The PAB vs the RCP

[Nilats]

After reading the posts here, I have noticed how many have questioned the need for a new party, being that there are other revolutionary parties in existence. However upon a closer examination, we think you will find that they are all massively flawed, with old leadership, old ideas, bankrupt strategies and are not connected to the working class even after so many years of being in existence.

The CP-USA for instance is entirely reformist it says to vote for the Democrats. The DSA is also reformist and isn't even a real party just says it will actively support the "progressive" Democrats. These two "socialist" parties are clearly not options for the serious activist or the serious revolutionary.

Which brings us to the RCP. The Revolutionary Communist Party headed by Chairman Bob (What about Bob? lol) Avakian. This party has set up a number of front groups like the WCW which is reformist in nature and says to fight the BUSH regime (not capitalism, not the ruling class, not both capitalist political parties)

The RCP has been around for decades and we ask - to what end? Where has it gone? What has it done? The answers, sadly, are very little.

First strike - it is Maoist which is a philosophy while can be useful to third world countries like China in the 1950s has no relevancy for first world advanced capitalist states like America.

Second strike - Its leader Chairman Bob Avakian is now living in France, exiled, and is quickly becoming burnt out and less radical as old age progresses. His views remain stagnant and his strategies remain dormant and ineffectice.

By contrast, the PAB also has a leader, a Chairman, who is currently living in the United States and is able to effect things much more directly. He is young and inspirational, he is ready to challenge old ideas, old ways and old strategies and develop new ones. I alert readers to his "The Question of Leadership" which is a major contribution to Marxist theory.

Third Strike - After decades of being around, it is sadly , still largely ineffecive, with little to no working class support with mostly "yuppies" and upper middle class people forming its ranks. Its opportunism, lack of clear strategy and clear goals are keeping it from being the revolutionary party it could be. Finally its lack of leadership is also making sure that it will stay that way.

Although this may be viewed as a sectarian attack, it really is not. We know that many rank and file members of the RCP are good people and revolutionaries, but the problem is, its leadership is bankrupt and its strategies and theories have been ineffectice.

We urge those serious revolutionaries and all serious revolutionaries of course to abandon failed parties and reformist parties claiming to be socialist and consider joining the Party of American Bolsheviks - a new party with new leadership and new ideas of making radical, socialist change.

[RevolutionaryMarxist]

The sad thing is that nearly all socialist parties in the united states currently fly under the banner of reformism, especially parties like CPUSA, which have actually lost support because of their reformism.

People see "Communist" and automatically see revolution, and Anti-Communists would never join it. Communists see "Communist" and then they see the reformist platform, then they don't join it either. So in the end all you have is a bunch of Social-Democrats.

[Enragé]

the problem with the RCP is that its an authoritarian organisation with a leadership-cult-thing

the PAB has the same problem
in addition to the fact that it has 2 members, the median age being 13

[YSR]

Or you could just see an internet-based political party.

[Cryotank Screams]

he is ready to challenge old ideas, old ways and old strategies and develop new ones.

With old, dogmatic, and worn out ideas? What sense does that make?

[Nilats]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2006 04:05 pm
the PAB has the same problem
in addition to the fact that it has 2 members, the median age being 13
what "fact? You know nothing about this organization. Stop pretending you do.

[Nilats]

Originally posted by Scarlet [email protected] 11, 2006 04:07 pm

he is ready to challenge old ideas, old ways and old strategies and develop new ones.

With old, dogmatic, and worn out ideas? What sense does that make?
Have you even read "The Question of Leadership" by Chairman MLS? I mean really read it, not just scroll to the bottom and yell at him for being a Marxist Leninist.

[Nilats]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2006 04:05 pm
The sad thing is that nearly all socialist parties in the united states currently fly under the banner of reformism, especially parties like CPUSA, which have actually lost support because of their reformism.

People see "Communist" and automatically see revolution, and Anti-Communists would never join it. Communists see "Communist" and then they see the reformist platform, then they don't join it either. So in the end all you have is a bunch of Social-Democrats.
I agree completely comrade. Thank you for writing a serious post, it is much appreciated. It is sad what the state of the "revolutionary" parties are in the United States, that is why the are all completely flawed and unacceptable to serious communists.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Nilats+November 12, 2006 02:07 am--> (Nilats @ November 12, 2006 02:07 am)
[email protected] 11, 2006 04:05 pm
the PAB has the same problem
in addition to the fact that it has 2 members, the median age being 13
what "fact? You know nothing about this organization. Stop pretending you do. [/b]
Mate, you dont have an organisation, stop pretending you do.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

The RCP has been around for decades and we ask - to what end? Where has it gone? What has it done? The answers, sadly, are very little.

First strike - it is Maoist which is a philosophy while can be useful to third world countries like China in the 1950s has no relevancy for first world advanced capitalist states like America.

