:08 AM)
[email protected] 2 2006, 09:01 AM
As for Pannekoek and Bordiga, comrades are welcome to draw their own conclusions about these two useless petty bourgeois.

How are either "useless" or "petty-bourgeois"? ....I assume you mean that their theories were petty-bourgeois in nature? [/b]
Well, you can argue that their theories were differing trends of petty-bourgeois socialism (I would). But, they also were petty bourgeois in their class backgrounds. I have no use for such "theoreticians".

Miles

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Mar 3 2006, 06:22 AM--> (CommunistLeague @ Mar 3 2006, 06:22 AM) Well, you can argue that their theories were differing trends of petty-bourgeois socialism (I would). [/b]

I don't know much about Bordiga, but as far as I'm aware, Pannekoek merely advocated workers control of the means of production, i.e. Council Communism and rejection of traditional Social-Democracy and "Vanguardist" Parties.

I don't see quite how that qualifies one to be part of a trend of "petty-bourgeois socialism".


CommunistLeague
But, they also were petty bourgeois in their class backgrounds.

So were most 19th and 20th century Communist theoreticians. Doesn't necessarily mean they all had nothing of interest to say.

[red_che]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Mar 2 2006, 09:01 AM--> (CommunistLeague @ Mar 2 2006, 09:01 AM)
[email protected] 2 2006, 01:19 AM
I can say you twisted the quotes again and missed entirely the points of Marx and Engels.

Never did Marx or Engels wanted a loose organization of the proletariat.
Actually, it's worse than that. The Marx quote, for example, is a defense against the slanderous accusation that he was part of a secret communist society, and that his lectures and writings were part of a secret conspiracy. The Engels quote was part of a longer statement about how there was no longer a need in Germany for a secret propaganda society that has to educate working people about the fact they are exploited. Neither of these quotes have anything to do with Marx or Engels rejecting the need for a political organization of working people -- a party.

As for Pannekoek and Bordiga, comrades are welcome to draw their own conclusions about these two useless petty bourgeois.

Miles [/b]
The Marx quote was in defense of a proletarian party.

In this Marx says, "By party, I meant the party in the broad historical sense."

It is not the Communist League or a typical bourgeois sense of a party. But a proletarian political party aimed at seizing political power and establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat. And Engels and Lenin went on to provide clear explanation of this.

As for Pannekoek, I don't care what he says. My apologies to his followers, but I really don't think he is a good source regarding the issue of a proletarian party.

[Poum_1936]

As for Pannekoek, I don't care what he says. My apologies to his followers, but I really don't think he is a good source regarding the issue of a proletarian party.

Pannekoek - Council Communist

Council Communists - Anarcho Syndicalists/Anarcho-Communists

In the words of Morpheus,

"Far-left Council Communism is a form of anarcho-communism but they don't call themselves anarchists because they usually (a) don't understand anarchism very well, (b) harbor various prejudices & stereotypes about anarchism, © are extremely steeped in the writings of Marx & those who want to interpret Marx as an ultra-leftist while reading relatively little of anarcho-communism, and/or (d) have been calling themselves Marxists for so long they find it difficult to be anything else."

I could not have put it better myself.

But Pannekoek is mos def not a "good source regarding the ... party". In fact, he has numerous articles against the idea of the vanguard and "linking" Bolshevism to the crimes of Stalinism.

[Lamanov]

I don't believe this idiocy. :lol:

I can only imagine red_che's attempt to "preach communism" to the working class: "You need structure, boy! You need discipline!" "Godamnit! You lazy proletarians need to do what yur told!"


Originally posted by Poum_1936+--> (Poum_1936)...In fact, he has numerous articles against the idea of the vanguard and "linking" Bolshevism to the crimes of Stalinism.[/b]


Originally posted by CommunistLeague+--> (CommunistLeague)Well, you can argue that their theories were differing trends of petty-bourgeois socialism (I would).[/b]

Care to explain? (both of you)

Or you're all just one-liners? You write a one-line comment on something or someone and you think it's good enough. It's not.

Miles, since you're quoting Sartre (and the book I have in mind), you might find yourself in one of his sentences I'll paraphrase for you: and our abstract 'Marxist' reduced analysis to a mere ceremony.

In this case, it fits you two perfectly. :lol:


[email protected]
The Marx quote was in defense of a proletarian party.

No, it's not. It's quite simple because for Marx and the revolutionary proletariat there is no such thing. There's only a...


Marx
...party in the broad historical sense...

Which means, on the one side, proletariat organizing itself for the means of political and economical struggle, and on the other, the whole "broad historical" tendency toward social transformation and revolution.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 3 2006, 11:47 AM
Care to explain? (both of you)

Or you're all just one-liners? You write a one-line comment on something or someone and you think it's good enough. It's not.

Miles, since you're quoting Sartre (and the book I have in mind), you might find yourself in one of his sentences I'll paraphrase for you: and our abstract 'Marxist' reduced analysis to a mere ceremony.

In this case, it fits you two perfectly. :lol:
I never portrayed my comments as analysis. If you'd like an analysis, however, here's a short one:

Much of what Pannekoek wrote about the role and importance of workers' councils was unoriginal. Apart from the fact that he had the experiences of the insurrections of 1917-1919 to draw on, what he wrote could have been penned by DeLeon, Connolly and even Lenin (pre-1917 Lenin, that is). Where Pannekoek separates himself from communism is on both the question of political organization and the question of tactics in the struggle for revolution.

In terms of political organization, his views were fundamentally shaped by his own class background. For example, in "Party and Working Class (http://www.marxists.org/archive/pannekoe/1936/party-working-class.htm)", he writes: "The whole question pivots, in short, on the following distinction: a party is a group based on certain ideas held in common, whereas a class is a group united on the basis of common interests. Membership in a class is determined by function in the production process, a function that creates definite interests. Membership in a party means being one of a group having identical views about the major social questions.

"In recent times, it was supposed for theoretical and practical reasons that this fundamental difference would disappear within a class party, the 'workers' party.' During the period when Social Democracy was in full growth, the current impression was that this party would gradually unite all the workers, some as militants, others as sympathizers. And since the theory was that identical interests would necessarily engender identical ideas and aims, the distinction between class and party was bound, it was believed, to disappear."

Not for one moment can he conceive of political organization that is based exclusively within the proletariat. That is the crux of the second paragraph, quoted above. In other words, he could only conceive of political organization in either bourgeois or Social-Democratic terms -- an all-encompassing "party" that allows non-proletarians into all levels of organization and leadership, and ultimately reproduces in microcosm the class-based division of labor that exists in society. This is because, as someone from the petty bourgeoisie, he cannot "think outside the box" and conceive of another kind of political party. In other words, he is hemmed in by his own origins in an exploiting class, and can really only view things from that perspective.

Now, in another thread on a similar topic, I wrote what I see as the role and mission of a proletarian political party:


The role of a proletarian political party is political leadership. That is, its mission, under capitalism, is to both educate about the need for a working people's republic and to provide working people with the organizational backbone and skills to establish that republic themselves. This is a far cry from the kind of "leadership" that most self-described "Marxist-Leninists" offer, which is mere substitution of the party for the class. A proletarian party should not be in the business of specializing in the "art" of party government; rather, a proletarian party should be in the business of specializing in the "art" (and science) of training through example for the establishment of a working people's republic.

Concretely, that means two things: First, it means giving expression and substance to what it means to establish a working people's republic. This is the educational aspect of the proletarian party. We educate and facilitate discussion among working people about what it is going to take to overthrow capitalism and initiate the transition period to communism. This means not only talking about what kind of economic structures and principles should be applied, but also what it means to have an all-encompassing social revolution that spans the whole gamut of society -- economics, politics, culture and social relations.

Second, it means taking advantage of opportunities as they arise to organize and show through example both what kind of practice will lead to the establishment of working people's republic and what forms should be employed to not only achieve that goal, but also to continue forward from the achievement of that goal. This means organizing workplace committees on the job, or neighborhood committees where they live; this means organizing armed workers' self-defense when necessary (and possible); this means organizing public services under workers' control in situations where state authority has failed or begun to fail. In short, this means laying the material basis for a workers' republic over the decaying hulk of the capitalist system.

Compare this view of a proletarian party to that of Pannekoek's, and you can see why I consider his view to be that of a useless petty bourgeois. Men like Pannekoek, Gorter and Bordiga lived through the experiences of these revolutions. They saw them up close and had the ability to follow events closely, taking in every facet of their development and dynamic. And yet, in spite of all of that rich experience, the best we get from them is a reactionary (i.e., a position formulated in reaction to something) viewpoint on the question of political organization.

(These views also betray an indisputable fact: Pannekoek's inability to break from bourgeois consciousness and ideology in his view of political organization betrays the fact that he was unwilling to break from his petty-bourgeois class origins. If he had integrated himself into the proletariat, I suspect his views on organization would be fundamentally different.)

In terms of his views on tactics in the struggle toward revolution, we see a similar methodological problem in a rejection of fighting for immediate demands -- "reforms" as they are sometimes called. For Pannekoek, just as a proletarian political organization can only be a "bourgeois party", so the struggle for immediate demands can only be "reformism". We also see it in his rejection of utilizing the tactic of running in elections; Pannekoek can only conceive of this tactic as "reformism" and "parliamentary cretinism". There is no other way it can go, as far as Pannekoek is concerned -- even though concrete historical experience has shown this is not the case.

This "either-or" method of seeing the world is little more than a crude mechanical materialism that actually abstracts the concepts of "party", "reforms" and "elections" from their specific material conditions and turns them into unchanging, universal institutions. In this sense, Pannekoek's vulgar materialism becomes its antipode: idealism. It's what's in Pannekoek's head that is the reality, not reality itself (with all of its contradictions and dynamics). In the end, his views convey the same message as the reformists: Don't bother fighting in the here and now, wait until the glorious revolution is upon us and then -- and only then -- stand up.

There is an old saying, DJ-TC: Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Miles

[Lamanov]

I don't see it that way. I can't tell why would you assume that he fetishises "party", "reforms" and "elections" as something "universal". That's not the point.

Party, reforms and elections are a part of a bourgeois structure, because they "came along" with it. The whole political mechanism of bourgeois society is projected upon those institutions, creating the inner logic which can only complement that same system and structure.

Parties are essentialy structuralistic and hierarchical, reforms do actually channel revolutonary potential, elections really serve only one purpose: state power.

The same class which must liberate itself from alienation is asked to come into alienating forms of struggle.


I have to say I'm pretty dissapointed. I expected much more.

I can understand your position on "the role and mission of a proletarian political party", but I can't escape from how you remind me of Lukacs: you are describing the "party" in every way which is not actually real, and which was never materializad.

It's about time we stop using false names for things and taking false views about them.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague
Pannekoek can only conceive of this tactic as "reformism" and "parliamentary cretinism". There is no other way it can go, as far as Pannekoek is concerned -- even though concrete historical experience has shown this is not the case.

What "historical experience" are you referring to?

I am no expert on the history of 20th century communism...but I'm not aware of a single case where anything constructive was ever achieved by revolutionaries in either campaigns or actually gaining seats in a bourgeois parliament.


This "either-or" method of seeing the world is little more than a crude mechanical materialism that actually abstracts the concepts of "party", "reforms" and "elections" from their specific material conditions and turns them into unchanging, universal institutions.

The "material conditions" are those of "developed capitalism"...in which it is assumed that things are "more or less" the same in all countries at that level of development.

Certainly not different enough to warrant the term "abstraction" that's true "for all time" and "in all places".

Lenin's "highest stage" of capitalism did include the assumption that reforms were "no longer possible"...and that was clearly wrong as the "golden age of reformism" was about to begin.

Reformists could form parties, run for office, win elections, and deliver substantive reforms. During that period (which I think ended in the "old" capitalist countries around 1975 or thereabouts), the parties that claimed to be "revolutionary" did the same things as the reformists did...and were, on occasion, likewise "successful" in the same ways.

But none of that stuff ever "led" to revolution or anything even close to that.

Your hypothesis is that a "proletarian-only" party can do all those things that reformist parties have done with a different outcome.

That is, your "new kind" of party won't become corrupted, trivialized, co-opted, etc., "because" you'll be excluding all along the sorts of people (petty bourgeois) who have a class interest in being corrupted, trivialized, co-opted, etc.

Well, who can say? We know from experience that workers can be corrupted, trivialized, co-opted, etc.

The objection to your perspective is not based on "mechanical materialism" or "universal abstractions" but on observed historical experience...that "party formations" failed to deliver the revolutionary "goods".

It's all well and good to claim that you've "found the problem" and "fixed it"...but until there's a visible "track record", your claim is speculative.

Myself, I offer the perspective of a "movement structure" that attacks reformism, parties, and elections as bourgeois instruments of coercion.

I don't think it's "our job" as revolutionaries to either "fix" capitalism or "take over" capitalist political organs.

My view, at this point, is just as speculative as anyone else's...we have little choice but to wait and see what working people conclude is "the best option".

And they may well invent something entirely new and completely unanticipated.

It's happened before.


In the end, his views convey the same message as the reformists: Don't bother fighting in the here and now, wait until the glorious revolution is upon us and then -- and only then -- stand up.

This is unfair to the reformists...who are always talking about "fighting in the here and now". It's what they fight for that revolutionaries find unsatisfactory.

And, worse, counter-productive. A "substantive reform" that's actually achieved can spread as a consequence the illusion that "the system works" or can be "made to work" in our favor.

Completely overlooking the demonstrated fact that pro-working class reforms under capitalism are always transient.

I can't see this as doing anything but delaying the emergence of revolutionary class consciousness.

I have a different view of what it means to "fight here and now". I think it means raising the communist option in a public way...so that working people at least have some idea of what we're about.

In this era, "taking part" in an actual struggle only makes sense if the "communist option" can be raised publicly.

That's a "very short list" because we live in a period of reaction. The list will get longer when people give up on the reformist perspective and "take it to the streets".

Since we want people to be revolutionary, we must begin by encouraging rebellion.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Axel1917]

A revolution cannot succed without an iron discipline that is put forth in a party capable of taking the revolution forward. To demand not having a party is tantamount to desiring to disarm the proletariat in favor of the Bourgeoisie. More people should read Lenin's "Left Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder.

[Much Commie Love]

I hope no-one minds I do some arguing aschwe? You could always take it up sometimes, if you don't mind...well, I couldn't just let it go, eh?


Originally posted by "RedStar2000"+--> ("RedStar2000")What "historical experience" are you referring to?[/b]

Oh, I don't know. The exercise of reformist "powers", maybe? 'Big event' ;)


Originally posted by "RedStar2000"+--> ("RedStar2000")
I am no expert on the history of 20th century communism...but I'm not aware of a single case where anything constructive was ever achieved by revolutionaries in either campaigns or actually gaining seats in a bourgeois parliament.
[/b]

Eh? Well, I thought you were - being the infamous owner of a self-proclaimed site mastering that subject, and more... Anyways, if you're really not after-all, then it's a bit disappointing, but why not do some research and find out? It can't hurt.


"[email protected]
The "material conditions" are those of "developed capitalism"...in which it is assumed that things are "more or less" the same in all countries at that level of development.

Is that so? Very well then, perhaps someone is ignoring invidual material conditions from country to country. It's called geology..one country might have good natural resources, other's not...and some get them no matter what (Imperialism). Like oil. Heheh. But the society structure it says nothing about that the material conditions are almost equal everywhere, just because they share the same 'governing style' and is therefore so alike, that you could just sweep them all over generally. And, in development...alot of strange things can happen...both failure, and succsess.


"RedStar2000"
Certainly not different enough to warrant the term "abstraction" that's true "for all time" and "in all places".

Nope...but that wouldn't be possible anyways, unless, of course, you believe in absolute truth's...like God. Sith's are the only one's whole believe in that shyte. But it's clearly a diversion for "almost" infinitively, and "nearly" everywhere. That's enough in most books to warrant a black mark, even if it's not a total abstraction! Don't be so picky :lol:

I leave the rest o' the reply to ye, "Communist League". Hey, you're a whole league in yourself? Lucky one....

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Axel1917
A revolution cannot succeed without an iron discipline that is put forth in a party capable of taking the revolution forward.

