The Revolutionary Communist Party USA

[Herman]

I'm not very well informed about the RCP USA and what it does. I mean, i've visited their website, read many things, etc, but I haven't seen it in action, you know. So to anyone who belongs in the RCP or has witnessed this party in action, what can you tell me?

Try to be as objective as you can though. Mention both bad and good things, even if you hate the RCP with all your soul or you completely disagree with them.

[Leo]

I think they are mostly active in the Not in Our Name and World Can' Wait campaigns.

[NewEast]

They have an ugly cult of personality around their leader, but they run a neat newspaper.

[Janus]

RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43277&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
Of all the leftist parties, we've probably discussed the RCP the most.

RCP? (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=62558&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party)
RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=66128&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
Bob Avakian (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=59867&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
Avakian (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51542&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=48572&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43391&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)
RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=42479&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party++avakian)

In fact, there's an ongoing discussion right now in this very forum:
RCP (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=65263&hl=+revolutionary++communist++party)

[Rawthentic]

I will try to be objective, but no promises. :D

The RCP has been around for about 32 years I believe, founded by Bob Avakian, a Berkeley graduate who hung around the Black Panthers for a while and the Peace and Freedom Party.

One of my main criticisms is the "fight for the middle", which under the disguise of "uniting all who can be united", they pander to the petty-bourgeoisie as an ally of the proletariat, even though Marx and Engels were very much against this. Also, they put political line above class background, and claim that it doesnt matter what class you belong to, as long as you somehow hold a "proletarian line."

Actually, I've looked at the other threads, and never mind this, those threads sort of confirm what I talk about.

[Ander]

Originally posted by Voz de la Gente [email protected] 20, 2007 04:44 pm
One of my main criticisms is the "fight for the middle", which under the disguise of "uniting all who can be united", they pander to the petty-bourgeoisie as an ally of the proletariat, even though Marx and Engels were very much against this. Also, they put political line above class background, and claim that it doesnt matter what class you belong to, as long as you somehow hold a "proletarian line."
I don't much like the sound of the RCP however I have to call you out on this one as a pretty narrow point of view.

I'm definitely not a proletarian; I'm petty bourgeois (aka middle class). Does that mean I'm no comrade of yours? It's not my fault I was born into a family where I have the privilege of living comfortably.

By the way, you may have forgotten but Engels wasn't much of a proletarian himself ;)

[Rawthentic]

Its not narrow. What Marx and Engels said is that petty-bourgeois who wanted to join a proletarian party needed to shed their petty-bourgeois outlook, and thus at the same time shed their class background. (Being determines conscience remember?) And its no excuse to say that because Engels was no proletarian, that we should members from the exploiting classes join. Engels very well understood proletarian self-organization and emancipation.

I do consider you a comrade of mine.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 10:42 am
I'm not very well informed about the RCP USA and what it does. I mean, i've visited their website, read many things, etc, but I haven't seen it in action, you know. So to anyone who belongs in the RCP or has witnessed this party in action, what can you tell me?

Try to be as objective as you can though. Mention both bad and good things, even if you hate the RCP with all your soul or you completely disagree with them.
I'm a supporter of the RCP-USA, The RCP aims to create a mass revolution in the belly of the beast. If you really want to know generally about the parties goals and programme, you should read the Draft Programme located online here (http://revcom.us/margorp/progtoc-e.htm) and can be bought at any Revolution Books Outlet. The RCP is one of the most active parties and one of the few groups which really oreintates itself around inner city proletarian youth with its Youth Arm, the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade and or in other areas Revolution Youth Clubs. RCP supporters are active in every anti-war march rally, every free mumia event, every womyn's rights event, every event which is the embodiment of mass anger with the system. RCP supporters and members and volunteers active in these rallies get out the paper Revolution/Revolucion to the masses, but not just at these rallies, on the streets, in the schools and workplaces. The paper is I think the only communist weekly in the country, although I'm not sure, and it is makes constant exposures of the crimes of the capitalist system, while offering a revolutionary perspective that encourages the masses to rise up and build a whole new system based on meeting the needs of the people; socialism. Supporters and Members do the same in all their work. At the same time, the RCP works with alot of groups building mass resistance to the system and its products like the World Can't Wait, Refuse & Resist, October 22nd Coalition Against Police Brutality, and Not in Our Name. The RCP was very active in the actual founding of these groups.