Marxist-Leninist-Maoism does entail a peasant-proletariat revolution, but it puts forward many other ideas that are necessary in socialism. Like the idea that class struggle continues throughout socialism and that there is a need for a cultural revolution. A maoist revolution would be based and led by the proletariat and thus is still useful in the first world.



Second strike - Its leader Chairman Bob Avakian is now living in France, exiled, and is quickly becoming burnt out and less radical as old age progresses. His views remain stagnant and his strategies remain dormant and ineffectice.

The mass personality cult that the RCP has formed around Bob Avakian is rather
disgusting and is the reason why I'm not an RCP or RCYB member. Although in his defence, his talks are sometimes interesting.

Perhaps he has become more moderate but that is normal of a communist party in the US. We aren't in anything resembling a revolutionary age, and the only way to atract members is through a more moderate agenda. The RCP is less moderate than other socialist parties like the SEP, SWP, and CPUSA, but still manages to be one of the larger socialist parties in the US.

Their activity in the WCW is also something I don't like very much, but it probably will gain them more respect and more following among leftists.


Third Strike - After decades of being around, it is sadly , still largely ineffecive, with little to no working class support with mostly "yuppies" and upper middle class people forming its ranks. Its opportunism, lack of clear strategy and clear goals are keeping it from being the revolutionary party it could be. Finally its lack of leadership is also making sure that it will stay that way

hmm... well what is the PAB made of lol? How many members does it have? I don't think it's in the position to criticize other parties and their base support :lol:

[Cryotank Screams]

Have you even read "The Question of Leadership" by Chairman MLS?
Yea, and it wasn't new or inventive, it was basically a Left leaning rehashing of mussolini set to Marxism-Leninism, with his talk of autocracy, and such; his view on the role of the leader, and leadership shows nothing but an exhaltion of what a leader and leadership has been in the past.

He should have said master instead of leader, because that is what he was talking about.


and yell at him for being a Marxist Leninist.

I didn't, I attacked what he said, quite using the same old scape goat.

[Demogorgon]

If this is a joke, then it is a good joke. otherwise heaven help us, we have some real life Wolfie Smiths here :lol:

[The Feral Underclass]

The PAB is just some teenagers wet dream lived out on the internet. It has nothing to do with real life activism and should be ignored.

[Sean]

The PAB is just some teenagers wet dream lived out on the internet. It has nothing to do with real life activism and should be ignored.

We've all been there to some degree surely?

[YSR]

I dunno. I didn't start a political party and then refer to myself as the Chairman all the time before I got out of my hicktown.

I mean, but that's just me.

[Nilats]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2006 04:14 pm
hmm... well what is the PAB made of lol? How many members does it have? I don't think it's in the position to criticize other parties and their base support :lol:
But you forgot to read the first part: After decades of being around.. The PAB is still just beginning to form, the RCP has been around as an established political party for over 30 years; we expect them to be a lot stronger than a party which has hardly gotten everything together yet.

This thread was to establish why a new party, a new movement is necessary and why the old ones are inadequate. Of course they are going to be bigger than us at this early stage, that's unavoidable. While we don't have a mass movement of the working class right now, if we didn't have on in 30+ years like the RCP, I'd call for the party to be disbanded. That's an absolute disgrace.

But saying well you have no right to criticize X party until your party is as big is like saying none of us have a right to criticize the Democratic Party; after all they have lots and lots of members, far more than any revolutionary party does, including members of the working class. So should we not criticize the Democrats cause we aren't as big as they are? Or should we point out their failures, their shortcomings, and then make the case why a new party (and thus, at the beginning at least, a much smaller one BUT one armed with the right ideas and the right tactics) is necessary.

[Xiao Banfa]

*Yawn*. The RCP is grounded in the real world. The "PAB" is a nonsense stalin kiddie internet wanker site.

[Red October]

nilats, if you're proud of your party, why dont you answer the question? how many members do you have? and how old are you and the glorious chairman MLS? i freely admit that i'm only 15, but i dont start my own parties and pretend that i'm making major "groundbreaking" contributions to marxism.

[Vanguard1917]

Have you even read "The Question of Leadership" by Chairman MLS? I mean really read it, not just scroll to the bottom

Haha...!

The 'Nilats' name is a quite clever btw. I would have gone for Ninel to be honest, but that's just for petty political reasons. At least you didn't choose Top Lop.

[Janus]

I don't see how PAB is going to change the current disillusionment with such parties especially due to the doubts about its "membership".

Anyways, moved.