Do Leninists secretly frequent "bondage & discipline" clubs? :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/evil/teu42.gif

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by DJ-TC+Mar 3 2006, 08:47 PM--> (DJ-TC @ Mar 3 2006, 08:47 PM)I don't see it that way.[/b]

I didn't expect you to.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 3 2006, 08:47 PM
I can't tell why would you assume that he fetishises "party", "reforms" and "elections" as something "universal". That's not the point.

Party, reforms and elections are a part of a bourgeois structure, because they "came along" with it. The whole political mechanism of bourgeois society is projected upon those institutions, creating the inner logic which can only complement that same system and structure.

Parties are essentialy structuralistic and hierarchical, reforms do actually channel revolutonary potential, elections really serve only one purpose: state power.

The same class which must liberate itself from alienation is asked to come into alienating forms of struggle.

All of this is only true if you accept that only the bourgeois conception of doing things is universal -- that is, the only way to do things. What you do is accept in advance that the bourgeoisie sets the terms and defines the boundaries. And if they decide to "move the goal posts", that's fine too. In other words, you agree in advance to "fight capitalism" while abiding by the capitalists' ideological terms, which means you don't "fight capitalism" at all.

You make a lot of noise about rejecting "alienating forms of struggle", but you do so while accepting alienating principles and ideology.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 3 2006, 08:47 PM
I have to say I'm pretty dissapointed. I expected much more.

The feeling is quite mutual.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 3 2006, 08:47 PM
I can understand your position on "the role and mission of a proletarian political party", but I can't escape from how you remind me of Lukacs: you are describing the "party" in every way which is not actually real, and which was never materializad.

Two points on this:

1) There is two very real, and very related, reasons why this has happened in the past: first, most of these organizations were jam packed with non-proletarian elements at all levels, which meant that the class-based division of labor that exists under capitalism was reproduced within these parties; and, second, these non-proletarian elements, like you and Pannekoek, never fully broke from bourgeois ideology and accepted the enemy class defining the conditions of struggle. Pannekoek's rejection of "party", "reform" and "elections" is a mechancial rejection -- the placement of a negative where his fellow petty-bourgeois radical leftists put a positive.

2) I would argue that the League is working toward building precisely the kind of proletarian political party I described. We do not call ourselves a party yet because we have do not have the numbers. However, in terms of our work, we already do these things (in fact, this description is based on the work the League has done since its foundation). So, you're welcome to quote Lucacs until the proverbial cows come home; it doesn't change the facts one bit. All it does is show how all your radical critique of capitalism is only that: radical critique. It is the political posture of an r-r-r-revolutionary dilettante.


DJ-[email protected] 3 2006, 08:47 PM
It's about time we stop using false names for things and taking false views about them.

Again, the feeling is quite mutual.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by Much Commie [email protected] 3 2006, 11:43 PM
I leave the rest o' the reply to ye, "Communist League". Hey, you're a whole league in yourself? Lucky one....
Nope, not a League in myself. In fact, if you look around, you will find a number of other League members here. They usually link to the League in their signatures.

Miles

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Miles
1) There is two very real, and very related, reasons why this has happened in the past: first, most of these organizations were jam packed with non-proletarian elements at all levels, which meant that the class-based division of labor that exists under capitalism was reproduced within these parties; and, second, these non-proletarian elements, like you and Pannekoek, never fully broke from bourgeois ideology and accepted the enemy class defining the conditions of struggle.

If we are to enter the realm of Bourgoeis politics, we have to make our representatives accountable and revocable; something which is illegal until there are amendments. I doubt the bourgoeis parties will make such accomodations.

Our representatives can't compromise to the state.

Will we be able to make any reforms if our illegal repressentatives aren't allowed in the government buildings?

If the "legal" representative doesn't act on our own behalf, we have lost the prolitarian character of our organization until the splinter dislodges from our flesh at the next "legal" bourgoeis election.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 4 2006, 02:16 AM
Will we be able to make any reforms if our illegal repressentatives aren't allowed in the government buildings?
I think this is something that some comrades here don't take into account. If a communist were to somehow be elected, it is more than likely they would not be allowed to even take their seat. That is, if the bourgeoisie couldn't keep a communist from winning an election (i.e., the bourgeoisie could not rig the election enough in their own favor), they would declare the comrade to be in violation of some kind of elections rule -- either campaign finance, or violating the oath of office, or something. All of this is to be expected, and can all work in our favor.

A communist runs in a bourgeois election because it gives the organization a platform for organizing, not because we want to be seated as a bourgeois legislator. An electoral campaign gives a communist the opportunity to speak to larger audiences than we can organize on our own. An electoral campaign gives us greater access to the mass media. An electoral campaign means we can maximize our meager resources in our efforts to reach out to thousands and millions of working people by using the platform the capitalists provide to us, which in turn allows us to more quickly hang the capitalists using the rope they provide.

Just because bourgeois elections are part and parcel of the "old system" doesn't mean there isn't something there we can use to further our educational and agitational work.

Miles

[Much Commie Love]

Originally posted by Axel1917+Mar 4 2006, 05:52 AM--> (Axel1917 @ Mar 4 2006, 05:52 AM) To demand not having a party is tantamount to desiring to disarm the proletariat in favor of the Bourgeoisie. More people should read Lenin's "Left Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder.[/b]

Is that so? So, before having a party, the proletariat is and was "armless"? And as soon as someone else - you, the Leninists - made a party, they got "arms"? Why not stretch our arms a bit and stop talking in apostrophes here: Yes, I mean ARMS. Get it? ;)

No, I don't mean to holler at ya, but I must be frank on this issue, 'cuz it's alot at stake, mr. A party never HAS arms. It acts on the permission of the burgerouise, and you might just aswell let them take to the streets themselves, because acting for them is just a diversion. 'Rallying' them in a vote-way..doesn't convince them, and surely doesn't make it feel they're taking back at the Establishment by doing just like before...voting for a party.And as for using it as an organization to 'stage it' directly - Well, that's not what it's for, who needs that anyways when you can have a movement, outside of such restrictments?

It ain't like they're ever a member of those parties, anyways. What we've lost before even accepting a party or refusing an existant one..is, well, a bunch of 'benefactors'...and you know, things that are given can be taken. And burgerouise already got 'THE' arms. Having a party won't change that and we never had 'THE' arms.

Once we stop fooling ourselves with a 'party' with party offices and campaigns and all kinds of symbols...we'll see who has a disorder, and who's the "infant": We, you, or them..and you're not our parents, and we're not your kids! Don't beat me, Lenin! ;)


"CL"
Nope, not a League in myself. In fact, if you look around, you will find a number of other League members here. They usually link to the League in their signatures.

Oh, that's news. Well! Good to see, that you take yourself THAT ceremonially..unlike our leninist-friend here. Bet he sure did enjoy reading about Lenin doing a nice "proletar"-revolution in a land of peasants and still in FEUDALISM (Perhaps on the way to, but that's another argument)...not Capitalism. Eyh? Well, enough about that.

So you're kind of a member-ship club, eh? That doesn't mean you believe in a 'vanguard party' now does it? Because if so..hmm, I could personally respect a support-movement for yer everyday Average Joe (And Jane), but not one that dictates for him. P.S., does yer league bear any similarities with that "Commie Club" I've sometimes seen talk of? Or is it two different thang's?

The difference in thinking would be too great, and especially refusal to bend in to protests from the people you're supposed to be 'caring' for, at best being dysfunctional 'help'. I 'aven't seen those links yet, by the way, but perhaps I'm not really looking either. Good luck with the league of extraordinary gentl...ahh, you caught me! Heh! Of pretty ordinary but remarkably radical gentle PEOPLE :blush:

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+--> (CommunistLeague)All of this is only true if you accept that only the bourgeois conception of doing things is universal -- that is, the only way to do things. What you do is accept in advance that the bourgeoisie sets the terms and defines the boundaries. And if they decide to "move the goal posts", that's fine too. In other words, you agree in advance to "fight capitalism" while abiding by the capitalists' ideological terms, which means you don't "fight capitalism" at all.

You make a lot of noise about rejecting "alienating forms of struggle", but you do so while accepting alienating principles and ideology.[/b]

You are saying precisely the opposite from what that post of mine is advocating. The whole point is rejecting hierarchy and alienation throught struggle, and braking up with ways in which people like red_che here say one thing but mean something quite different (cough*bourgeois*cough).

Or is it maybe that someone who doesn't agree with can only be a "useless petty bourgeois"? An "anti-dialectic mechanicist"?


Originally posted by CommunistLeague+--> (CommunistLeague)There is two very real, and very related, reasons why this has happened in the past: first, most of these organizations were jam packed with non-proletarian elements at all levels, which meant that the class-based division of labor that exists under capitalism was reproduced within these parties...[/b]


Originally posted by CommunistLeague
and, second, these non-proletarian elements, like you and Pannekoek, never fully broke from bourgeois ideology and accepted the enemy class defining the conditions of struggle. Pannekoek's rejection of "party", "reform" and "elections" is a mechancial rejection -- the placement of a negative where his fellow petty-bourgeois radical leftists put a positive.

No. What "me" and "non-proletarians like me" are blamed for is admiting the obvious fact stated in the first part of the quote. We are blamed for rejection of bourgeois Jacobin ideology which is incompatible with the proletarian movement.

You dream of makin your little party, fight non-prole elements in it, and hope one day that it will grow so much in number of trained and disciplined proles who will on one fine morning overthrow capitalism and make the new "working class republic".

Cute.

I predict the "historical repeating" of trade-union example (if it goes anywhere, that is).

A "diamatist" who thinks that bourgeois-like labor division could reproduce within a "wokring class party" only through infiltration of "none-prole elements" is up for a surprise when he finds out that bourgeois political structure and hierarchy projected itself onto his little "proletarian" project.


[email protected]
More people should read Lenin's "Left Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder.

Oh, you mean that same pamphlet which passed Nazi censorship in 1933 and remained in distribution, when all other progressive books were burned??


EL KABLAMO
If we are to enter the realm of Bourgoeis politics, we have to make our representatives accountable and revocable; something which is illegal until there are amendments. I doubt the bourgoeis parties will make such accomodations.

Don't you see it comrades!? The fact that we use the "we must" attitude means that we're repeating the old "What is to be Done?" psychology!

[violencia.Proletariat]

An electoral campaign gives a communist the opportunity to speak to larger audiences than we can organize on our own.

Since when? I've never seen a communist candidate on tv or heard them on radio.


An electoral campaign gives us greater access to the mass media.

Erm, above. You have to pay for that stuff.


An electoral campaign means we can maximize our meager resources in our efforts to reach out to thousands and millions of working people by using the platform the capitalists provide to us, which in turn allows us to more quickly hang the capitalists using the rope they provide.

The majority of the working class doesnt even vote. Why would they care if communists are in the election?


further our educational and agitational work

Why cant you do this outside the elections? I mean, you pool all your resources for elections, you cant do the same just for the thought of spreading the movement?

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague
All of this is only true if you accept that only the bourgeois conception of doing things is universal -- that is, the only way to do things. What you do is accept in advance that the bourgeoisie sets the terms and defines the boundaries. And if they decide to "move the goal posts", that's fine too. In other words, you agree in advance to "fight capitalism" while abiding by the capitalists' ideological terms, which means you don't "fight capitalism" at all.

That is what reformists do!

The controversy here is whether or not revolutionaries should play the bourgeois game on the bourgeois field by the bourgeois rules at all!

When people enter a casino, they know (or should know) that the rules of all the games favor the house. Play long enough and you must lose.

That doesn't mean one should "never gamble"...it means that casino gambling is a form of entertainment for which the player pays.

The arena of bourgeois politics is actually worse than a casino...because the ordinary player always loses!

For revolutionaries to participate in the bourgeois political "game" is like throwing all your money away in a casino to "prove" that the house always wins...something that's already known.

More and more working people are completely indifferent to bourgeois "elections"...because they already know that it's not going to make any significant difference in their lives except make things worse no matter "who wins".

In addition, of course, there's the problem of the mixed message. I've reproached the Trotskyists here about this on numerous occasions. In the U.K., they run people for office while telling whatever audience they can manage to gather that "elections are no good; we need a revolution".

In other words, they're tell people that "running for public office is useless" while showing that they "really mean" it by...running for public office. :lol:

Who would take seriously anyone so self-evidently confused?

The boilerplate "rationale" is that people are "more inclined" to listen to political rhetoric during election campaigns...but I think the "truth" of that is visibly shrinking. I think a lot of people in the U.S. now are more likely to get their "political information" from MTV or Saturday Night Live...or from some 30-second dummyvision spot.

It's all a show...and no revolutionary group has the resources to compete in that arena.


Just because bourgeois elections are part and parcel of the "old system" doesn't mean there isn't something there we can use to further our educational and agitational work.

I'm think there's nothing there at all.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by nate+Mar 4 2006, 11:22 AM--> (nate @ Mar 4 2006, 11:22 AM)Since when? I've never seen a communist candidate on tv or heard them on radio.[/b]

I have. Remember, I helped with a communist campaign last year, and the candidate was on both radio and television doing interviews several times.


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 11:22 AM
Erm, above. You have to pay for that stuff.

Not necessarily. See above.


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 11:22 AM
The majority of the working class doesnt even vote. Why would they care if communists are in the election?

They vote when they have a reason. But that's not the point. Again, the point of running in an election is to conduct educational and agitational work.


[email protected] 4 2006, 11:22 AM
Why cant you do this outside the elections? I mean, you pool all your resources for elections, you cant do the same just for the thought of spreading the movement?

See above.

Miles

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by DJ-TC+Mar 4 2006, 02:59 PM--> (DJ-TC @ Mar 4 2006, 02:59 PM) Don't you see it comrades!? The fact that we use the "we must" attitude means that we're repeating the old "What is to be Done?" psychology! [/b]
That wasn't my intention.

The point I was trying to make is that theres no way to keep an elected repressentative accountable in a bourgoeis Parliament. They are a great big disemobodied , floating, singing, head.


Miles
I think this is something that some comrades here don't take into account. If a communist were to somehow be elected, it is more than likely they would not be allowed to even take their seat

That will be known by everyone, and those who voted that candiate in will sing what happened. The song may fall on deaf ears, it may bring a reform into the system, or it may cause a beginning of a revolt.

But we don't have the resources for such a wide spread campaign.

Alot of Socialist and Communist parties in America have candidiates that run for president, the average Joe only finds about them when he reads the ballot, or if he decided to go on-line and research candidiates.

I don't know if a parlimentary misadventure is the best method.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Miles
They vote when they have a reason. But that's not the point. Again, the point of running in an election is to conduct educational and agitational work.

Lets say the candidiate wins a substancial majority, but they are unable to take their seat. If this causes great social unrest (which is the intention), the bourgoeisie can easily implement measures to have the candidiate take their seat, to suppress social upheaval.

Then what happens?

Does the candiate reject their seat, that they fought for?

Or do they inevitably form a block with the most left of the bourgoeis to get some reforms passed, and get caught up in the agenda of the bourgoeisie?

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by EL KABLAMO
That wasn't my intention.

Yes, I know. My comment was actually complementing yours. It was directed in another way...

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by DJ-TC+Mar 4 2006, 09:59 AM--> (DJ-TC @ Mar 4 2006, 09:59 AM)You are saying precisely the opposite from what that post of mine is advocating. The whole point is rejecting hierarchy and alienation throught struggle, and braking up with ways in which people like red_che here say one thing but mean something quite different (cough*bourgeois*cough).[/b]

But what kind of struggle do you do? You don't fight for immediate demands, either on the job or in neighborhoods; you don't organize or fight inside existing trade unions; you don't use the tactic of running candidates to augment street campaigns. What do you do, concretely speaking, to advance the class struggle? Publish a journal nobody knows even exists? Do a little "Sunday Speechifying for Socialism"? Go to an event and pass out a leaflet that is vague on what you would do, but quite specific on what you wouldn't do?


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 09:59 AM
Or is it maybe that someone who doesn't agree with can only be a "useless petty bourgeois"? An "anti-dialectic mechanicist"?