On what Voz brings forward, The RCP's line is firmly that the proletariat must lead a United Front of Anti-Imperialist classes and it should attempt to win over as many people as it can to the revolution. In a society where class relations are so twisted as in the US, this is crucial to win the revolution, at the very least, the RCP attempts to win the middle strata to a friendly nuetral position because if the proletariat does not, then the revolution will be much, much, much more likely to fail and probably will considering the fact that there will be class traitors from the proletariat and the like

On what New East slanders, the RCP isn't a cult. Cults worship people, kill each other, and etc... just because the RCP has leadership that is necessary to inspire the masses and to plan revolution as well as constantly work to solve contradictions and problems that arise including fundamental questions like how to make a revolution, just because of that, doesn't mean the RCP is a cult. That is upsurd and pathetic. Would you call the Bolsheviks a cult because they promoted Lenin as leader of the party and his works as spot on? At least New East is spot on in regard to the paper. We use lots of pretty colors :D

[Rawthentic]

LeftyHenry some of what you said seems to go against Mao, who said: "There are two kinds of personality cults. One is a healthy personality cult, that is, to worship men like Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. Because they hold the truth in their hands. The other is a false personality cult, i.e. not analyzed and blind worship."

Notice he uses the word "worship".. but wait, not all worship is good, just worship based on "analysis"? :wacko:

And so, which one is Avakian, the worship based on "analysis?" Does anyone else see the contradiction here?

But one thing I will have to give to the RCP is that they are very active and have a lot of members, and after 32 years they better.

And about Revolution, its looks nice, I'll admit that, and is the only decent communist weekly, but thats just because The Worker [Communist] and El Obrero[Comunista] come out every 2 weeks. And plus, since we dont pay dues or go to petty-bourgeois neighborhoods to ask for funds its hard to make as many the RCP does as well.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Well first, I've always thought that quote was a bit interesting. I don't speak a word of Chinese but I always figured that that quote was a misinterpretation. The promotion and the party's actions revolving around Avakian are very much centered around analysis at every step. Not just holding discussions, but like deciding what section of a talk is best suited for a certain group of people and shit like that.

The RCP doesn't have any member dues, or supporter dues. Going to petty bourgeois neighborhoods is always a gamble with alot of contradictions which is why its done infrequently compared to the RCP's presence in proletarian neighborhoods.

[Rawthentic]

I dont think its fair to say that its a "misrepresentation" when its awfully clear that Mao tries to justify them. So, the RCP is Maoist, and which type of cult do they follow? Because, saying neither would be driving a bit of a wedge between Avakian and Mao.

[RNK]

The one major aspect of the RCPUSA that I admire is that they have cast aside any thought of simply being yet another reformist, do-nothing party that sits there, hopes to get elected, and generally does nothing to pursue a revolutionary outlook.

The one major aspect of them that I utterly despise is the massive issue of Avakian's role in the party (or, one could say, the Party's role to Avakian).

But I do believe the RCP, perhaps more than any other Party, has more of a chance of actually getting things "done". Time will tell.

[Janus]

Off-topic posts have been merged with the discussion on the Communist League.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

The RCPUSA has good merits, I'll give them that. They are active, especially in the World Can't Wait campaign. They've done alot, and their newspaper looks good. However, I have two major criticisms of the RCPUSA: It's cult of personality, and how it doesn't operate on a proletarian only policy. Avakian is held up as infallible, and petty bourgeois are allowed in as well as proletarians.

[Rawthentic]

Vlad, no offense, but when you make that criticism, it will shift to the League again, and I don't want to have to go through the whole process of defending us again.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

As I have previously said off of Revleft, it would've done that anyways, no matter what.

[Leo]

Vlad, no offense, but when you make that criticism, it will shift to the League again

Well, it is bound to when the only major criticism other than the cult of personality is them not operating according to the proletarian only policy.

[Rawthentic]

Oh, thats not the only criticism.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 26, 2007 10:20 pm

Vlad, no offense, but when you make that criticism, it will shift to the League again

Well, it is bound to when the only major criticism other than the cult of personality is them not operating according to the proletarian only policy.
I said main criticisms&#33; I have more, but I didn&#39;t post them&#33; <_< Ah well, I&#39;ll do it anyways.