[Nilats]

Originally posted by Tino [email protected] 11, 2006 09:08 pm
*Yawn*. The RCP is grounded in the real world. The "PAB" is a nonsense stalin kiddie internet wanker site.
The RCP is grounded in nothing but a bizarre personality cult for what about Bob Avakian. For the past 30+ years it's been around it's almost meaningless with no large support. Thanks for ignoring all my points btw in a rather long post.

The PAB is very new and just started. I made this point in part to reply to others who asked me why a new party is necessary - and why the current ones are inadequate. By the way, as for "internet site" we don't even have our own webpage yet! :lol: This is the only site we have ever made ourselves known on because we respect it and respect some of the members on here.

The RCP has lots more websites than we do, maybe they should be called an internet site based on how little support they have and how many websites they own!

[Redmau5]

The RCP is grounded in nothing but a bizarre personality cult

And this coming from a Stalinist?

[An archist]

Originally posted by Nilats+November 11, 2006 04:07 pm--> (Nilats @ November 11, 2006 04:07 pm)
[email protected] 11, 2006 04:05 pm
the PAB has the same problem
in addition to the fact that it has 2 members, the median age being 13
what "fact? You know nothing about this organization. Stop pretending you do. [/b]
hmm, I wonder why that's so.

[ZACKist]

Fuck, do I hate sectarianism.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

The RCP is grounded in nothing but a bizarre personality cult for what about Bob Avakian. For the past 30+ years it's been around it's almost meaningless with no large support.

That is one of the things a despise about the RCP, aside from that and their support for the World Can't Wait shit, I agree with pretty much everything.


But saying well you have no right to criticize X party until your party is as big is like saying none of us have a right to criticize the Democratic Party;

I never said you had no right.

I said you are in no position to criticize the base, especially since the base of the PAB has acquired the reputation of a teenage internet cult.

[Zero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2006 01:16 am
Fuck, do I hate sectarianism.
QFT

[MrDoom]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2006 08:38 pm

The RCP is grounded in nothing but a bizarre personality cult

And this coming from a Stalinist?
:angry: How dare you speak out against Lord Comrade MLS! His endless contributions to the proletarian cause of Marxism-Leninism are like the sun in our hearts! Off to the gulag with you!

All hail Lord Comrade MLS, Stalin Reborn! o/ o/ o/
All hail Comrade Nilats, Mouth of Lord Comrade MLS and of Marxism-Leninism! o/ o/ o/

:blush:

[Zero]

Originally posted by MrDoom+November 13, 2006 03:02 am--> (MrDoom @ November 13, 2006 03:02 am)
[email protected] 12, 2006 08:38 pm

The RCP is grounded in nothing but a bizarre personality cult

And this coming from a Stalinist?
:angry: How dare you speak out against Lord Comrade MLS! His endless contributions to the proletarian cause of Marxism-Leninism are like the sun in our hearts! Off to the gulag with you!

All hail Lord Comrade MLS, Stalin Reborn! o/ o/ o/
All hail Comrade Nilats, Mouth of Lord Comrade MLS and of Marxism-Leninism! o/ o/ o/

:blush: [/b]
All Hail MrDoom! Secretary of Sectarian Sarcasm!

[RNK]

if you feel the PAB can contribute more to the Revolutionary cause, then you have my blessing. But be very careful not to alienate and make an enemy out of the RCP. Instead, focus on what you can do better, and offer alliance with the RCP to collaborate whenever possible. And don't make any more inflammatory posts attempting to demonize them in a very unremarkable way to try and get people to join you and not them. You're doing nothing but furthering the fracture and division and weakening of the Revolutionary movement when you act in this way, and for that reason, I do not respect you.

[emokid08]

Party of American Bolshevism?

Great, that's all we need-another authoritarian Lennie party! The original author's analysis of the RCP is correct, but if we want fresh new ideas or a new direction then we can't look back to 1917 Russia!

Maoists and Leninist are both alike: All they advocate is the changing of one group of tyrannical parasites to another. We don't need another cult of personality. Fuck Lenin! The working class doesn't need to be led or ruled over- we can liberate ourselves and build a new society together. All it takes is hard work, education, organization, and commitment.

:star: :AO: :A:

[Zeruzo]

This rant against the RCP is quite bull-shitish...
Every person in it's right mind can see that.
First of the fact the RCP exists for 30+ years next to the fact that they haven't made major differences in current day politics. And you're conclusion next to this, that the RCP would have failed. Shows how utopian you are, quite a materialist really :rolleyes:. You cant expect a party to just make changes like that, just for existing for a long period of time. The Communist party of China for example existed for many years before actually bringing about revolutionary change.

Next to that you talk about the 'personality cult' besides the fact that you're truly existing personality cult of yourself is far worse, it is not a personality cult as in they praise him in every way, shape and form. I dont know if you have ever talked to someone from the RCP but i doubt you did...
They are critical towards Avakian, and Avakian even tries to stimulate critical thinking within the party. The fact that the party tries to bring forward Avakian as the leader of the revolution is not really the smartest thing to do, but arguably not bad either, it wont scare away anybody except for the left-communists which wont join the RCP anyway.