Just answer the question.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 09:59 AM
No. What "me" and "non-proletarians like me" are blamed for is admiting the obvious fact stated in the first part of the quote. We are blamed for rejection of bourgeois Jacobin ideology which is incompatible with the proletarian movement.

The problem is, you only reject the forms of "bourgeois Jacobin ideology", not its content -- the bourgeois ideology that underpins it.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 09:59 AM
You dream of makin your little party, fight non-prole elements in it, and hope one day that it will grow so much in number of trained and disciplined proles who will on one fine morning overthrow capitalism and make the new "working class republic".

Actually, if I "dream of makin'" anything, it is an organization that is able to convince a majority of working people of the need for them to take matters into their own hands and overthrow capitalism themselves, that helps working people establish the basis for the working people's republic themselves beginning before the actual overthrow takes place, and then encourages working people to take the necessary steps to complete the overthrow and begin on the road to a classless, communist society.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 09:59 AM
I predict the "historical repeating" of trade-union example (if it goes anywhere, that is).

Well, thank you, Carnac the Magnificent.


DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 09:59 AM
A "diamatist" who thinks that bourgeois-like labor division could reproduce within a "wokring class party" only through infiltration of "none-prole elements" is up for a surprise when he finds out that bourgeois political structure and hierarchy projected itself onto his little "proletarian" project.

History will be the judge of that, not you and your fellow dilettantes.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by DJ-TC+Mar 4 2006, 06:41 PM--> (DJ-TC @ Mar 4 2006, 06:41 PM)
EL KABLAMO
That wasn't my intention.

Yes, I know. My comment was actually complementing yours. It was directed in another way... [/b]
Yeah, mostly to make yourself feel good.

Miles

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by CommunistLeague+Mar 5 2006, 12:22 AM--> (CommunistLeague @ Mar 5 2006, 12:22 AM) The problem is, you only reject the forms of "bourgeois Jacobin ideology", not its content -- the bourgeois ideology that underpins it. [/b]

Either my English is really bad or it's you seeing things in between the lines... things which don't exist.

Any how, only comment worthy posting is this one: you don't need a party, much less a party which accepts the bourgeois "game", to activate and release the revolutionary potential of the masses.

That's the only real issue which moved this discussion. Everything else you accuse me of was just "pinned" on me for I don't know what reason but those two I mentioned.


CommunistLeague
What do you do, concretely speaking, to advance the class struggle?

I don't do much, but I obviously don't do any less then you.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Mar 4 2006, 02:30 PM--> (redstar2000 @ Mar 4 2006, 02:30 PM)That is what reformists do![/b]

You said it, not me. ;)


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 02:30 PM
The controversy here is whether or not revolutionaries should play the bourgeois game on the bourgeois field by the bourgeois rules at all!...

Actually, the controversy here is whether communists step onto the bourgeois field, using their own rules in order to both demonstrate a point and frustrate the bourgeoisie's "peace", or if, by doing nothing, they accept and reinforce the bourgeoisie's rules and the universality of the bourgeoisie's game. We propose the former; in my view, DJ-TC proposes the latter, and then dresses it up in "Left Communist" rhetoric.


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 02:30 PM
For revolutionaries to participate in the bourgeois political "game" is like throwing all your money away in a casino to "prove" that the house always wins...something that's already known....

If it is something that is really "already known", then explain this:


"Sixty-four percent of U.S. citizens age 18 and over voted in the 2004 presidential election, up from 60 percent in 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today. Tables from a November survey also show that of 197 million citizens, 72 percent (142 million) reported they were registered to vote. Among those registered, 89 percent (126 million) said they voted. In the 2000 election, 70 percent of citizens were registered; and among them, 86 percent voted.

"In 2004, turnout rates for citizens were 67 percent for non-Hispanic whites, 60 percent for blacks, 44 percent for Asians and 47 percent for Hispanics (of any race). These rates were higher than the previous presidential election by 5 percentage points for non-Hispanic whites and 3 points for blacks. By contrast, the voting rates for Asian and Hispanic citizens did not change." -- http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/re...ing/004986.html (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/voting/004986.html)

Now, either you're right, and most people "already know" the "house always wins", and they're comfortable with that, or you're wrong, and people still see elections (well, presidential elections, anyway) as a something more or less relevant to their lives.


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 02:30 PM
More and more working people are completely indifferent to bourgeois "elections"...because they already know that it's not going to make any significant difference in their lives except make things worse no matter "who wins"....

See above.


Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 02:30 PM
The boilerplate "rationale" is that people are "more inclined" to listen to political rhetoric during election campaigns...but I think the "truth" of that is visibly shrinking. I think a lot of people in the U.S. now are more likely to get their "political information" from MTV or Saturday Night Live...or from some 30-second dummyvision spot.

See above.


[email protected] 4 2006, 02:30 PM
It's all a show...and no revolutionary group has the resources to compete in that arena.

In one sense, you're right that no single group has the resources themselves to carry out a serious campaign. But there is nothing that says such a campaign cannot do grassroots fundraising.

For example, for a communist candidate to do a decent run for president, we have figured it would take about $1 million to do it. We break that down like this: 50,000 people donating $20 a piece equals $1 million. Can we find 50,000 people across the country over the course of a year or so willing to donate $20 in order to build that kind of war chest? I think so. It is not unrealistic.

The key issue is ballot access. To get on the ballot in most states on a party line or as an independent is far out of the reach of most organizations.. However, you can run a national write-in campaign. In almost every state, all it takes to run as a write-in candidate is an affadavit (statement of intent) and a list of Electors. And you can usually find the handful of people willing to be Electors within a few days of campaigning. Beyond that, it's a matter of publicity and education about how to vote write-in.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by DJ-TC+Mar 4 2006, 07:37 PM--> (DJ-TC @ Mar 4 2006, 07:37 PM)Either my English is really bad or it's you seeing things in between the lines[/b]

Of course I'm seeing things between the lines. You often have to read between the lines to find the truth. Your lines are no exception.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 07:37 PM
... things which don't exist.

No, things you fail to recognize.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 07:37 PM
Any how, only comment worthy posting is this one: you don't need a party, much less a party which accepts the bourgeois "game", to activate and release the revolutionary potential of the masses.

Working people will activate themselves and will enter the struggle on their own initiative. But will working people automatically "connect the dots" between that self-activation/initiative and the need for the overthrow of capitalism, especially with all of those self-appointed "leaders" working overtime to divert their activity back into the bourgeois order? History says no. Experience says no.

That's where the communist organization comes in -- to "point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality", and "always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole" -- to be "the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others" and that has "the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement", as Marx and Engels put it in the Communist Manifesto.


Originally posted by DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 07:37 PM
That's the only real issue which moved this discussion. Everything else you accuse me of was just "pinned" on me for I don't know what reason but those two I mentioned.

You asked me to give you an analysis of Pannekoek. I did so. You took it personally and began to spout shite. That's how this part of the discussion started. Now you want to issue yet another self-serving proclamation and back out.


DJ-[email protected] 4 2006, 07:37 PM
I don't do much, but I obviously don't do any less then you.

Comrade, if you had any idea what I did on a daily basis, you wouldn't have made such a stupid statement.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 10:20 PM
This is unfair to the reformists...who are always talking about "fighting in the here and now". It's what they fight for that revolutionaries find unsatisfactory.
I meant to respond to this comment before.

The reformists do not tell working people, or any people, to "fight in the here and now". What reformists tell people is to let them "fight in the here and now" on their behalf. The last thing in the world the reformists want is something that can get out of their control, like a grassroots movement. They want tightly-controled demonstrations and tightly-controled campaigns. "Fighting" doesn't figure anywhere into it.

Miles

[redstar2000]

The Census Bureau numbers that you report are projections from a self-reporting survey...which suffer from known statistical uncertainties.

For example, 125.7 million people said they voted in the 2004 presidential "election", but (from the same link) only 122.3 million people "officially voted".

It's a less extreme version of "church attendance" figures. That is, when the religious are polled about their regular church attendance, the numbers come out substantially larger than the numbers actually reported by all the churches.

In surveys, people lie to make themselves "look better".

The registration numbers are probably similarly inflated. Most people know that registering to vote gets your name on the jury duty list...and who needs that?

It would be interesting to get a break-down of those Census Bureau numbers by class.

It's the "common assumption" that voting rates decline by "socio-economic status"...but it would be nice to have some actual empirical confirmation.

Because if that "common assumption" is indeed valid, then any "communist" electoral strategy would perforce be "based" on the premise of attracting people back "into" the system who've already left it.

Note also from that Census Bureau report...


Citizens age 65 and older had the highest registration rate (79 percent) while those age 18 to 24 had the lowest (58 percent). The youngest group also had the lowest voting rate (47 percent), while those age 45 and older had the highest turnout (about 70 percent).

If we assume that alienation from the existing system and potential receptivity to communist ideas tends to be highest among young adults, then once again a "communist" electoral strategy would be trying to "pull into the system" people who are already alienated from it or at least indifferent to it.

Finally, the high turnout in 2004 may have included a good many "votes against Bush"...people who would not have normally bothered to register, much less vote, were it not perceived as an opportunity to protest the Iraqi war, the Patriot Act, etc.

The long-term trend in what The Economist calls "mature democracies" (:lol:) is for declining voter turnouts...and 2004 may have simply been a "blip" that will not be repeated.


Originally posted by CommunistLeague
For example, for a communist candidate to do a decent run for president, we have figured it would take about $1 million to do it. We break that down like this: 50,000 people donating $20 a piece equals $1 million. Can we find 50,000 people across the country over the course of a year or so willing to donate $20 in order to build that kind of war chest? I think so. It is not unrealistic.

How much radio and television time can you purchase for $1 million?

And will they be willing to sell you any time at all?

I rather doubt it, myself.


In almost every state, all it takes to run as a write-in candidate is an affidavit (statement of intent) and a list of Electors. And you can usually find the handful of people willing to be Electors within a few days of campaigning. Beyond that, it's a matter of publicity and education about how to vote write-in.

I have never heard of even a single state that bothers to count write-in votes and release the total.


The reformists do not tell working people, or any people, to "fight in the here and now". What reformists tell people is to let them "fight in the here and now" on their behalf. The last thing in the world the reformists want is something that can get out of their control, like a grassroots movement. They want tightly-controlled demonstrations and tightly-controlled campaigns. "Fighting" doesn't figure anywhere into it.

Well, that's an argument ultimately based on the "sincerity" of professional reformists...do they really "fight" for the reforms that they profess to desire?

I think most of them probably do...they could get higher-paying jobs if they really wanted them.

I agree they are averse to "grassroots movements" that might possibly escape their control; the modern reformist model appears to be a group of professionals and in which ordinary people "participate" by mailing in a check.

The difference between reformists and communists is not only in what they fight for but what they mean by the word fight. Reformists are "at home" on the bourgeois "playing field"...they "play by the rules" and are never rude to the "umpires". :lol:

And, from examples I've seen, they have adopted the techniques of bourgeois ideologues with considerable dexterity...fund raising letters that promise "doom is at hand" unless you (yes you, you selfish bastard!) mail in your check at once! They rely on guilt and fear.

If you're going to raise $1 million from 50,000 people to run someone for president in 2008, what techniques will you employ?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[violencia.Proletariat]

I have. Remember, I helped with a communist campaign last year, and the candidate was on both radio and television doing interviews several times.

It seems to have been very effective :(


Not necessarily

If your running for president and want to be covered on major cable television, you have to pay. People get their news most from tv, so thats where you would "reach the masses" yet at the same time you wouldnt because young people (who we really need to convince) dont really watch the news :lol:


See above.

But you can do the same thing without an election. Or can you only raise money for "an election" because peopel wont donate on a large basis otherwise?

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by nate+Mar 5 2006, 12:39 PM--> (nate @ Mar 5 2006, 12:39 PM)It seems to have been very effective :( [/b]

Having been on the ground, I would say it was effective, even though the candidate did not win. But 41 percent of the vote is nothing to sneeze at, either.


Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 12:39 PM
If your running for president and want to be covered on major cable television, you have to pay. People get their news most from tv, so thats where you would "reach the masses" yet at the same time you wouldnt because young people (who we really need to convince) dont really watch the news :lol:

First of all, it's not necessarily true that "you have to pay". Many cable companies, like Comcast, for example, not only have a national network of public access stations that people watch, they also, during an election season, will run "meet the candidates" specials, either on public access or on one of the news stations (e.g., CNN Headline News). Both public access and the "meet the candidates" spots are either free or low-priced (a couple hundred dollars). In addition, both cable companies and local television stations will often sell airtime on a Sunday evening at a discounted price -- sometimes as low as $100 for 30 minutes.

It is true that most young people don't watch television. So, radio is the answer. A 60-second spot running during the times that young people are most likely to listen to the radio can cost $160-200 for a four-day run. And these are major-market prices, so it goes down in "middle America" areas. Then there are webcasts, podcasts, Google ads, link exchanges, and so on and so on.

(If you're wondering, I'm using the ad cards we collected during that campaign I was working with to answer your question.)


[email protected] 5 2006, 12:39 PM
But you can do the same thing without an election. Or can you only raise money for "an election" because peopel wont donate on a large basis otherwise?

People are more inclined to donate to a political organization if they are running a candidate in an election. This is not to say that people won't donate in general or outside of an electoral cycle; people will donate, if they see a point to it. All I'm saying is that you cannot collect those funds as quickly or efficiently as you can during a campaign.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Mar 5 2006, 09:55 AM--> (redstar2000 @ Mar 5 2006, 09:55 AM)The Census Bureau numbers that you report are projections from a self-reporting survey...which suffer from known statistical uncertainties.

For example, 125.7 million people said they voted in the 2004 presidential "election", but (from the same link) only 122.3 million people "officially voted".

It's a less extreme version of "church attendance" figures. That is, when the religious are polled about their regular church attendance, the numbers come out substantially larger than the numbers actually reported by all the churches.

In surveys, people lie to make themselves "look better".

The registration numbers are probably similarly inflated. Most people know that registering to vote gets your name on the jury duty list...and who needs that?[/b]

There are a number of things here that also have to be taken into consideration, which may affect how people look at the apparent discrepancy.

First, it's always been my experience that very few people lie about whether or not they voted. Certainly, there are many reasons why someone might lie and say they voted, but who do you know who would do that? My personal experience has been that, if someone did not vote, they admit it.

Second, there were a number of issues regarding the casting of provisional ballots. Ohio, for example, had over 155,000 provisional ballots cast -- a number larger than the margin of victory Bush had in that state. Similarly, over 20,000 provisional ballots were cast in New Mexico -- a state Bush "won" by about 12,000 votes. None of these ballots were counted. It is estimated that close to 1 million provisional ballots were cast but not counted.

Third, and going along with the second, there is the issue of "spoilage". On average, about 2-3 percent of the votes cast are "spoiled" and thrown out. The difference between the 122.3 and 125.7 million votes listed in the U.S. Census report is 2.61 percent -- and that number includes the provisional ballots.

Based on these things, I can see the numbers as being more or less accurate. You might be right that some people here and there lied about whether or not they voted, but not 3.4 million.


Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 09:55 AM
It would be interesting to get a break-down of those Census Bureau numbers by class.

It's the "common assumption" that voting rates decline by "socio-economic status"...but it would be nice to have some actual empirical confirmation.

Because if that "common assumption" is indeed valid, then any "communist" electoral strategy would perforce be "based" on the premise of attracting people back "into" the system who've already left it.

CNN has a breakdown on their 2004 Election website that gives a lot of information, but not something that breaks it down by class. However, it is an interesting read.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html)


Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 09:55 AM
How much radio and television time can you purchase for $1 million?

And will they be willing to sell you any time at all?

I rather doubt it, myself.

You certainly can't purchase as much radio and TV time as one of the two bourgeois candidates does, but you can purchase a pretty good amount (and that amount can be maximized with a certain amount of forethought and efficiency). And, yes, they will sell airtime to a communist candidate -- at least, the cable companies and radio stations will.


Originally posted by re[email protected] 5 2006, 09:55 AM
I have never heard of even a single state that bothers to count write-in votes and release the total.