-Your leader has too much power. I know you practice democratic centralism, however it&#39;s more centralist than democratic in your party.
-You don&#39;t have a revolutionary branch to your party, like Lenin&#39;s Red Army.
-The RCP is too sectarian, only allowing Maoists.
-Your leader practices commandism, a revisionist trait.
-You talk too much about Avakian&#33; TALK ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE FOR PETE&#39;S SAKE&#33;

There. Five complaints. A complete list, for every list needs a #5. :D

[Rawthentic]

You don&#39;t have a revolutionary branch to your party, like Lenin&#39;s Red Army.
Who does? I mean, the League has the WSDC, but its not even starting to operate yet. Lenin&#39;s Red Army was not a "branch" to the Bolsheviks, and especially not before the Revolution. I also might add that the Worker&#39;s Self Defense Corps is not an army.


The RCP is too sectarian, only allowing Maoists.
They allow whoever, in the process making Maoists out of them.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by Voz de la Gente [email protected] 26, 2007 10:40 pm

You don&#39;t have a revolutionary branch to your party, like Lenin&#39;s Red Army.
Who does? I mean, the League has the WSDC, but its not even starting to operate yet. Lenin&#39;s Red Army was not a "branch" to the Bolsheviks, and especially not before the Revolution. I also might add that the Worker&#39;s Self Defense Corps is not an army.
I couldn&#39;t find better words to describe it. What I was trying to say is that the RCP-USA, like all the other "official" communist parties have no true interest in starting a revolution. Where&#39;s their revolutionary activity? They&#39;re still into just "recruiting" (yes, granted, so is the League, but we&#39;ve only been around for three years. They&#39;ve been around for over 25 years), not class warfare.

[Rawthentic]

They sincerely are for revolution, and are very active politically. And we don&#39;t recruit in the League for the sake of numbers.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by Voz de la Gente [email protected] 26, 2007 10:49 pm
They sincerely are for revolution, and are very active politically. And we don&#39;t recruit in the League for the sake of numbers.
I didn&#39;t say we recruit for numbers.

All I&#39;m saying is that they&#39;re powerful enough to start their People&#39;s War. I mean, groups like the RAAN are doing something to disrupt the system at the local level (though it&#39;s severely debatable wether or not destroying 150 parking meters can be considered &#39;revolutionary activity&#39;, we can give them credit for doing something against the bourgeoisie in an at least semi-militant manner.), why can&#39;t the RCP destroy some bourgeois property? Why can&#39;t they be active not only in protesting, but disrupting the system physically like destroying those parking meters or something? Sorry if I can&#39;t post for a while, I get the giggles whenever I think of the 150 destroyed parking meters. :P

[RNK]

A) They&#39;re not anarchists (LOLWTF)

Kidding. But seriously, do you expect the RCP would be anouncing every act of civil disobedience, vandalism and violence committed by its members? Not unless they want their members being harassed and arrested.

Just because you can&#39;t see it doesn&#39;t mean it doesn&#39;t exist. ;)

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 11:46 am
A) They&#39;re not anarchists (LOLWTF)

Kidding. But seriously, do you expect the RCP would be anouncing every act of civil disobedience, vandalism and violence committed by its members? Not unless they want their members being harassed and arrested.

Just because you can&#39;t see it doesn&#39;t mean it doesn&#39;t exist. ;)
...
Never thought of it that way. :mellow:

[AmbitiousHedonism]

Just because you can&#39;t see it doesn&#39;t mean it doesn&#39;t exist. ;)

Just because we can&#39;t doesn&#39;t mean it does, either.

[redwinter]

On the military strategy of the RCP,USA, I&#39;d recommend checking out the Party&#39;s draft programme (available online at http://revcom.us/margorp/).

Here are some excerpts from the draft programme (specifically the section "Revolution Means Waging People&#39;s War") that I think might shed some light on the topics being discussed:


.... In ordinary times in the imperialist countries, the conditions for launching a revolutionary war do not exist.