First strike - it is Maoist which is a philosophy while can be useful to third world countries like China in the 1950s has no relevancy for first world advanced capitalist states like America.

This shows you haven't truly studied Maoism as an ideology. The most important parts of Maoism are the mass-line, the cultural revolution and the bourgeouisie within the party. There's more to it, but this is the basis, and it has nothing to do with a state being 3rd or 1st world. Of course Mao was for a peasants-proletarian alliance beceause the proletariat in China was not big enough to wage the struggle on it's own, thus needed an ally, which were the poor and middle peasants. This says nothing about Maoism, but about China's specific situation. Since capitalism could by then no more be proggresive the rule of the proletariat was required in order for the Chinese state not to degenerate.



Which brings us to the RCP. The Revolutionary Communist Party headed by Chairman Bob (What about Bob? lol) Avakian. This party has set up a number of front groups like the WCW which is reformist in nature and says to fight the BUSH regime (not capitalism, not the ruling class, not both capitalist political parties)

WCW is a front-group trying to kick out the Bush-regime which they see as a priority over beating capitalism, small changes are important too. Not just the big ones (Though the RCP doesn't appreciate these small changes too much in my opinion, that is they're problem and that is why they dont follow the mass-line anymore, which is a shame). It is the analyses of the RCP that the Bush-regime is fascistic, which is the reason it has to be beaten as a priority to beating capitalism. Whether this is a correct analyses or not... i dont know, cause i haven't studied the RCP's views on it. There was an article in the newspaper of the dutch communist party quite recently about the U.S. being fascistic now, so i'll read it and then look whether i agree with that analyses or not. But this does explain why they do it.



The CP-USA for instance is entirely reformist it says to vote for the Democrats. The DSA is also reformist and isn't even a real party just says it will actively support the "progressive" Democrats. These two "socialist" parties are clearly not options for the serious activist or the serious revolutionary.

The reasoning of the CP-USA is that capitalism isn't jet developed well enough, and that voting for the democrats lifts a part of the pain, since revolution isn't jet possible the democrats are the best choice of the two. I dont agree with this analyses, but trying to understand the analyses of a certain group is important before just randomly criticizing them. Showing they still believe in the revolution and are thus not reformist in the sense of the word, but revisionist.



Although this may be viewed as a sectarian attack, it really is not. We know that many rank and file members of the RCP are good people and revolutionaries, but the problem is, its leadership is bankrupt and its strategies and theories have been ineffectice.

No, it's theories were right, they just didn't use them... I mean, how many times did the RCP use the mass-line? Go to the people's try to actively improve they're situation through direct action? All they do is run some book-shops and scream on demonstrations, they dont actively try to change the situation of the working class.



The RCP has lots more websites than we do, maybe they should be called an internet site based on how little support they have and how many websites they own!

Thats not the criteria of an internet-party...



Third Strike - After decades of being around, it is sadly , still largely ineffecive, with little to no working class support with mostly "yuppies" and upper middle class people forming its ranks. Its opportunism, lack of clear strategy and clear goals are keeping it from being the revolutionary party it could be. Finally its lack of leadership is also making sure that it will stay that way.

They have pretty much working class-support, especially compared to you're party...
Most of the members of the party i've seen while visiting the U.S. were just plainly working-class...
The party does have a clear goal, but i doubt you've read Avakians works. On strategy i'm inclined to agree (Which you should consider to be an honor). And claiming the party lacks leadership is just laughable, Avakian is very charismatic and in my opinion a very good leader too, he makes clear understandable points of how things work, and why he believes what he believes. Unlike you're 'Chairman'.


Now, lets talk about YOU'RE party...



By contrast, the PAB also has a leader, a Chairman, who is currently living in the United States and is able to effect things much more directly. He is young and inspirational, he is ready to challenge old ideas, old ways and old strategies and develop new ones. I alert readers to his "The Question of Leadership" which is a major contribution to Marxist theory.
Young? As in 12?
Ok, lets not go there... other people did it already...
So, he is young and inspirational? Then why hasn't he inspired anybody jet, and is he totally un-convincing? Every single Marxist-Leninist is ready to challenge old idea's, old ways and old strategies, what is you're point? This is nothing 'brilliant'.
I also read his 'major contribution to Marxist theory', which isn't really a contribution... He just says there needs to be a leader that has more power the the central commitee... which is... stupid... It's of no use, if anything the power of leaders should be cut down, and the central commitee should be broadened... It's really not a major contribution, not even a minor one... It's microscophic, if anything...

Well, i guess... thats about as far as my rant will go...