Actually, they do count write-in candidates, but not on Election Night. When the final totals are given to the Secretary of State for certification, the write-in candidates' totals are released. But again, this is not about winning office.


Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 09:55 AM
Well, that's an argument ultimately based on the "sincerity" of professional reformists...do they really "fight" for the reforms that they profess to desire?

No, not really. It may have been, in the past, that they really did fight "on behalf of" their base. But now, virtually all of the reformists are in defensive mode, and that means "no fighting, just cover your arse".


[email protected] 5 2006, 09:55 AM
If you're going to raise $1 million from 50,000 people to run someone for president in 2008, what techniques will you employ?

First of all, let me say that the League has not decided to run a candidate for any office at any level, and probably will not do so any time in the future.

That said, if I was working on an independent working people's campaign for president, I would be inclined to say that, as opposed to the "guilt and fear" technique of the Democrats, or the "fear and loathing" technique of the Republicans, we would say something like this:

"We are not interested in propping up this bankrupt system by lending it a 'legitimacy' it does not deserve. We are running in this election in order to give a voice to the issues that matter to working people by bringing them to a national platform, and to talk with our brothers and sisters about the need to move forward from this system by taking matters into our hands and beginning that very real revolutionary movement.

"However, no one is going to get involved in an unserious, amateurish effort, especially when it is aimed directly at the existing regime and the ruling class that supports it. We intend to conduct this campaign in a 'run-to-win' spirit. That is, we intend to challenge the bosses' candidates at every turn, answering every argument with our own, responding to every charge, going where they go (and won't go!), and offering a revolutionary alternative at every step. Most importantly, though, every step of this effort will be designed to leave a 'revolutionary footprint' in every community, every neighborhood, every workplace we go -- a 'footprint' that takes the form of a growing movement of working people fighting for their own liberation.

"But this kind of campaign -- this kind of organizing effort -- cannot be done without support. That is why we are turning to you and asking for both your financial support and helping hand...."

Something like that, anyway.

Miles

[red_che]

Which means, on the one side, proletariat organizing itself for the means of political and economical struggle, and on the other, the whole "broad historical" tendency toward social transformation and revolution.

Haha....

Some kind of revisions, huh!

Well, in Marx's view, the party in it's broad historical sense is one that has ideological, political and organizational leadership over the proletarian revolution. One party that leads the proletariat up to its complete victory, that is, from seizure of political power up to the complete abolition of private property and the establishment of communist society.


The controversy here is whether or not revolutionaries should play the bourgeois game on the bourgeois field by the bourgeois rules at all!

What game are you referring here with all that bourgeois rules?!!!

Participation in the reactionary elections, is that it?

Well, participation in reactionary elections can also be similar to going to court to file a peition against illegal arrest, or petition against union busting, or going to the streets in protest of a legislation of a certain anti-worker bill.

Of course, it may be different in some respect, but what I refer to here is that those were similar forms of parliamentary struggle in further advancing the revolutionary struggle. These were struggle for reforms in order to gain some concessions for the revolutionary struggle.

Reformism is different. It is reformism when the struggle would be confined only and is limited to parliamentary forms of struggle that only calls for some reforms and hoping that these reforms would peacefully evolve into socialism.


The arena of bourgeois politics is actually worse than a casino...because the ordinary player always loses!

This is again one of your hypocritical and metaphysical assumptions.

For one, it is true that ordinary players don't have a chance at getting to win in a high position, like becoming a President of the country or a Senator. That's true. But the proletarian party can gain some seats in the local legislature, for example, or some local government positions, such as Mayoralty posts, that can be very helpful in further advancing the revolutionary struggle.


For revolutionaries to participate in the bourgeois political "game" is like throwing all your money away in a casino to "prove" that the house always wins...something that's already known.

That's if these revolutionaries think as foolishly as you.

For revolutionaries to participate in the reactionary elections, they must know the limitations and must set specific objectives and how can that further advance the revolution.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by red_che
Well, in Marx's view, the party in it's broad historical sense is one that has ideological, political and organizational leadership over the proletarian revolution. One party that leads the proletariat up to its complete victory, that is, from seizure of political power up to the complete abolition of private property and the establishment of communist society.

Source?

Here and there you might be able to scrape up a fragment from Marx or, more likely, Engels, to "justify" your inference that "this" is what Marx "expected to happen".

But in the form you phrase it, this was really Lenin's idea...though a logical extension of what the Kautskyist leadership of German Social Democracy essentially proposed as the "road to socialism".

Lenin gave it a "revolutionary spin"...and the "winner effect" took care of the rest.


Well, participation in reactionary elections can also be similar to going to court to file a petition against illegal arrest, or petition against union busting, or going to the streets in protest of a legislation of a certain anti-worker bill.

No, your first two examples only involve a few lawyers making appropriate mouth-noise.

And your last example -- "going to the streets" -- is what I propose as the proletarian alternative to bourgeois electioneering.

When people "take it to the streets", they approach the "borders" of bourgeois "right" and frequently cross those borders! What they want is more important than what bourgeois law "permits".

That opens up revolutionary possibilities...something that cannot happen when people simply dick around with electoral politics.


It is reformism when the struggle would be confined only and is limited to parliamentary forms of struggle that only calls for some reforms and hoping that these reforms would peacefully evolve into socialism.

The flow of resources is towards "parliamentary forms" of "struggle" and the socialist rhetoric is gradually abandoned in order to win more votes.

Even those who "started out" with revolutionary intentions end up as bourgeois politicians.


But the proletarian party can gain some seats in the local legislature, for example, or some local government positions, such as Mayoralty posts, that can be very helpful in further advancing the revolutionary struggle.

The city of Milwaukee (Wisconsin) had Socialist Party mayors for decades...it didn't "advance" squat. There are cities in Italy that have had "communist" mayors since the end of World War II...nice places to live from what I've read but not quite up to the level of the Paris Commune. :lol:

You seem to have a very exaggerated conception of "local powers" in bourgeois society.


For revolutionaries to participate in the reactionary elections, they must know the limitations and must set specific objectives and how can that further advance the revolution.

Carefully thought-out and well-planned folly is still folly!

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[red_che]

Source?

Here, in The Manifesto of the Communist Party. Read it carefully and understand what he says here.


In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?

The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality. 2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.

The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.

The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.(Italics and underlines are mine)


No, your first two examples only involve a few lawyers making appropriate mouth-noise.

No. The first two examples still need, and in fact, relies much more on the strength of a mass movement of the proletariat.

Such as participation in the elections also needs relies solely on the strength of the mass movement.


And your last example -- "going to the streets" -- is what I propose as the proletarian alternative to bourgeois electioneering.

When people "take it to the streets", they approach the "borders" of bourgeois "right" and frequently cross those borders! What they want is more important than what bourgeois law "permits".

That opens up revolutionary possibilities...something that cannot happen when people simply dick around with electoral politics.

It seems to be that it's just a matter of strategy and tactics how the mass movement and participation in the reactionary elections could be done in order to advance further the revolutionary movement.


The flow of resources is towards "parliamentary forms" of "struggle" and the socialist rhetoric is gradually abandoned in order to win more votes.

Even those who "started out" with revolutionary intentions end up as bourgeois politicians...

...The city of Milwaukee (Wisconsin) had Socialist Party mayors for decades...it didn't "advance" squat. There are cities in Italy that have had "communist" mayors since the end of World War II...nice places to live from what I've read but not quite up to the level of the Paris Commune.

You seem to have a very exaggerated conception of "local powers" in bourgeois society.

I'll give you a more fitting example.

The revolutionaries in the Philippines participates in the reactionary elections. And guess what? Their revolutionary struggle is advancing further. Take a look at their site: Philippine Revolution Web Central (http://www.philippinerevolution.org).

They have launched many successful tactical offensives in their armed struggle. These successes are achieved while the parliamentary struggle (legal mass movements in the cities including participation in the bourgeois reactionary government) are being done.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by The Communist Manifesto+--> (The Communist Manifesto)The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.[/b] -- your emphasis.

Each separate Leninist party is opposed to all other Leninist parties...surely you are aware of this?

And to the extent that parties controlled by the bourgeoisie that still enjoy substantial working class support exist, all Leninist parties oppose them as well.

What really happens is that each Leninist party defines itself as the only "working class party".


Originally posted by The Communist Manifesto+--> (The Communist Manifesto)They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.[/b]

All those pictures of Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, etc. were just there for decoration? :lol:

Every Leninist party most certainly has and still does "set up sectarian principles of its own".

The most glaring of which is that it alone must rule!


The Communist [email protected]
In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole. -- your emphasis.

No, they actually haven't done that...or at least only rarely. They say that they "represent the interests of the movement as a whole"...but, for example, how did it "represent the interests of the movement as a whole" for Stalin to sign a pact with Hitler or Mao with Nixon?

The history of 20th century Leninism is replete with examples of such behavior!

-------------------------------------

Beyond these considerations, you might also consider that the Manifesto was written and circulated on the eve of the great wave of predominately bourgeois insurrections in 1848.

Does it really make sense to you to take "strategic advice" from a document now more than 150 years old?


red_che
The revolutionaries in the Philippines participate in the reactionary elections.

Do they? Can you link to a specific article on that site that explains why they do that? And what they imagine that they're getting out of that participation?

Because, frankly, that sounds "just crazy" to me! They have an armed struggle going...that's where their resources should be put!

Philippine bourgeois politics is a toxic waste dump of corruption, intrigue, and superstition...what could revolutionaries ever hope to gain from participating in that?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[red_che]

Each separate Leninist party is opposed to all other Leninist parties...surely you are aware of this?

And to the extent that parties controlled by the bourgeoisie that still enjoy substantial working class support exist, all Leninist parties oppose them as well.

What really happens is that each Leninist party defines itself as the only "working class party".

Source?


Every Leninist party most certainly has and still does "set up sectarian principles of its own".

The most glaring of which is that it alone must rule!

Surely, you are not aware or don't know anything about Leninism.

Your accusations here are basically the same as what the bourgeois propagandists say.


No, they actually haven't done that...or at least only rarely. They say that they "represent the interests of the movement as a whole"...but, for example, how did it "represent the interests of the movement as a whole" for Stalin to sign a pact with Hitler or Mao with Nixon?

The pact with Mao, I have to read it first, I haven't seen the entire text yet. But that was in the "spirit" of Internationalism.

As for the pact with Hitler, this is so to at least delay the Nazi advance and aggression on Russia. But in the end, it was the Russians, the Bolsheviks who stopped Hitler and defeated the Nazis.

Regarding the pact with with Nixon, this I'm not really aware of. If you're kind enough to post, or give a link to the entire text of this agreement, I will be pleased and will read the text so I can make a xomment on that.

Now all of these were done to further advance the international proletarian movement


Do they? Can you link to a specific article on that site that explains why they do that? And what they imagine that they're getting out of that participation?

Because, frankly, that sounds "just crazy" to me! They have an armed struggle going...that's where their resources should be put!

Philippine bourgeois politics is a toxic waste dump of corruption, intrigue, and superstition...what could revolutionaries ever hope to gain from participating in that?

Their main strategy consists of:

1.) combination of armed struggle and parliamentary struggle, of which the armed struggle in the countryside is the primary form of struggle and the parliamentary struggle (including participation in the reactionary elections, peace talks with the reactionary government, etc.) as the secondary but essential form of struggle.

2.) combination of underground and aboveground organizing, wherein legal and democratic mass movements are established with the communist party serving as the backbone of all these organizations.

However, the CPP does not directly participate. It is the legal democratic mass organizations that participate, for obvious reasons of security.

I tried to look for articles concerning their participation in their site, but I think these were already removed. But here are some links that can be helpful in unferstanding their revolutionary struggle:

Our Urgent Tasks (http://www.philippinerevolution.org/cgi-bin/cpp/pdocs.pl?id=out_e;page=01)

Specific Characteristics of our People's War (http://www.philippinerevolution.org/cgi-bin/cpp/pdocs.pl?id=scpwe;page=01)

Philippine Society and Revolution (http://www.philippinerevolution.org/cgi-bin/cpp/pdocs.pl?id=lrp_e;page=01)

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by redstar2000
Each separate Leninist party is opposed to all other Leninist parties...surely you are aware of this?

And to the extent that parties controlled by the bourgeoisie that still enjoy substantial working class support exist, all Leninist parties oppose them as well.

What really happens is that each Leninist party defines itself as the only "working class party".


How do you explain the Bolsheviks being able to form an international with parties from all over the world?

Of course there are still parties today who claim to be Leninist and do not oppose other 'Leninist' parties who have about the same views as them. You're basically wrong.

[redstar2000]

Alas, red_che, you are once again reduced to apologetics and diversions. I suppose that you feel you "must" say "whatever's necessary" to defend 20th century Leninism as best you can...but you don't really offer any substantive arguments.

To say that "surely, you are not aware or don't know anything about Leninism" or "your accusations here are basically the same as what the bourgeois propagandists say" is just completely meaningless.

Likewise, "The pact with Mao [and Nixon]...was in the 'spirit' of Internationalism" or "as for the pact with Hitler, this was so to at least delay the Nazi advance and aggression on Russia" is just noise.

Your excuses have the same semantic content as, for example, "the reason the U.S. used the atomic bomb on Japan was to save American lives"...zero!


Originally posted by red_che+--> (red_che)Now all of these were done to further advance the international proletarian movement.[/b]

Blah, blah, blah. :lol:


Marxism-Leninism
How do you explain the Bolsheviks being able to form an international with parties from all over the world?

The "winner effect". There are probably no longer any people still alive who remember the enormous prestige that the Bolsheviks enjoyed after 1917.

Had they suggested that "every revolutionary" must eat one dog turd a day, the sidewalks of western cities would have suddenly been one heck of a lot cleaner. :lol:

The political devolution of those parties is a much sadder story. :(

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[red_che]

I suppose that you feel you "must" say "whatever's necessary" to defend 20th century Leninism as best you can...but you don't really offer any substantive arguments.

I don't know what kind of big fuss you're making here. It's as if anytime or most of the time I have a copy of those pacts, and that I can't explain them. :angry:

Resdstar, as i said, I have to read them first. I am not avoiding it. Until now, I am looking for those texts. I have, in fact, called so many friends of mine to ask if they have a copy of that or at least knew where to get one. Wait until I have them and I'll answer your queries.

Or, if you're kind enough, can you give a link to a possible site where those texts can be found. :)

[redstar2000]

Mao :wub: Nixon...

http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/Re...2_Nixon30th.htm (http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/Reality%20Check/02_19_02_Nixon30th.htm)

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episo...ments/us.china/ (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/15/documents/us.china/)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by RS+--> (RS)The "winner effect". There are probably no longer any people still alive who remember the enormous prestige that the Bolsheviks enjoyed after 1917.
[/b]

Why did you ignore the second part of my post?

Let me repeat:


Marxism-Leninism
Of course there are still parties today who claim to be Leninist and do not oppose other 'Leninist' parties who have about the same views as them. You're basically wrong.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by Marxism-Leninism
Of course there are still parties today who claim to be Leninist and do not oppose other 'Leninist' parties who have about the same views as them. You're basically wrong.