In these countries, the launching of the revolutionary war depends on the eruption of a revolutionary crisis in society as a whole, including serious dissension and contention within the ranks of the ruling class over how to rule and ?maintain control.? Further, revolutionary war must rely on a revolutionary people?proletarians, and other oppressed people, in a combative mood, busting loose in massive upheaval, where increasing numbers of them are ready to ?put it on the line? for a different future. And there must be large sections of middle strata no longer willing to accept the ruling class? program, and who could potentially be won over as allies to the revolutionary cause.

Building on all the political organizing and the struggle of the masses that has taken place during the entire period preceding the development of the revolutionary situation, the party can lead the masses to seize on the eruption of such a revolutionary crisis: to forge a revolutionary army and to wage a revolutionary war. This war must take the form of mass armed insurrections?in a number of major cities, at relatively the same time?leading to the establishment of a revolutionary regime in as much of the territory as possible, and then the waging of civil war to finally and completely defeat the old ruling class and its counterrevolutionary forces and consolidate the new revolutionary power over a much greater territory.

Serious About Winning&#33;

In their typical arrogant contempt, the ruling classes think of, and portray, uprisings against them in terms of ?unruly mobs,? without political consciousness and disciplined organization, or as the actions of small bands of ?terrorists? cut off from the masses of oppressed people and having no support among them. But an actual armed uprising?one that has a real chance at winning?cannot be either of these: it would have to be firmly based among the masses of the oppressed, and would have to draw in thousands, tens of thousands, and ultimately millions of them in various forms of combat and support activity.

Revolutionary war in a country like the U.S. would mean going up against a power structure that has a large, well-equipped military, with an advanced communication and support system and massive amounts of technology and weaponry at their disposal. It would mean defeating an army that would be prepared and willing to bring down mass destruction and suffering on the people. Winning would require waging an all-out struggle to defeat and shatter the armed forces of the enemy, smash and dismantle their apparatus of repression, and consolidate power.

When the revolutionary opening comes the people?s army would need to strike, launching the armed insurrection and holding nothing back, going on the offensive in an all-out battle for the seizure of power. It would need to ?hit them? in such a way that the whole power structure could be ?cracked? and be dealt paralyzing and decisive blows. It would need to bring to bear the strength of millions of the oppressed, leaping at the chance, at long last, to bring down their heartless oppressors?and organized into actual military formations and effective fighting forces, under the leadership of the proletarian vanguard.

This revolutionary armed force of thousands and millions would need to be wielded to strike concentrated and coordinated blows at the enemy forces?so massively and decisively that they are immediately set back, with some of their key units and formations overwhelmed and shattered. It would be crucial then to maintain and step up the revolutionary offensive, giving the enemy no breathing room but instead continuing to overwhelm, defeat and disintegrate its armed forces.

It would mean continually forging more battle-tested troops and more powerful military formations among the revolutionary armed forces. It would require relying on the masses for intelligence, logistical support, etc., while also making use of weapons and other equipment captured from the enemy, as well as enemy troops who come over to the people?s side, integrating them into the developing fighting forces of the proletarian revolution.

It would be necessary to quickly link up the territories ripped away from the counter-revolutionary forces, consolidating these territories into a new revolutionary regime. This would serve as the base for waging the civil war to finally defeat the remaining forces of the imperialists and their allies. The more the revolutionary war of the masses advanced in this way, the more people, including intermediate forces, would be won to the side of the revolution and away from supporting the imperialists and their counter-revolutionary war.

Proletarian revolution cannot be conceived of as an ?armed general strike? or as a mass movement that gradually builds, draws in the majority of society, and eventually overwhelms the enemy. An actual armed insurrection would likely begin with a minority, made up of the most advanced forces in society, although this insurrection would actively involve millions.

In fact, one of the distinguishing features of the insurrection?and still more of the civil war?would be that, to a large degree, the reserves for the revolutionary side are found among people who are at first not actively involved, or who might be in the camp of the enemy at the start. The ?drawing in? of many of the previously neutral or inactive forces, or those who were originally on the other side, to actively join and/or support the revolutionary armed struggle will be vital to the success of the revolution.

And the winning over of troops from the other side?through the combination of fighting and defeating them on the battlefield, as the main and decisive thing, and at the same time appealing to their basic interests as part of the oppressed masses ?is also a vital part of revolutionary warfare. These characteristics are factors that give an insurrection a chance of winning when it may well appear on the surface that there is no such chance at all.