So why are there so many fucking Leninist parties and "Internationals"?? :D



Parties formerly associated with the World Marxist Review (Problems of Peace and Socialism)

Communist Party of Argentina (Partido Comunista de la Argentina, PCA)
Communist Party of Australia (CPA), formerly the Socialist Party of Australia
Communist Party of Austria (Kommunistische Partei Österreichs, KPÖ)
Communist Party of Bangladesh (Bangladesher Communist Party)
Belarusian Party of Communists (Partyia Kamunistau Belaruskaia, PKB) periodical Tovarishch
Communist Party - Flanders (Kommunistische Partij - Vlaanderen, KP), Belgium
Communist Party - Wallonia (Parti Communiste - Wallonie, PC) regional organization, Belgium
Democratic Progressive Tribune Society (Jami'at Al-Minbar al-Taqaddum al-Dimuqrati, al-Minbar), Bahrain, founded by members of National Liberation Front/Bahrain
National Democratic Action Society (Jami'at al-Amal al-Watani al-Dimuqrati), other page, other page, founded by members of National Liberation Front/Bahrain
Communist Party of Canada (Communist Party of Canada / Parti Communiste du Canada, CPC/PCC)
Communist Party of Quebec (Parti Communiste du Québec, PCQ)
Communist Party of Chile (Partido Comunista de Chile, PCC)
Colombian Communist Party (Partido Comunista Colombiano, PCC)
Communist Party of Cuba (Partido Comunista de Cuba, PCC), periodical Granma
Progressive Party of Working People (Anorthotiko Komma Ergazomenou Laou, AKEL), Cyprus
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (Komunistická strana Cech a Moravy, KSCM), Czech Republic
Communist Party of Denmark (Danmarks Kommunistiske Parti, DKP)
Revolution Force (Fuerza de la Revolución), Dominican Republic, merger of the Communist Party and other groups updated February 05
Egyptian Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Misri)
French Communist Party (Parti Communiste Français, PCF)
Communist Refounders (Réfondateurs Communistes)
Communist Regroupment (Regroupement Communiste)
Facts and Analysis (Faits et Analyses)
Glaring Reds (Rouges Vifs) regional group
New Communist Left / Popular Association for Mutual Aid (Nouvelle Gauche Communiste / Association Populaire d'Entraide)
Pole of Communist Renaissance in France (Pole de Renaissance Communiste en France, PCRF)
Reconstruct the PCF (Reconstruire le PCF, RPCF) added February 05
Struggle (Combat)
German Communist Party (Deutsche Kommunistische Partei, DKP)
Communist Party of Greece (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, KKE)
Communist Party of India (Bharatiya Kamyunista Parti, CPI)
Party of the Masses of Iran (Hezb-e Tudeh-ye Iran), periodical Rahe Tudeh
Iraqi Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-'Iraqi, ICP)
Kurdistan Communist Party, other page
Communist Party of Ireland (Pairtí Cummanach na hÉireann, CPI)
Communist Party of Israel (Miflagah ha-Komunistit ha-Yisre'elit / al-Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Isra'ili, MAKI)
Japanese Communist Party (Nihon Kyôsantô, Nikkyo)
Communist Party of Kazakhstan (Kommuniststicheskaya Partiya Kazakhstana / Kazakstan Kommunistyk Partiyasy)
National Democratic Front of South Korea (Han-min-jeon)
Lebanese Communist Party (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Lubnani / Parti Communiste Libanais, PCL)
Socialist Party of Latvia (Latvijas Sociâlistiskâ Partija / Socialisticheskaya Partiya Latvii, LSP)
Communist Party of Luxemburg (Kommunistesch Partei vu Lëtzebuerg / Parti Communiste Luxembourgeois, KPL/PCL) periodical Zeitung vum Lëtzebuerger Vollek
Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (Partidul Comunistilor din Republica Moldova, PCRM)
Party of Progress and Socialism (Hizb al-Taqaddum wa-al-Ishtirakiyah / Parti du Progrès et du Socialisme, PPS) periodical Al Bayane, Morocco
Communist Party of Norway (Norges Kommunistiske Parti, NKP)
Communist Party of Pakistan [Khaskheli] (CPP[Khaskheli])
Palestinian People's Party (Hizb al-Sha'b al-Filastini, PPP)
Peruvian Communist Party [Unity] (Partido Comunista Peruano [Unidad], PCP[Unidad])
Portuguese Communist Party (Partido Comunista Português, PCP)
All-Russian Communist Party of the Future (Vserossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Budushchego, VKPB) updated February 05
Communist Party of the Russian Federation (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Rossiiskoi Federatsii, KPRF)
South African Communist Party (SACP)
Communist Party of Spain (Partido Comunista de España, PCE)
Sudanese Communist Party (Al-Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Sudani, HSS)
Swiss Labour Party (Parti Suisse du Travail / Partei der Arbeit der Schweiz / Partito Svizzero del Lavoro, PdA/PST/PdL), mirror page
Syrian Communist Party [Faysal] (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Suri [Faysal]) periodical Al-Nur
Communist Party of Turkey [Harvest] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [Ürün])
Communist Party of Ukraine (Komunistychna Partiya Ukrainy, KPU)
All-Ukrainian Workers Union (Vseukrains'kiy Soyuz Rabochykh, VSR)
Communist Party of Uruguay (Partido Comunista del Uruguay, PCU)
Union of Communist Parties - Communist Party of the Soviet Unio (Soyuz Kommunisticheskih Partii - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, SKP-KPSS)
Communist Party USA (CPUSA)
Communist Party of Venezuela (Partido Comunista de Venezuela, PCV)
Communist Party of Vietnam (Dang Cong san Viêt Nam / Parti Communiste Vietnamien)
Others parties with a similar political orientation

United Cyprus Party (Birlesik Kibris Partisi, BKP), Cyprus/TRNC updated February 05
Workers' Party (Pairtí na nOibrí), Ireland
Socialist Popular Party of Mexico (Partido Popular Socialista de México, PPS México)
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (Jabhah al-Dimuqratiyah li-Tahrir Filastin, DFLP) periodical Al-Huriyah
New Romanian Communist Party - Initiative Committee (Noul Partid Comunist Român - Comitetul de Initiativa)
Communist Party of Kurdistan (Partiya Komunistê Kurdistan / Kürdistan Komünist Partisi, PKK/KKP), Turkey
Communist Party of Turkey [ex-SIP] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [ex-SIP])
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), merger of several leftist currents, among them the majority of the United Communist Party of Turkey (TBKP)
Leftist splits from communist parties

Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism (Parti Algérien pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, PADS)
Communist Party - Extraordinary Congress (Partido Comunista - Congreso Extraordinario, PC(CE)), Argentina added February 2005
Communist Refoundation (Refundación Comunista), Argentina
Communist Initiative (Kommunistische Initiative, KI), Austria updated April 05
Brazilian Communist Party (Partido Comunista Brasileiro, PCB), split from the Socialist Popular Party (PPS) that was formerly called PCB
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista), Brazil
Bulgarian Workers-Peasants Party (Bulgarska Rabotnichesko-Selska Partiya, BRSP) updated April 05
Bulgarian Workers Socialist Party (Bulgarska Rabotnicheska Sotsialisticheska Partiya, BRSP) added April 05
Canadians for Peace and Socialism updated April 05
Costarrican People's Party (Partido del Pueblo Costarricense, PPC) periodical Libertad, Costa Rica, split from the Popular Vanguard Party (PVP)
Socialist Workers Party of Croatia (Socijalisticka Radnicka Partija Hrvatske, SRP)
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (Komunistická strana Çeskoslovenska, SCK), split from Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM)
Communist Party in Denmark (Kommunistisk Parti i Danmark, KPiD), split from the Communist Party of Denmark (DKP)
Communist Party of Finland (Suomen Kommunistinen Puolue, SKP), split from Leftist Alliance
Communist Workers' Party (Kommunistinen Työväenpuolue, KTP), split from the Communist Party of Finland
League of Communists (Kommunistien Liitto), Finland, split from KTP
Union of Revolutionaries-Communists of France (Union des Révolutionnaires-Communistes de France, URCF) updated February 05
Communists (Communistes), France, split from French Communist Party (PCF)
Communist Party of Britain (CPB), split from the Communist Party of Great Britain (today the New Times Network)
Communist Party of Great Britain - Provisional Central Committee (CPGB-PCC), split from Communist Party of Great Britain
New Communist Party (NCP), Great Britain, split from the Communist Party of Great Britain (today the Democratic Left)
New Left Current (Neo Aristero Reuma, NAR), split from the Communist Party of Greece (KKE)
Workers' Party (Munkáspárt), split from the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (MSzMP, today the Hungarian Socialist Party)
Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M), split from the Communist Party of India (CPI)
Iraqi Communist Party - Cadre (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-'Iraqi - al-Kader)
Israeli Communist Forum, split from the Communist Party of Israel
Movement for the Unity of Communists (Movimento per l'Unità dei Comunisti, UC) regional group, Italy
Party of Communist Refoundation (Partito della Rifondazione Comunista, PRC), Italy
Bandiera Rossa Association (Associazione Bandiera Rossa, ABR), periodical Erre
Communism from below (Comunismo dal basso)
Communist Project - Programatic Area of the PRC (Progetto Comunista - Area Programmatica del PRC)
l'ernesto
Red Line (Linea Rossa)
Reds Association (Associazione Reds)
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista")
Sickle Hammer (Falce Martello)
Party of Italian Communists (Partito dei Comunisti Italiani, PdCI), right wing split from PRC
Popular Democracy (United Left) (Democrazia Popolare (Sinistra Unita), DP(SU)) added February 05
Communist Party for Independence and Socialism (Pati Kominis pou Lendépandans èk Sosyalism / Parti Communiste pour l'Indépendance et le Socialisme, PKLS/PCIS), split from Martinican Communist Party (PCM)
Party of Communists (Partido de los Comunistas), founded by Party of Mexican Communists and Party of the Socialist Revolution (PRS), both founed by ex-members of Socialist Popular Party (PPS) and Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD)
New Communist Party of the Netherlands (Nieuwe Communistische Partij van Nederland, NCPN), split from the Communist Party of the Netherlands (CPN) which merged in GreenLeft
United Communist Party (Verenigde Communistische Partij, VCP), Netherlands, split from NCPN
Socialist Party of Aotearoa (SPA), New Zealand, New Zealand, split from the Socialist Unity Party (SUP)
Movement for Socialism (Bevegelsen for Sosialisme), Norway, split from NKP
Communist Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Polski, KPP)
Polish Socialist Workers Party (Polska Socjalistyczna Partia Robotnicza, PSPR) added February 05
Communist Refoundation (Refundación Comunista), Puerto Rico
Communist Party of Russia - Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, RKP-KPSS) unofficial, split from the CPSU
Communist Party of the Republic of Tatarstan (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Respublikii Tatarstan, KPRT), Russia
Communists of Working Russia (Kommunisty Trudovoii Rossii, KTP) / Working Russia (Trudovaya Rossiya)
Russian Communist Party - Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya - Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza, RKP-KPSS), split from the CPSU
Russian Communist Workers' Party - Revolutionary Party of Communists (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Rabochaya Partiya - Revoliutsionnaya Partiya Kommunistov, RKRP-RPK)
Union of Communists (Soyuz Kommunistov, SK) unofficial, Russia, split from the CPSU
Union of Marxists (Soyuz Marksistov), Russia
San Marino Communist Refoundation (Rifondazione Comunista Sammarinese)
League of Communists of Yugoslavia in Serbia (Savez Komunista Jugoslavije u Srbiji, SKJ u Srbiji) local group, Serbia and Montenegro
Communist Party of Slovakia (Komunistická Strana Slovenska, KSS), split from the Party of the Democratic Left, the former KSS
Canarian Comunist Militants Organized in Cells (Militantes Comunistas Canarios Organizados en Células), Spain
Cell for the Reconstruction of the Canarian Communist Party (Célula para la reconstrucción del Partido Comunista Canario, CRCCP), Spain updated February 05
Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (Partido Comunista de los Pueblos de España, PCPE), split from the PCE
Party of the Communists of Catalonia (Partit dels Comunistes de Catalunya, PCC), Spain, split from the United Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC)
Spanish Communist Workers' Party (Partido Comunista Obrero Español, PCOE) updated February 05
United Socialist Party of Catalonia-Living (Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya - Viu; PSUC-Viu), Spain, leftist split from original PSUC
Communist Party of Sweden (Sveriges Kommunistiska Parti, SKP), split from the Left Party Communists (today the Left Party)
National Committee for the Unity of the Syrian Communists (Lajnah al-Wataniyah li-Wahdah Shuyu'iyin Suriyin), periodical Kassioun, Syria
Syrian Communist Party - Political Bureau (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Suri - al-Maktab al-Siyasi)
Communist Party of Turkey [Workers Voice] (Türkiye Komünist Partisi [Iscinin Sesi], TKP[IS]), split from TKP
Factory (Fabrika), Turkey, origin in TIP
Truth (Gercek), Turkey, origin in SIP (now TKP)
Union of Communists of Ukraine (Soyuz Kommunistiv Ukrainy) periodical Marksizm i Sovremennost, split from Communist Party of Ukraine
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya bol'shevikov, VKPb), ex-USSR, split from CPSU
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [S. Skvortsov] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [S. Skvortsova]), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [Shenin] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [Shenin], KPSS[Shenin] updated February 05
Communist Party of the Union (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Soyuza, KPS) Moscow organization, split from Communist Parties of several republics of the former USSR updated February 05
Marxist Platform (Marksistskaya Platforma), ex-USSR, rest of Marxist Platform of CPSU
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (Nova Komunisticka Partija Jugoslavije, NKPJ), split from the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
Ex-Communists

Socialist Party of Albania (Partia Socialiste ë Shqipërisë, PSS) added February 05
Democratic and Social Movement (Mouvement Démocratique et Social, MDS), formerly the Socialist Vanguard Party (PAGS), Algeria
Social Democratic Party Bosnia and Hercegovina (Socijaldemokratska partija Bosne i Hercegovine, SDP BiH), formerly the League of Communists
Socialist Popular Party (Partido Popular Socialista, PPS), formerly the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB)
Bulgarian Socialist Party (Bulgarska Sotsialisticheska Partiya, BSP), formerly the Bulgarian Communist Party (BKP)
Cambodian People's Party (Parti du Peuple Cambodgien / Kanakpak Pracheachon, Prachor)
Socialdemocratic Party of Croatia (Socijaldemokratska Partija Hrvatske, SDPH), formerly the League of Communists of Croatia
Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (Frente Farabundo Martí de Liberación Nacional, FMLN), the Communist Party of El Salvador (PCS) became part of it
Estonian Social Democratic Labour Party (Eesti Sotsiaaldemokraatlik Tööpartei, ESDTP), formerly the Communist Party of Estonia
Left Alliance (Vasemmistoliitto/Vänsterförbundet, VL), founded by Finnish Communist Party (SKP)
Party of Democratic Socialism (Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus, PDS), mirror page, formerly the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED)
New Politics Network, Great Britain, formerly the Democvratic Left which was the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB)
Coalition of the Left and Progress (Synaspismos tis Aristeras kai tis Proodou, SYN), founded mostly by groups that split from KKE at different times
Inuit Community (Inuit Ataqatigiit, IA), Greenland
Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca, URNG), communist Guatemalan Labour Party (PGT) merged in it
People's Progressive Party (PPP), Guyana
Hungarian Socialist Party (Magyar Szocialista Párt, MSzP), formerly the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (MSzMP)
Social Democratic Alliance (Samfylkingin), Iceland, includes the formerly communist People's Alliance (Alþýðubandalagid)
Democratic People's Party of Iran (Hezb-e Demokratik-e Mardom-e Iran), split from Party of the Masses of Iran (Tudeh Party)
Organization of Iranian People's Fedaian (Majority) (Sazman-e Feda'iyan-e Khalq-e Iran (Aksariyat), OIPFM)
Democrats of the Left (Democratici di Sinistra, DS), formerly the Italian Communist Party (PCI)
Lithuanian Social Democratic Party (Lietuvos Socialdemokratu Partija, LSDP), the former Communist Party of Lithuania, the Lithuanian Democratic Labour Party (Lietuvos Demokratinë Darbo Partija) merged with it in 2001
Social-Democratic League of Macedonia (Socijaldemokratski Sojuz na Makedonija, SDSM), formerly the Communist League of Macedonia
Democratic Revolution Party (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, PRD)
Emiliano Zapata Brigades of the PRD (Brigadas Emiliano Zapata del PRD, BEZ-PRD)
Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party (Mongol Ardyn Chuvsgalt Nam)
Green Left (GroenLinks), Netherlands, the former Communist Party (CPN) became part of it
Alliance of the Democratic Left (Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej, SLD), the Social Democracy of the Republic of Poland (SdRP, formerly the Polish United Workers Party (PZPR)) became part of it
Party of Democrats (Partito dei Democratici), San Marino added February 05
Independence and Labour Party (Parti de l'Indépendance et du Travail, PIT), Senegal
Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro (Demokratska Partija Socijalista Crne Gore, DPS), Serbia and Montenegro, formerly the League of Communists of Montenegro
Socialist Party of Serbia (Socijalisticka Partija Srbije, SPS), Serbia and Montenegro, merger of the League of Communists of Serbia and the Socialist Alliance of Working People
Party of the Democratic Left (Strana Demokratickej L'avice, SDL'), formerly the Communist Party of Slovakia (KSS)
United List of Social Democrats (Zdruzena Lista Socialnih Demokratov, ZLSD), Slovenia, încludes the former League of Communists of Slovenia
Initiative for Catalonia - Greens (Iniciativa per Catalunya - Verds, IC), Spain, contains the majority of the United Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC) which was part of the PCE
United Socialist Party of Catalonia (Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya, PSUC), Spain
Left Party (Vänsterpartiet, V), Sweden, formerly the Left Party Communists (VPK)
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), contains the majority of the former United Communist Party of Turkey (TBKP)
People's Democratic Party (Narodno-Demokratychna Partiya, NDP), Ukraine, one of the successors of the the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU)
Socialist Party of Ukraine (Sotsialistychna Partiya Ukrainy, SPU), one of the successors of the the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU)

International Communist Seminars (Brussels)

Parties adhering to Maoism or Mao-Tsetung-Thought

Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Parties waging or supporting People's War

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations [Maoist]

Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionario, PCR), Argentina
Communist Party of Colombia - Maoist (Partido Comunista de Colombia - Maoísta, PCC-M), other page
Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany (Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Deutschlands, MLPD)
Communist Organization of Greece (Kommounistiki Organosi Elladas, KOE)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Democracy (CPI-ML(ND))
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Kanu Sanyal]
Committees for the Support of the Resistance - For Communism (Comitati di Appoggio alla Resistenza - per il Comunismo, CARC)
Commission for the Preparation of the Foundation Congress of the (New) Italian Communist Party (Commissione Preparatoria del congresso di fondazione del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano)
Popular Front for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party (Fronte Popolare per la ricostruzione del partito comunista, FP-rpc)
Group of Marxist-Leninists/Red Morning (Groep van Marxisten-Leninisten/Rode Morgen), Netherlands
Workers' Communist Party (Arbeidernes Kommunistparti, AKP), Norway
Communist Party of the Philippines (Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas, CPP)
National Democratic Front (NDF)
Russian Maoist Party (Rossiiskaya Maoistskaya Partiya)
Labour Party (Partija Rada), Serbia/Montenegro
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (Türkiye Komünist Partisi/Marksist-Leninist, TKP/ML)
Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionario, PCR), Uruguay
Ray O. Light unofficial, USA added February 05
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM)
other unofficial page

Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan (Hizb-e Komunist-e Maoist-e Afghanistan)
Revolutionary Front Marxist - Leninist Maoist (Frente Revolucionario - Marxista Leninista Maoísta, FR-MLM), Bolivia, close to RIM
Union of Communist Revolutionaries (Maoists) (Unión de Revolucionarios Comunistas (Maoístas)), Chile, close to RIM added February 05
Communist Workers' Union (Marxist-Leninist Maoist) (Unión Obrera Comunista (Marxista-Leninista-Maoísta), UOC(mlm)), Colombia, close to RIM
Revolutionary Communist Group of Columbia (Grupo Comunista Revolucionario de Colombia, GCR)
Communist Party of India (Maoist) (CPI(M)) added February 05
Communist Party of Iran (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran (Marksist-e Leninist-e Maoist-e))
Iraqi Revolutionary Marxist-Leninists Regroupment (Al-Tajammu' al-Marksiyin al-Leniniyin al-Thawriyin al-Iraqiyin), close to RIM
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), unofficial, unofficial
Communist Party of Peru [Louminous Path] (Partido Comunista del Perú [Sendero Luminoso]), unofficial page, unofficial page, periodical El Diario Internacional
Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) periodical Revolutionary Worker, USA
Maoist Communist Party (Maoist Komünist Partisi, MKP), Turkey
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (Maoist Party Centre) (Türkiye Komünist Partisi/Marksist-Leninist (Maoist Parti Merkezi))
Others

Afghanistan Liberation Organization (Sazman-e Reha'i-ye Afghanistan, ALO)
Liberation Party (Partido de la Libéracion, PL), Argentina
Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist) (CPA-ML) periodical Vanguard updated April 05
Marxist-Leninist Party of Austria (Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Österreichs, MLPÖ)
Workers' Party of Belgium (Parti du Travail de Belgique / Partij van de Arbeid van België, PTB/PvdA)
Communist Party of Brazil - Red Faction (Partido Comunista do Brasil - Fração Vermelha, PCdoB-FV) periodical A Nova Democracia
Revolutionary Communist Party (Organizing Committees) / Parti communiste révolutionnaire (comités d'organisation) (PCR(co)/RCP(OC)), Canada
Communist Party of China (Zhongguo Gongchandang) updated February 05
Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong
Labour Party of Colombia (Partido del Trabajo de Colombia, PTC-Moirista)
Revolutionary and Independent Workers' Movement (Movimiento Obrero Independiente y Revolucionario, MOIR), Colombia
Patriotic Front for the Renovation and the Progress (Front Patriotique pour le Renouveau et le Progrès, FP-RP), Congo, Democratic Republic added February 05
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia - Czechoslovakian Workers Party (Komunistická strana Ceskoslovenska - Ceskoslovenská strana práce, KSC-CSSP)
Communist Party of the Dominican Republic (Partido Comunista de la República Dominicana, Pacoredo)
Dominican Workers' Party (marxist-leninist) (Partido de los Trabajadores Dominicanos (marxista-leninista), PTD-ml)
Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (Parti Communiste (marxiste-léniniste-maoïste)), France
Against the Current (Gegen die Strömung), Germany
Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten, KPD/ML)
Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Greece (Marxistiko-Leninistiko - Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, M-L KKE)
Organization for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party of Greece (Organosi gia tin Anasyngrotisi tou Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, OAKKE)
Revolutionary Communist Movement of Greece (Epanastatiko Kommounistiko Kinima Elladas, EKKE)
Communist Workers Newspaper Group (Gruppe Kommunistische Arbeiterzeitung, K.AZ), Germany
New Unity Group (Gruppe Neue Einheit), Germany
Workers League for the Reconstruction of the KPD (Arbeiterbund für den Wiederaufbau der KPD, AB), Germany
Communist Party of Greece (marxist-leninist) (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas (marxistiko-leninistiko), KKE(m-l))
Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Lal Salaam] added May 05
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (CPI-ML Liberation)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) [Mahadev Mukherjee] (CPI-ML[MM])
National Socialist Council of Nagaland [Issak/Muivah] (NSCN[I/M]), India
United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), India
Revolutionary Labour Party of Iran (Hezb-e Kar-e Enqelabi-ye Iran)
Toilers Party of Iran (Hezb-e Ranjbaran Iran)
Italian Marxist-Leninist Party (Partito Marxista-Leninista Italiano, PMLI)
Red Line - for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party (Linearossa - per la Ricostruzione del Partito Comunista), Italy
Red Line (Linea Rossa), other page, Italy, faction inside PRC
Japan Communist Party (Action Faction) (Nihon Kyôsantô (Kôdô-ha))
Japan Labor Party (Nihon Rôdôtô)
Workers' Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô), Japan
Workers Socialist League (Rôdôsha Shakaishugi Dômei, Rôshadô), Japan
Communist Party of Burma [White Flag] (Bama Pyi Comyuni Pati [Alan-Pyu], CPB)
Communist Party of Aotearoa (CPA), New Zealand
Serve the People - a marxist-leninist group (Tjen Folket - ei marxist-leninistisk gruppe), Norway
Communist Workers Peasants Party (Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party, CMKP), Pakistan
Patriotic Front of the Socialist Left (Patriotyczny Front Lewicy Socjalistycznej, PFLS), Poland
Communist Party of the Portuguese Workers (Partido Comunista dos Trabalhadores Portugueses, PCTP)
Communist Party of Spain [Maoist] (Partido Comunista de España [Maoista], PCE)
Communist Party of Spain (reconstituted) (Partido Comunista de España (reconstituido), PCE®)
Communist Unification of Spain (Unificación Comunista de España / Komunisten Batasuna, UCE)
New Revolutionary Workers' Organization of Spain (Nueva Organización Revolucionaria de los Trabajadores de España, nORTe)
New Workers' Newspaper (Nya Arbetartidningen, Nya AT), Sweden
United Communist Party (Birlesik Komünist Parti, BKP) periodical Uzun Yürüyüs, Turkey
Workers Party (Isçi Partisi), Turkey
Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Fight Back] (FRSO), USA
Freedom Road Socialist Organization [Freedom Road] (FRSO), USA
Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM), USA
Organizing Committee to form the Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist) unofficial added February 05
Progressive Labor Party (PLP), other page, USA
Parties formerly associated with the Labour Party of Albania

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations [Hoxhaist]

Albanian Communist Party (Partia Komuniste Shqiptare, PKSH) added February 05
Revolutionary Communist Party (Partido Comunista Revolucionário, PCR), Brazil
Chilenian Communist Party (Proletarian Action) (Partido Comunista Chileno (Acción Proletaria), PC(AP))
Communist Party of Colombia (marxist-leninist) (Partido Comunista de Colombia (marxista-leninista), PCdeC(ml)) added February 05
Workers' Communist Party (Arbejderpartiet Kommunisterne), Denmark
Communist Labour Party (Partido Comunista del Trabajo), Dominican Republic
Marxist Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista del Ecuador, PCMLE)
Democratic Popular Movement (Movimiento Popular Democrático, MPD)
Communist Party of Germany [Red Morning] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands [Roter Morgen], KPD)
Workers Communist Party of the France (Parti Communiste des Ouvriers de France, PCOF)
Movement for the Reorganization of the Communist Party of Greece (1918-55) (Kinisi gia Anasyntaxi tou Kommounistikou Kommatos Elladas (1918-55)), Greece added May 05
Labour Party of Iran (Hezb-e Kar-e Iran, Toufan)
Organization for the Communist Party of the Proletariat of Italy (Organizzazione per il Partito Comunista del Proletariato d'Italia)
Communist Party of Mexico (marxist-leninist) (Partido Comunista de Mexico (marxista-leninista), PCM(M-L))
ML-group Revolution (ML-gruppa Revolusjon), Norway
State Committee of Communist Organizations (Coordinación Estatal de Organizaciones Comunistas, CEOC), Spain
Communist Collective 27 September (Colectivo Comunista 27 de Septiembre, 27-S)
Communist Organization of the Valencian Country (Organización Comunista del País Valenciano / Organització Comunista del País Valencià, OCPV), Spain updated February 05
October Communist Organization (Organización Comunista "Octubre"), Spain
Communist Party of Tunisian Workers (Parti Communiste des Ouvriers Tunisiens / Hizb al-'Ummal al-Shuyu'i, PCOT)
Revolutionary Communist Party of Turkey (Türkiye Devrimci Komünist Partisi, TDKP), other page
Labourers Party (Emegin Partisi, Emep), legal wing of TDKP
Communist International Marxists-Leninists

Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists [Red Morning] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten [Roter Morgen], KPD/ML)
Setup Organization of the New Workers Party, Marxists-Leninists (Opbouworganisatie van de Nieuwe Arbeiderspartij - Marxisten Leninisten, NAP-ML (Opbouworganisatie), Netherlands
Others

Communist Party of Albania "8 November" (Partia Komuniste e Shqipërisë "8 Nëntori") added February 05
Labour Party of Albania (Partia e Punës e Shqipërisë, PPSH)
Advance Group (Grupo Avanzar), Argentina
Marxist-Leninist Bloc (Bloc Marxiste-Léniniste / Marxistisch-leninistisch Blok), Belgium
Communist Collective Aurora (Communistisch Collectief Aurora), Belgium
Communist Party of Brazil (Partido Comunista do Brasil, PCdoB)
Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) (CPC(ML))
Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec (Parti Marxiste-Léniniste du Québec, PMLQ)
Socialist Party of Cyprus (Kibris Sosialist Partisi, KSP) updated February 05
Communist Party of Denmark/Marxists-Leninists (Danmarks Kommunistiske Parti/Marxister-Leninister, DKP/ML)
Workers' Party of Ecuador (Partido de los Trabajadores del Ecuador, PTE)
Revolutionary Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) (Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire (Marxiste-Léniniste)), France added February 05
Communist Party of Germany/Marxists-Leninists [Red Star] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands/Marxisten-Leninisten [Roter Stern], KPD/ML)
Organization for the build-up of a communist workers party of Germany (Organisation für den Aufbau einer kommunistischen Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands) periodical Arbeit Zukunft updated February 05
Red October - Organization for the Build-up of the Communist Party in Germany (Roter Oktober - Organisation zum Aufbau der Kommunistischen Partei in Deutschland), Germany updated February 05
Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (CPB (M-L))
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (RCPB-ML)
Communist Ghadar Party of India (CGPI)
Organization for Peoples Empowerment (Lok Raj Sangathan, LRS)
Revolutionary Democracy, India
Spark (Scintilla), Italy
Polish Party of the Working Class - Initiative Group (Polska Partia Klasy Robotniczej - Grupa Inicjatywna) added February 05
Popular Democratic Union (União Democrática Popular, UDP), Portugal
Proletarian Communist Organization (Marxist-Bolshevik) of Portugal (Organização Comunista Proletária (Marxista-Bolchevique) de Portugal, OCP(MB)P)
Communist Party of Togo (Parti Communiste du Togo, PCT)
Communist Party - Build Up Organization (Reorganization Coordination) (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü (Yeniden Örgütlenme Koordinasyonu), KP-IÖ[YÖK]) periodical Ileri, Turkey updated February 05
Communist Party - Build Up Organization [DHB] (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü [DHB], KP-IÖ[DHB]) periodical Devrimci Halkin Birligi
Communist Voice Organization, USA
US Marxist-Leninist Organization (USMLO) periodical Voice of Revolution
Ex-Maoist Parties

Socialist Party of Albania (Partia Socialiste ë Shqipërisë, PSS) updated February 05
Ethiopian Peoples' Revolutionary Party (Yethiopia Hizbawi Abyotawi Party, EPRP), center
Analysis and Critique (Analyse und Kritik, AK; formerly the Communist League), Germany, left socialist
Association for Socialist Politics (Vereinigung für Sozialistische Politik), Germany, radical leftist
Communist Debate (Kommunistische Debatte), Germany, radical leftist
Forum of Communist Working Groups (Forum kommunistischer Arbeitsgemeinschaften), Germany, formerly League of West German Communits (BWK)
Communist Party of Iran (Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran, CPI)
Kurdistan Organisation of the Communist Party of Iran (Sazman-e Kordestan-e Hezb-e Komunist-e Iran, Komalah)
Iraqi Communist Party - Central Command (Hizb al-Shuyu'i al-Iraqi - Al-Qiyadah al-Markaziyah), periodical Al-Ghad
New Unity (Nuova Unità), Italy
Workers Communist Party (Rôdôsha Kyôsantô), Japan, marxist-leninist
Militants for the Progress of Madagascar (Militants pour le Progrès de Madagascar / Mpitolona ho Amin'ny Fampandrosoan'i Madagaskar, MFM), liberal
Labour Party (Partido del Trabajo, PT), Mexico, left socialist
Revolutionary Popular Democratic Party (Partido Democrático Popular Revolucionario, PDPR), Mexico, radical leftist
The Democratic Way (Annahj Democrati / La Voie Démocratique), Morocco
Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist) (Nepal Kamyunist Parti (Ekikrit Marksvadi ra Leninvadi), CPN(UML))
Socialist Party (Socialistische Partij, SP), Netherlands, left socialist
Socialist Worker, New Zealand, trotskyist
Communist Party of Peru (Red Homeland) (Partido Comunista del Perú (Patria Roja), PCdelP), marxist-leninist
New Left Movement (Movimiento Nueva Izquierda, MNI), Peru
Act Together/African Party for Democracy and Socialism (And Jëf/Parti africain pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, AJ/PADS), Senegal, left socialist
Communist Party (Kommunistiska Partiet), Sweden, anti-revisionist updated February 05
Tunisian Perspectives (Perspectives Tunisiennes)
Bolshevik Party (North Kurdistan-Turkey) (Bolsevik Partisi (Kuzey Kürdistan-Türkiye), BP(KK-T)), marxist-leninist
Communist Party - Build Up Organization (Komunist Partisi - Insa Örgütü), other page
Communist Workers Party of Turkey (Türkiye Komünist Isçi Partisi, TKIP), radical leftist
Revolutionary Communists Union of Turkey (Türkiye Ihtilalci Komünistler Birligi, TIKB) periodical Alinteri, marxist-leninist
Revolutionary Communists Union of Turkey - Bolshevik (Türkiye Ihtilalci Komünistler Birligi - Bolsevik, TIKB-B) periodical Devrimci Durus
League of Revolutionaries for a New America (LRNA), USA
Workers Party U.S.A., marxist-leninist
Socialist League (Liga Socialista, LS), Venezuela
International Struggle - Marxist-Leninist (IS/ML)

Alliance Marxist-Leninist (North America), Canada/USA
Communist League of Great Britain
Communist Party Alliance (CP Alliance), Great Britain
Proletarian Path, India added February 05
Communist Party of Italy Marxist-Leninist (Partito Comunista d'Italia Marxista-Leninista, PCIML)
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Marksist Leninist Komünist Partisi, MLKP), Turkey
Socialist Platform of the Oppressed (Ezilenlerin Sosyalist Platformu, ESP), Turkey
Other Anti-Revisionist Parties

Algerian Party for Democracy and Socialism (Parti Algérien pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, PADS)
Communist Action - Marxist-Leninist (Kommunistische Aktion - marxistisch-leninistisch), mirror page, Austria
All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (Vsesaiuznaia Kamunistychnaia Partyia (Bal'shavikou), VKP(B)) periodical Vpered, Belarus
October 8th Revolutionary Movement (Movimento Revolucionário 8 de Outubro, MR-8) periodical Hora do Povo, Brazil
Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Partido Comunista Marxista Leninista), Brazil
Bulgarian Workers-Peasants Party (Bulgarska Rabotnichesko-Selska Partiya, BRSP) updated February 05
Recabarren Organization of Communists (Organización Comunista Recabarren, OCR), Chile
Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (Komunistická strana Çeskoslovenska, SCK)
Communist League (Kommunistien Liitto / Kommunisternas Förbund), Finland
Communist Workers' Party (Kommunistinen Työväenpuolue, KTP), Finland
Communist Militant (Militant Communiste), France
Communist Regroupment (Regroupement Communiste), France
Communists (Communistes), France
Communists in Struggle for the Building of a Marxist-Leninist Party in France (Communistes en Lutte pour la Construction en France d'un Parti Marxiste-Léniniste)
Facts and Analysis (Faits et Analyses), France
Struggle (Combat), France
Union of Revolutionaries-Communists of France (Union des Révolutionnaires-Communistes de France, URCF) updated February 05
Bolshevik Initiative Germany (Bolschewistische Initiative Deutschland)
Communist Party of Germany [Red Flag] (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands [Rote Fahne], KPD)
Red Fox (RotFuchs), Germany
Free Workers' Union/Anarchist Party (Freie Arbeiter Union/Anarchistische Partei, FAU/AP), Germany
Communist Action, Great Britain
Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) (CPGB-ML)
New Communist Party (NCP), Great Britain
Partisan, Great Britain
Communist Party of Greece (Kommounistiko Komma Elladas, KKE)
Resist (Kontra), Greece
New Communist Party of Haiti (Nouveau Parti Communist Haïtien, NPCH)
Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI), India added February 05
Organization of Iranian People's Fedai Guerrillas (Sazman-e Cherikha-ye Feda'i-ye Khalq-e Iran, OIPFG)
Socialist Party of Latvia (Latvijas Sociâlistiskâ Partija / Socialisticheskaya Partiya Latvii, LSP) added February 05
Red Fox - Marxists-Leninist of Luxemburg (Roude Fiisschen - Marxisten-Leninisten zu Lëtzebuerg) added February 05
Red Workers Party (Partido Obrero Rojo, POR), Mexico added February 05
New Communist Party of the Netherlands (Nieuwe Communistische Partij van Nederland, NCPN)
Setup Organization of the New Workers Party, Marxists-Leninists (Opbouworganisatie van de Nieuwe Arbeiderspartij - Marxisten Leninisten)
United Communist Party (Verenigde Communistische Partij, VCP), Netherlands
Communist Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Polski, KPP)
Communists of Working Russia (Kommunisty Trudovoii Rossii, KTP) / Working Russia (Trudovaya Rossiya) updated February 05
Russian Communist Workers' Party - Revolutionary Party of Communists (Rossiiskaya Kommunisticheskaya Rabochaya Partiya - Revoliutsionnaya Partiya Kommunistov, RKRP-RPK)
Russian Revolutionary Movement (Russkoe Revoliutsionnoe Dvizhenie) added February 05
Communist Party of Slovakia (Komunistická Strana Slovenska, KSS)
Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (Partido Comunista de los Pueblos de España, PCPE)
Communist Refoundation Board (Mesa de Refundación Comunista, MRC), Spain
Workers Power (ml) (Arbetarmakt(ml)), Sweden added February 05
Communist Party of Switzerland (Build-up Organization) (Kommunistische Partei der Schweiz (Aufbauorganisation))
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front (Devrimci Halk Kurtulus Partisi-Cephesi, DHKP-C)
Front for Rights and Freedom (Haklar ve Özgürlükler Cephesi, HÖC), Turkey
Spartacus Group (Spartakus Grupu), Turkey added February 05
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks - Ukraine (Vsesoyuzka Komunistychna Partiya bil'shovykiv, VKPb)
Communist Party of Workers and Peasants (Komunistychna Partiya Robitnykiv i Selyan, KPRS)
Union of Communists of Ukraine (Soyuz Kommunistiv Ukrainy) periodical Marksizm i Sovremennost
Marxist-Leninist Organizer unofficial, USA added February 05
All-Union Communist Party bolsheviks (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya bol'shevikov, VKPb), ex-USSR
All-Union Communist Party (bolsheviks) (Vsesoyuznaya Kommunisticheskaya Partiya (bol'shevikov), VKP(b)), ex-USSR
Bolshevik Platform of the KPSS (Bol'shevistskaya Platforma v KPSS), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [A. Miroshnik] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [A. Miroshnika]), ex-USSR
Communist Party of the Soviet Union [Shenin] (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza [Shenin], KPSS[Shenin] updated February 05
Communist Party of the Union (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Soyuza, KPS) Moscow organization updated February 05
New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (Nova Komunisticka Partija Jugoslavije, NKPJ), Ex-Yugoslavia

Committee for a Workers International (CWI)

Socialist Party, Australia
Socialist Left Party (Sozialistische LinksPartei, SLP), Austria
Leftist Socialist Party / Movement for a Socialist Alternative (Linkse Socialistische Partij / Mouvement pour une Alternative Socialiste, LSP/MAS), Belgium
Revolutionary Socialism (Socialismo Revolucionário, SR), Brazil updated April 05
Socialist Alternative / Alternative Socialiste, Canada
Socialist Alternative Future (Socialistická alternativa Budoucnost), Czech Republic
Socialist Alternative (Sosialistinen Vaihtoehto), Finland
Revolutionary Left (Gauche Révolutionnaire, GR), France
Socialist Alternative (Sozialistische Alternative, SAV), Germany
International Socialists, Great Britain/Scotland
Socialist Party (SP), Great Britain
Socialist International Organisation "Start" (Sosialistiki Diethnistiki Organosi "Xekinima"), Greece
Socialist Party, Ireland, Northern Ireland
Socialist Struggle (Ma'avak Sotsyalisti), Israel
Struggle for Socialism (Lotta per il Socialismo), Italy
Offensive (Offensief), Netherlands
Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), Nigeria
Group for a Workers Party (Grupa na rzecz Partii Robotniczej, GPR), Poland
Socialist Resistance (Sotsialisticheskoye Soprotivlemiye), Russia
Justice Party Socialists (Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna), Sweden
Socialist Alternative, USA
Committee of International Rapprochement

Socialist Convergence (Convergencia Socialista), Argentina added April 05
Left Party, USA
Communist Organization for the Fourth International (COFI)

Communist Organization for the Fourth International - FRG (Kommunistische Organisation für die Vierte Internationale-BRD, KOVI-BRD), Germany
League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP), USA
Coordinating Committee for the Refoundation of the Fourth International (CRFI)
Tendency aound the Argentinian Workers Party (Partido Oberero, PO)

Workers' Party (Partido Obrero, PO), Argentina
Workers' Cause Party (Partido da Causa Operária, PCO), Brazil
The Proletarian Society of China periodical The Trotskyist, China/Hongkong, close to CRFI
Workers Revolutionnary Party (Ergatiko Epanastatiko Komma, EEK), Greece
Socialist Workers League, Israel/Palestine
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista"), Italy, active inside PRC
Workers' Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT)
Workers Action, USA
International Bolshevik Tendency (IBT)

International Bolshevik Tendency (Spartacus Group) (Internationale Bolschewistische Tendenz (Gruppe Spartakus)), Germany
Marxist Bulletin, Great Britain
International Center of Orthodox Trotskyism (Centro Internacional del Trotskismo Ortodoxo - IV Internacional, CITO)

Guernica Socialist Group (Grupo Socialista Guernica), Argentina
Socialist Revolution Party [Workers' Word] (Partido de la Revolución Socialista [Palabra Obrera]), Argentina
International Committee of the Fourth International [1] (ICFI[1])

Socialist Equality Party (SEP), Australia
Party for Social Equality (Partei für Soziale Gleichheit, PSG), Germany
Socialist Equality Party (SEP), Great Britain
Socialist Equality Party (SEP), other page, USA
International Committee of the Fourth International [2] (ICFI[2])

Workers' Revolutionary Party (WRP), Great Britain
International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) (ICL(FI))

Proletarian Platform (Platforma Proletariacka), Poland
International Liaison Committee for a Workers' International (Entente Internationale des Travailleurs)


Workers' Party (Parti des Travailleurs, PT) unofficial, periodical Fraternité, Algeria
Workers' Party (Parti des Travailleurs, PT), France updated May 05
Social Politics and Democracy (Soziale Politik und Demokratie), Germany
The Struggle (Lalit), Mauritius
Association for Workers' Emancipation (Asociatia pentru Emanciparea Muncitorilor) periodical Tribuna Socialã, Romania
Workers Information (Información Obrera), Spain
Collective for Workers' Socialism (Colectivo por el Socialismo Obrero)
Communist Encounter (Reencuentro Comunista)
Union of Circles for Workers' Politics (Union des Cercles pour une Politique Ouvrière, UCPO), Switzerland
Socialism without Bosses, General, Bureaucrats (Patronsuz, Generalsiz, Bürokratsiz Sosyalizm, PGB Sosyalizm), Turkey
International Marxist Tendency
Tendency around the Group publishing Socialist Appeal in Great Britain

The Militant (El Militante), Argentina
The Spark (Der Funke), Austria
Spark (Vonk), Belgium
FightBack, Canada updated February 05
Socialist Standpoint (Socialistisk Standpunkt), Denmark
Counter-attack (La Riposte), France
The Spark (Der Funke), Germany
Socialist Appeal periodical, In Defense of Marxism periodical, Great Britain, active inside Labour Party
Marxist Voice (Marxistiki Foni), Greece updated February 05
Shining Light (Cahaya), Indonesia
Iranian Revolutionary Socialists' League (Ettehadi-ye Sosiyalistha-ye Enqelabi-ye Iran, IRSL)
In Defence of Marxism, Israel
Spark (Iskra), Israel
Sickle Hammer (Falce Martello), Italy, active inside PRC
Militant (Militante), Mexico, active inside PRD
Struggle (Jeddo Judh) trade union wing, Pakistan
Socialist Left Force (Fuerza de Izquierda Socialista, FIS), Peru added February 05
Socialism (Socjalizm), Poland
Workers Democracy (Rabochaya Demokratiya), Russia
Insurgent Reason (Pobunjeni Um), mirror page, Serbia and Montenegro (close to CMI)
Forward! - Slovenian Marxist Circle (Naprej! - Stran Slovenskih Marksistov)
The Militant (El Militante), Spain
Militancy (Militancia), Spain/Andalusia added February 05
Marxist Left (Esker Marxista), Spain
Yesterday and Today (Onte e Hoxe), Spain
The Socialist (Socialisten), Sweden
Marxist Attitude (Marksist Tutum), Turkey
Workers International League (WIL), youth organization, USA
Revolutionary Marxist Current (Corriente Marxista Revolucionaria), Venezuela
International Secretariat of the Fourth International (Secrétariat International de la Quatrième Internationale)

Labour (O Trabalho), periodical O Trabalho, Brazil
Socialist Workers' Organization (Organización Socialista de los Trabajadores) youth organization, Mexico
Workers' Party of Socialist Unity (Partido Operário de Unidade Socialista, POUS), Portugal
Internationalist Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Socialista Internacionalista, POSI), Spain
"Struggle" Union (Soyuz "Borot'ba"), Ukraine added February 05
Socialist Organizer, USA
International Socialist Forum (ISF)

International Socialist League (Liga Socialista Internacional, LSI)

Socialist Workers Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PRT), Costa Rica
Workers Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT), Honduras
Revolutionary Workers Party (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores, PRT), Nicaragua
International Socialists (IS)
other page

Left Turn (Linkswende), Austria
International Socialist Organisation (ISO), Australia
Revolts (Revolutas), Brazil
International Socialists / International Socialism (International Socialists/Socialisme International), Canada
Workers' Democracy (Ergatiki Demokratia), Cyprus
Socialist Solidarity (Socialistická Solidarita), Czech Republic
International Socialists (Internationale Socialister), Denmark
Socialist League (Sosialistiliitto, SL), Finland
Socialism from Below (Socialisme par en bas), France
Left Shift (Linksruck), Germany
Socialist Workers' Party (SWP), Great Britain
Socialist Workers' Party (Sosialistiko Ergatiko Komma, SEK), Greece
Anticapitalist Alliance (Antikapitalistiki Symmachia), Greece
Socialist Workers Party (SWP), Northern Ireland
Communism from below (Comunismo dal basso), Italy
International Socialists (Internationale Socialisten), Netherlands
Socialist Worker, New Zealand
International Socialists (Internasjonale Sosialister), Norway
International Socialists, Pakistan added February 05
Workers' Democracy (Pracownicza Demokracja), Poland
International Socialist Organization (Organización Socialista Internacional, OSI), Puerto Rico
In Struggle (En Lucha), Spain
Antikapitalist (Anti-capitalist), Turkey
Revolutionary Socialist Workers Party (Devrimci Sosyalist Isçi Partisi, DSIP), periodical Sosyalist Isçi, Turkey
Revolutionary Left (Izquierda Revolucionaria), Uruguay
International Socialist Organization (ISO), Zimbabwe
Splits from International Socialists

Socialist Action Group (SAG), Australia, split from SA added May 05
Socialist Alternative (SA), Australia, split of ISO
Solidarity, Australia, split from ISO added May 05
New Socialist Group, Canada
Active Socialist Forum (Aktivt Socialistisk Forum, ASF), Denmark, split of IS
International Socialism (Socialisme International), France
Anti-capitalist Network (Antikapitalistisches Netzwerk), Germany, split from Linksruck
Group of International Socialists (Gruppe Internationaler SozialistInnen, GIS), Germany, Germany, split from Linksruck, now left communist updated February 05
International Socialists (Internationale Sozialisten), Germany, split of SAG, close to IS
Internationalist Workers Left (Diethistiki Ergatiki Aristera, DEA), Greece, split from SEK
International Socialist Organization (ISO), New Zealand, split from SWO, close to IS
International Socialist Organization (ISO), USA, ex-IS
Left Turn, USA, ex-IS
International Trotskyist Committee for the Political Regeneration of the Fourth International (ITC)

Revolutionary Internationalist League (RIL) auxiliary organization, Great Britain
Revolutionary Workers League (RWL), USA added February 05
International Trotskyist Labor Tendency (ITLT)

Workers Front Organization, Great Britain
Trotskyist Labor League (TLL)
International Trotskyist Opposition (ITO)

International Trotskyist Opposition, Denmark, active inside SAP
British Supporters of the International Trotskyist Opposition
Our Word (Unser Wort), Germany
Revolutionary Marxist Association "Communist Project" (Associazione Marxista Rivoluzionaria "Progetto Comunista"), Italy, active inside PRC
International Workers League (Fourth International) (Liga Internacional de los Trabajadores (Quarta Internacional), LIT-CI)

Socialist Worker Front, Frente Obrero Socialista (FOS), Argentina
Workers League, Australia
Unified Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista dos Trabalhadores Unificado, PSTU)
Movement for a New Socialist Party (Movimento por um Novo Partido Socialista), Brazil
Movement for Socialism (Movimiento por el Socialismo, MPS), Chile
Internationalist Socialist Group (Groupe Socialiste Internationaliste, GSI), France
International Socialist League (ISL), Great Britain
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Socialista, POS), Mexico
Workers' Party (Partido de los Trabajadores, PT), Paraguay added February 05
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PST), Peru
Breach/Front of the Revolutionary Left (Ruptura/Frente da Esquerda Revolucionária, Ruptura/FER), Portugal updated February 05
Internationalist Struggle (Lucha Internacionalista), Spain
Revolutionary Workers' Party - Revolutionary Left (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores - Izquierda Revolucionaria / Partit Revolucionari dels Treballadors - Esquerra Revolucionari, PRT), Spain
International Bulletin (Enternasyonal Bülten), Turkey
Workers Front (Isçi Cephesi) periodical Isçi Cephesi, Turkey
International Workers' Unity (Fourth International) (Unidad Internacional de los Trabajadores (Quarta Internacional), UIT)

Socialist Workers' Movement (Movimiento Socialista de los Trabajadores, MST), Argentina
Socialist Workers' Current (Corrente Socialista dos Trabalhadores, CST), Brazil
La Commune Group (Groupe "La Commune"), France
Union of the Working Class (Union de la Clase Trabajadora, UCLAT), Mexico
Internationalist Communist Union (Union Communiste Internationaliste, UCI)

Communist Union (trotskyist), [Workers Struggle] (Union Communiste (trotskyste), [Lutte Ouvrière], LO), France
Faction of Workers Struggle (Fraction de Lutte Ouvrière) periodical Convergences Révolutionnaires
Workers' Struggle (Combat Ouvrier), Guadeloupe/Martinique
The Spark, USA
League for the Fifth International (LFI)

Workers' Standpoint Group (Gruppe ArbeiterInnenstandpunkt, ASt), Austria
Socialist Workers Organization (Socialistická organizace pracujících, SOP), Czech Republic
Workers' Power (Pouvoir Ouvrier, PO), France, dissolved in 2003
Workers' Power Group (Gruppe Arbeitermacht, GAM), Germany
Workers' Power, Great Britain
Revolutionary Socialist League (Zväz revolucných socialistov, ZRS), Slovakia
Workers Power (Arbetarmakt), Sweden
League for the Fourth International

Fourth Internationalist League of Brazil (Liga Quarta-Internacionalista do Brasil, LQIB)
Internationalist Group (Groupe Internationaliste), France
Internationalist Group, USA
Liaison Committee for an International Conference of Principled Trotskyists and Revolutionary Internationalist Workers' Organizations

Revolutionary Marxist Committee (Marxist Trench) (Comitê Marxista Revolucionário (Trincheira Marxista)), Brazil
Workers' Oppostion (Oposição Operária), Brazil
Liaison Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International (LCMRCI)
Communist Workers Group (CWG), mirror page, New Zealand
Internationalist Trotskyist Faction - Fourth International (Fracción Trotskista Internacionalista - Cuarta Internacional) updated February 05

Internationalist Workers League (Fourth International) - Workers' Democracy (Liga Obrera Internacionalista (Cuarta Internacional) - Democracia Obrera), Argentina, split of PTS updated February 05
Fourth Internationalist Tendency (Tendência Quarta Internacionalista, TQI) updated February 05

Construction Committee for a Revolutionary Workers' Party (Comité Constructor por un Partido Obrero Revolucionario), Argentina
Trotskyist Faction (Fração Trotskista), Brazil
Liaison Committee for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International (Comité de Enlace por la Reconstrución de la IV Internacional, CERCI)

Revolutionary Workers' Party [Masas] (Partido Obrero Revolucionario [Masas], POR[Masas]) periodical Masas, Bolivia
Leninist-Trotskyist Tendency (LTT)

Workers Action, Great Britain
Movement (Movimiento)

Socialist Left Movement (Movimento Esquerda Socialista), Brazil
Socialist Workers Unity (Unidad Obrera y Socialista, UnioS!), Mexico
Permanent Revolution Collective (Collectif Révolution Permanente / Colectivo Revolución Permanente) added February 05

Bolshevik Group (Groupe Bolchevik) France
Germinal Group - In Defense of Marxism (Grupo Germinal - En Defensa del Marxismo), Spain
Posadist Fourth International added February 05

Revolutionary Worker's Party (Trotskyist) (Parti Ouvrier Révolutionnaire Trotskiste, POR(T) periodical Lutte Ouvrière, Belgium added February 05
Posadist Current of the Workers Party (Corrente Posadista do Partido dos Trabalhadores) periodical Revolução Socialista, Brazil added February 05
Revolutionary Communist Party (Trotskyist) (Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire (Trotskiste), PCR(T)) periodical Lutte Communiste, France added February 05
Revolutionary Workers Ferment (Fomento Obrero Revolucionario, FOR) other page

Socialism or Barbarism

Movement towards Socialism (Movimiento al Socialismo, MAS), Argentina
Socialism or Barbarism (Socialismo o Barbarie), Bolivia added August 04
Avanti!, France
Socialist Workers Party Tendency
Tendency around the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) of the USA
Periodical Militant

Communist League (Kommunistiska Förbundet) bookstore, Sweden
Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) periodical Militant, USA
Trotskyist Faction (Estrategia Internacional) (Fracción Trotskista (Estrategia Internacional), FT(EI)), European page

Workers' Party for Socialism (Partido de Trabajadores por el Socialismo, PTS), Argentina
Revolutionary Workers' League for the Fourth International (Liga Obrera Revolucionaria por la Cuarta Internacional, LOR-CI), Bolivia
Revolutionary Strategy (Estratégia Revolucionária), Brazil
Revolutionary Trotskyist Militants (Militantes Trotskistas Revolucionarios) periodical Clase contra Clase, Chile
Workers' League for Socialism - Against the Current (Liga de Trabajadores por el Socialismo - ContraCorriente, LTS-CC), Mexico
Trotskyist Posadist Fourth International

Revolutionary Workers' Party (Partido Obrero Revolucionario, POR), Uruguay added February 05
United Secretariat of the Fourth International (USFI)
Periodicals International Viewpoint, Inprecor, Inprekorr, Inprecor America Latina

Member Organizations

Socialist Workers Party (Parti Socialiste des Travailleurs / Akhabar Anemlay Nikhedamen /Hizb al-Ummal al-Ishtiraki, PST), Algeria
Socialist Workers' Party (Socialistische Arbeiders Partij / Parti Ouvrier Socialiste, SAP/POS), Belgium
Socialist Democracy (Democracia Socialista) periodical, Brazil
Freedom and Revolution (Liberdade e Revolução) Brazil
Socialist Left (Gauche Socialiste, GS), Canada/Quebec
Socialist Workers' Party (Socialistisk Arbejderparti, SAP), Denmark
Revolutionary Communist League (Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire, LCR)
Arguments for Socialism (Arguments pour le Socialisme)
Avanti!
International Socialism (Socialisme International)
Militant Debate (Debat Militant)
Workers Voice (Voix des Travailleurs, VdT)
International Socialist Left (Internationale Sozialistische Linke, ISL), Germany
Revolutionary Socialist League (Revolutionär Sozialistischer Bund, RSB), Germany
International Socialist Group (ISG), Great Britain
Organization of Communist Internationalists of Greece-Spartacus (Organosi Kommouniston Diethniston Ellados-Spartakos, OKDE-Spartakos)
Socialist Revolution Group (Groupe Révolution Socialiste, GRS), Guadeloupe/Martinique
Socialist Democracy, Ireland
Bandiera Rossa Association (Associazione Bandiera Rossa, ABR), periodical Erre, Italy
Socialist Convergence (Convergencia Socialista), Mexico
Socialist Alternative Politics (Socialistische Alternatieve Politiek), Netherlands updated February 05
Internationalist League of Norway (Forbundet Internasjonalen i Norge, FIN)
Revolutionary Socialist Political Association (Associação Política Socialista Revolucionária, APSR) periodical Combate, Portugal updated February 05
Political Education Workshop (Taller de Formación Política, TFP), Puerto Rico
Alternative Left (Izquierda Alternativa, IA) periodical Viento Sur, Spain
Collective for an Alternative Left (Col.lectiu per una Esquerra Alternativa, CEA), Spain/Catalonia
New Equal Society Party (Nava Sama Samaja Pakshaya, NSSP), Sri Lanka
Socialist Party (Socialistiska Partiet, SP), Sweden
Socialist Alternative / Solidarity (Sozialistische Alternative / Solidarität, SOAL), Switzerland
Sympathising Organizations

Socialist Democracy, Australia
Socialist Action, Canada
October Review Group (Shih Yueh P'ing Lun), English articles, China/Hongkong
Japan Revolutionary Communist League (Nihon Kakumeiteki Kyôsanshugisha Dômei, JRCL)
National Council of Internationalist Workers (Kokusaishugi Rôdôsha Zenkoku Kyôgikai), Japan updated February 05
Socialist Unity League (Liga de Unidad Socialista, LUS), Mexico
Militant (Al-Mounadhil), Morocco added February 05
Revolutionary Left Current (Nurt Lewicy Rewolucyjnej, NLR), Poland
Socialist Workers' Party (Partido Socialista de los Trabajadores, PST), Uruguay added November 05
Socialist Action, USA
Organizations including USFI supporters

New Socialist Group, Canada
Movement of the National Left (Muvimentu di a Manca Naziunale), France/Corsica
Association for Solidarity Perspectives (Verein für Solidarische Perspektiven), Germany
Movement for a Reunionese Alternative to the Neoliberal Order (Mouvement pour une Alternative Réunionnaise à l'Ordre Néolibéral, MARON)
Act Together/African Party for Democracy and Socialism (And Jëf/Parti africain pour la Démocratie et le Socialisme, AJ/PADS), Senegal
Alternative Space (Espacio Alternativo), Spain
Alternative Galicia (Galiza Alternativa)
Alternative Left (Izquierda Alternativa, IA) periodical Viento Sur
Alternative Space (Espai Alternatiu)
Andalusian Revolutionary Space (Espacio Revolucionario Andaluz)
Rainbow (Arcoiris)
Shock (Batzac)
Stand up (Zutik), Spain/Basque Country
Movement for Socialism (Bewegung für den Sozialismus / Mouvement pour le Socialisme / Movimento per il Socialismo, BFS/MPS) regional groups, Switzerland
Freedom and Solidarity Party (Özgürlük ve Dayanisma Partisi, ÖDP), Turkey
Labor Standard, mirror page, USA
Solidarity, USA
Others

Revolutionary Socialism (Socialismo Revolucionario), Argentina, split from PTS added February 05
Revolutionary Socialist League (Liga Socialista Revolucionaria, LSR), Argentina, split of MAS
Socialist Workers' Union (Unión Socialista de los Trabajadores, UST), Argentina
Democratic Socialist Perspective (DSP), Australia, ex-USFI
Workers' Liberty, Australia, linked to British AWL
Anti-fascist Left (Antifaschistische Linke, AL), Austria
Group for Revolutionary Workers Politics (Gruppe für Revolutionäre Arbeiter/innenpolitik, GRA), Austria
Working Group Marxism (Arbeitsgruppe Marxismus, AGM), Austria
Internationalist Bolshevik League (Liga Bolchevique Internacionalista, LBI), Brazil
<

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Marxism&#045;Leninism
Of course there are still parties today who claim to be Leninist and do not oppose other &#39;Leninist&#39; parties who have about the same views as them.

In the same country?

On very rare occasions, two Leninist parties within the same country will merge...but I haven&#39;t heard of such a thing (in the "west") in decades.

Let me re-phrase my point: within any given country, every Leninist Party considers itself the only "working class party"...no matter what other parties exist and regardless of the degree of working class participation in them.

This is the only (verbal) way that they can "square" their actual practice with that quotation from Marx about "not being sectarian".

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by RS
In the same country?

You&#39;re probably right about that, two Leninist parties in the same country who have the same views usually merge, logically.

So if today there are Leninist parties in a given nation that are not merged, guess what, they have opposing views, you didn&#39;t really discover anything new here.


Let me re-phrase my point: within any given country, every Leninist Party considers itself the only "working class party"...no matter what other parties exist and regardless of the degree of working class participation in them.


That is true, I don&#39;t see what is wrong with that though.

The Bolsheviks said they were the only working class party, and even though they were not the largest party in the country for quite some time, they turned out to be....the only working class party. Logically other Leninist parties also believe that one day they might &#39;take the lead&#39;.

If those parties are really Leninist, they probably will.


This is the only (verbal) way that they can "square" their actual practice with that quotation from Marx about "not being sectarian".


That quotation from Marx was made over 130 years ago, things change, Communism in those days was a &#39;fixed theory&#39;, every Communist basically had the same view as the other, today however --as a result of the class-struggle over the past century-- many Communists have different views, sectarianism naturally arises out of this contradiction.

[red_che]

So why are there so many fucking Leninist parties and "Internationals"??

It is about the same question as to why are there so many people claiming to be communists while in fact they were not.

Like you, you claim to be communist and you have all the right to claim so. But your practice can determine if you really are a communist.

The same with these parties, a lot of them are genuine Leninist parties, and several are claiming to be. But the actual practice of these parties would determine if they are genuine communist parties.

And I agree with ML that if there were two or more Leninist parties in one country, the logical conclusion is that they will merge at some point in time. That is, if they are genuine Leninist parties.

Redstar:

The link you posted is just an editorial, not the pact as you claim to have been done. And it is even a bourgeois document. Nothing can be expected of that but to claim that the communists are giving in to the bourgeoisie.

And, even reading those articles, they did not show any deviation of Mao on the interest of the proletariat, whether by the Chinese peoples or by the entire proletarian class. They were just preliminary talks, nothing conclusive.

In fact, Mao, or the Chinese Communist Party, stressed and always mentions of the "peoples of the countries". Meaning, the CCP is putting the interest of the peoples of both countries, not the interest of the rulers of America.

[Famous Mortimer]

I think parties are vital, and the starter of this thread seems to be trying to justify his own lack of participation in any political process other than writing about it on the internet. Marx may have said those things, but hacking them out of their context makes the meaning they may have had horribly distorted. Why not use one of their many quotes on the need for a party which directly contradicts those? As for the other two theorists, the fact I&#39;ve been around the revolutionary left for almost a decade and had never heard of them until I opened this thread says everything you need to know about them.

Anyway. I&#39;m a member of a revolutionary party, and the reason we take part in elections, stand on street corners with newspapers, petitions, banners and the like, is because we understand that revolution isn&#39;t inevitable. Not all working class people think the same way I do at the moment and rejecting parties seems like cutting off my nose to spite my face- I only got involved in revolutionary politics because someone met me half-way, discussed my concerns and then explained how they thought on the issue. If we stand in elections, it&#39;s another tactic to meet people and get our message across- if we believe what we&#39;re saying is right, people will join us, slowly probably, but it will happen.

I&#39;m firmly with Trotsky on this one, which I assume from reading some more of this forum will make me moderately unpopular here. United fronts are the way to go, people. Rejecting parties because Marx said something 150 years ago is just a bit daft.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Famous Mortimer
Anyway. I&#39;m a member of a revolutionary party, and the reason we take part in elections, stand on street corners with newspapers, petitions, banners and the like, is because we understand that revolution isn&#39;t inevitable.

I see. If it were not for Leninists -- the British S.W.P. in particular -- then capitalism would last forever&#33;


United fronts are the way to go...

...back to the bourgeoisie. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif