Communist Party USA toils in Manhattan obscurity

[jacobin1949]

http://doantn.hnue.edu.vn/upload-images/article5196.jpg

Communist Party USA toils in Manhattan obscurity
-!-!-
By Kerry Burke
-!-!-
2002-02-21
-!-!-
Hardly a stereotypical Bolshevik, Sam Webb, the Communist Party USA chairman, says he wants to bring the party into the American mainstream. But first, he'll have to shake the legacy of Gus Hall.

-!-!-
Most passers-by barely notice the Unity Book Center. The titles in the window, however -- "Capitalism in Crisis," "Another World Is Possible" and "Russian Peasants' Soviet Power" -- aren't on any best-seller list. The storefront, inside a former family court building in Manhattan, is the public face of the Communist Party USA. Upstairs is the party's national headquarters.

Sitting in the cafeteria hidden behind the bookstore, Sam Webb, national party chairman, says he is not bothered by the party's obscurity.

"A disinformation campaign by the ruling class tied America's communist party to the now dissolved Soviet Union," said Webb confidently. "But we've adapted and will continue to change with the times."

Webb, 56, presides over a party whose most newsworthy figure, Gus Hall, died two years ago. The married father of two grown daughters, Webb is easygoing, bespectacled and a dedicated reader of The New York Times. Hardly a stereotypical Bolshevik, he says he wants to bring the party into the American mainstream. But first, he'll have to shake the legacy of Gus Hall.

"Hall's party came out of the struggles of the Great Depression, Franco and Spain, Hitler and World War II, " said Webb wistfully. "But that generation was getting old. We needed to make a transition -- not only at the top, but every level. We're still in the middle of it."

Over the four decades he led America's communists, Gus Hall was the party. The son of an impoverished Minnesota miner, Hall outlasted steel mill insurrections, World War II, McCarthy era imprisonment, Cold War isolation and even the dissolution of his beloved Soviet Union. Admitting to absolutely none of socialism's shortcomings, Hall remained a stalwart Stalinist right into the post-Communist world.

Even as the left's agenda became increasingly defined by feminism, environmentalism and gay activism, Hall demanded an international factory-worker-led revolution. He waxed nostalgically for the old Soviet bloc and called famine-stricken North Korea an "economic miracle." In 1994, the New York party splintered, with much of the membership bolting after Hall refused to step down.

It's Webb's job to pick up the pieces. He has to offer a viable political party to a public that barely knows it exists and without disowning communism's core principles.

Webb preaches "Bill of Rights Socialism," a phrase Hall coined but that Webb is trying to make currency. "Socialism in this country has to reflect American history, habits and traditions," he said on a recent morning at 9 a.m., an hour before the party's student employees and senior citizen volunteers arrived for work. "The Bill of Rights was attached to the Constitution because people wanted certain rights protected that weren't covered by the constitution as written over 200 years ago.

"We think those protections should continue in a socialist society, although we think they should be extended to include decent jobs, affordable housing and health care," he explained.

Since Webb's election, the party has also gone high-tech. Well, sort of. "Workers of the World, Log In!" invites the home page -- but the site's only features are excerpts from party publications and past convention speeches. One thing you can do, however, is join online. Workers at party headquarter could not provide accurate numbers for either site "hits" or new e-members.

Webb says there are over 15,000 communists nationwide -- down from a peak of 66,000 in 1939 -- although no independent figures exist. The majority, he said, live in New York City. The party's roughly 15 full-time employees, including its chairman, make the same $350 weekly salary, a paltry sum in a city where studio rents can start at $1,700 monthly. Webb lives on Manhattan's gentrified Upper West Side where he has a cut-rate sublet from a comrade.

Webb gets vague when asked how socialism will come to pass.

"Eventually the American people are going to -- based on their own experience, not imposed by us or anyone else -- realize that socialist society will be a better alternative than capitalism," he said in his gruff but gentle native Maine accent.

But Webb's media strategy will need some work. Victor Navasky, publisher of The Nation, a prominent weekly left-wing journal, said he had never heard of chairman Webb.

"My sense is that a party still exists," said Navasky. "And that they're putting on a brave front."
-!-!-
Communist Party USA Chair Sam Webb
-!-!-
Evelyn Fitzgerald

[KC]

Not surprising at all. Typical CPUSA garbage.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by Zampanò@November 10, 2007 04:49 am
Not surprising at all. Typical CPUSA garbage.
To top this crap off, the CPUSA expelled some of its members in Minneapolis for calling for the nationalization of a Ford plant.

[KC]

To top this crap off, the CPUSA expelled some of its members in Minneapolis for calling for the nationalization of a Ford plant.

They don't advocate communism. They advocate "socialism to replace capitalism as a better system."

What a bunch of knobs.

[RedJacobin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0yXXjJuyPE

Revisionist! Revisionist!

[YSR]

Nothing resembles the bourgeois as much as representatives of the proletariat.

[jacobin1949]

Club Educational Study Guide: on Reflections on Socialism by Sam Webb


Archive Education Educational Study and Discussion Guides

Author: CPUSA Education Commission


First published 08/02/2005 15:37 by {article_topic_desc}


Importance of Subject

Comrade Sam Webb has written a discussion paper, Reflections on Socialism. It deals with the key considerations in going from where we are to winning socialism and the key questions of the early period of its construction in the U.S. This paper opens a major discussion throughout the Party and with our friends. It is important to update our thinking on this subject both in terms of substance and methodology as they apply to our country. Doing so will help us become much more effective in building the Party and attracting people to socialism. It will also link our daily activity in the struggle for the needs of our class and people to defeat the ultra-right Bush Administration and their cohorts, with the road ahead to socialism. It is, therefore, most important for our entire membership and all our clubs to participate in the discussion.

Method of Conducting Club Educationals

We, therefore, urge every club to have at least two major club discussions on the paper. This guide is aimed at helping you accomplish that in the most productive way. It is most important that everyone receive Comrade Webb's paper and, if at all possible, read it completely through before the first of the two proposed club discussions. Each discussion should be planned for approximately an hour. Someone should be assigned to lead each discussion, and someone else to take notes. A copy of the notes should be sent in to the National Education Commission c/o the National Office ([email protected] or 235 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10011).

There are seven discussion questions below: 4 for the first session and 3 for the second. Approximately 15 minutes should be allotted for each of the 4 questions in the first discussion and 20 minutes for each of the three questions in the second discussion.

There are several methods that could be used to conduct the educationals. Pick that which suits your club circumstances best.

Method 1. Each discussion question (or a substitute you devise) is assigned to a different person to open up for 5-7 minutes and then the discussion leader chairs additional comments from the club. Then the discussion leader sums up where there is agreement, disagreement, and where there is the desire to have further discussion at some future time. The same process is repeated with each discussion question.

Method 2. The discussion leader opens up on each question for 5 minutes and then the same process is followed as in Method 1.

Method 3. No one is asked to prepare an opening on any given discussion question. Rather the discussion leader poses the question to the club members and chairs and guides the discussion on each successive question, etc. Of course, it is likely the discussion will be richer if the discussion leader or participants are asked to help by preparing a little opening on each question.

Discussion Questions

Session 1:
1. We fight for the daily needs of working people both as a matter of social justice and as necessary to be able to advance the struggle for socialism. We also believe it is possible to win some victories in these struggles. Comrade Webb gives reasons for the necessity of socialism in addition to those we have traditionally used. Why is socialism indispensable and necessary?

2. Comrade Webb lists important values that need to guide our struggles for progress and socialism. Why do we need values in the struggle? And where do the values of the Communist Party come from? Why does he list democracy as one of our most important values?

3. Comrade Webb argues that the working class must and will lead the struggle for major social progress and socialism. But he also argues this must be done in close alliance with other “core social forces”—namely the racially and nationally oppressed, women and youth. Then he argues the alliance that can and needs to be built to win socialism will be the broadest of all and can embrace all working people. Why can't some other class or social force or combination of them play the leading role for major social progress and socialism? Considering that each stage of the struggle takes on more advanced demands, why does Comrade Webb say the progressive front of struggle for socialism will be the broadest?

4. Comrade Webb argues the advance from where we are to socialism requires going from one strategic stage of struggle to another. In the present stage we seek to defeat the ultra-right, most reactionary sector of the transnationals. Progress in this stage of struggle will open the next stage of struggle where our main aim will be to radically curb the power of the transnational monopolies as a whole. Progress in this stage of struggle will open the door to the stage of struggle where our aim will be to achieve working people's power headed by the working class to construct socialism. What is the significance of our understanding of these different phases or stages of struggle? Why should we not just skip the intermediary phases and fight for a change in class power and the construction of socialism?

Session 2:
5. Marxism has always pointed to the necessity to win a qualitative change in class power from that of big capital to that of the working class in alliance with its allies in order to be able to build a socialist society. Comrade Webb suggests that change in power will likely be more than a single event at a single moment. Rather it is likely to be more complex and could be extended in time. Marx, Engels, and Lenin all preferred such a transition be achieved without civil war or significant violence—a peaceful transition. However, they considered the conditions for it could only be achieved rarely. Comrade Webb agrees that if it were only up to big capital such a peaceful transition would be highly unlikely. Under what conditions does Comrade Webb consider avoidance of violence a real possibility?

6. For many years Marxist textbooks defined socialism as "working class power, social ownership of the means of production, and planned economy." Why does Comrade Webb favor qualification of such a definition? The record of the socialist countries with respect to democracy is mixed. There are good experiences of going beyond the limits of what was won under bourgeois democracy, and there are experiences that deviated from the struggle to build truly democratic societies and hence are incompatible with socialist values. What approaches to the political structure and functioning of our country, including the role of the Communist Party, does Comrade Webb suggest so that there will be a flowering of democracy for working people and a full implementation of equality for the racially and nationally oppressed and women.

7. One of the conditions for socialist society to fulfill its high values is the rapid progress of its economy. The model of the socialist economy 20 years ago began suffering from a number of problems in comparison with the developed capitalist countries it had been overtaking. These included: an inability to introduce the results of science, research and development rapidly into production; wastage of input factors; production of consumer goods no one would buy; falling behind most advanced capitalist countries in productivity and technology. Among the approaches Comrade Webb suggests to overcome or prevent such problems are: combining the use of market mechanisms with central planning and regulation: using a variety of forms of social ownership of production and distribution, not only nationalization; ending all forms of unearned income, while paying for work performed according to its quantity and quality, until the communist stage is reached. Will these suggestions help avoid such problems? What else should be considered?

Click here to read or print Sam Webb's Reflections on Socialism

Don't forget to send in notes of your club's discussion and opinions to the National Education Commission: ([email protected] or 235 West 23rd Street, New York, NY 10011).

[Marxist Napoleon]

I really like Reflections on Socialism by Comrade Webb. And it's true, CPUSA doesn't talk about communism much. But they still do talk about it, they realize the steps necessary for communism in America, and the focus has to be on socialism right now. The CPUSA has taken a slightly-pragmatic stance, but I think they're a valuable contribution to the communist movement. And about the nationalization thing, yeah, it's bad that the comrades were expelled, but what were the details? You'd have to be crazy to think a company nationalized by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT would be any better for the workers than a privately-owned one. The call seems to be out of line with the Party's national strategy, so it doesn't seem entirely ridiculous.

[jacobin1949]

I don't love everything about the CPUSA either. But at least they are connected to the International Communist Movement including Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, and the Left party in Germany. And the greatest weakness of communism in America has been its depiction as something "foreign", so I think an appeal to patriotism is neccesary. The CPUSA was depicted as a bunch of old dinosaurs as early as the 1960s, yet the dinosaur is still lumbering on while all the youth groups of the 60s have died out.

[RedJacobin]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 03:03 pm
The CPUSA was depicted as a bunch of old dinosaurs as early as the 1960s, yet the dinosaur is still lumbering on while all the youth groups of the 60s have died out.
That is hardly an accurate description of the state of the left in the US. There are many groups that are active, including some that came out of the 60s, such as the RCP and the two FRSOs. There are also other groups like the PLP with roots in a split from the CP around the time Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin was publicized, as well as the WWP and PSL that grew out of Sam Marcy's brand of Trotskyism.

The CPUSA (if one can even consider them to be "of the left") doesn't just take a pragmatic stance. They are thoroughly revisionist and reactionary. They oppose the immediate withdrawal of imperialist troops from Iraq. The antiwar coalition that they lead (UfPJ) consistently plays a right-wing role in the antiwar movement. They create illusions in the Democratic Party among the people and illusions of a peaceful transition to socialism. Furthermore, as illustrated by the documents posted above, they oppose socialist planning in favor of market socialism. They also uphold state-capitalist China and consider Salvador Allende's Chile as an example to be emulated.

[Marxist Napoleon]

Do you have a source of the CP supporting the occupation of Iraq? They recently had an article claiming that the occupation was the biggest problem facing the Iraqi people. And they support Allende, because the Party tries to show that not all communists are crazy like Pol Pot. Chile is one example where socialism is clearly on the moral high ground against capitalism. Also, there's been some support for market socialism, but they certainly haven't abandoned the idea of central planning. The Party feels that the transition to socialism in the most capitalist country on the planet must employ the socialist market and central planning. And I don't care how much you hate the CPUSA; they're on the left. You can't deny that. A peaceful transition to socialism USA is what the Party wants, but if you ever read their website, you would know that they realize there will be struggle involved. They say that the violence starts with the capitalists, and if they resist the revolution, we will fight them.

[MarxSchmarx]

Aren't we beating a dead horse here? The CPUSA's days have passed it. It has proven itself irrelevant, impotent, and sad :(

Let's move on, leave the curators to play in their archival struggle. They have no viable plan, no realistic chance at success, and are sadly confined to the dustbin of history. Why does the serious left continue to bother with this joke of an organization?

[jacobin1949]

The Communist Parties of Yugoslavia, Japan, Germany, Vietnam and China all recognize the CPUSA as the vanguard party in the USA.

In pure numbers its by far the largest, and internally it has maintained strict Leninist discipline that has allowed it to survive into 2007.

I wont dispute attacks on its effectiveness, but FRSO, PLP and RCP aren't exactly leading a revolution either and are far smaller and less active. With the exception of FRSO all other Marxist parties adapt a hopeless nihilist notion that all existing socialist nations of the 21st century are revisionist. And as far as being effective only CPUSA members have ever held elective office or controlled unions. The NYC Transit Union was led by a CP member.

[Marxist Napoleon]

More importantly, Cuba maintains ties with the CPUSA. The CPUSA is a legitimate, revolutionary, Marxist-Leninist party. Why is the CPUSA the scapegoat? The Socialist Party and a handful of "social democratic" or Trotskyist groups are probablly way more reactionary. The CPUSA has every right to construct its own model for socialism in America.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Marxist Napoleon+November 14, 2007 07:17 pm--> (Marxist Napoleon @ November 14, 2007 07:17 pm) More importantly, Cuba maintains ties with the CPUSA. The CPUSA is a legitimate, revolutionary, Marxist-Leninist party. [/b]
The CPUSA is a reformist organization which until recently has run electoral candidates rather than back revolutionary change.

Now, they even endorse Dumocratic candidates. :lol:


Originally posted by Marxist Napoleon+--> (Marxist Napoleon)Why is the CPUSA the scapegoat?[/b]
Because they are reformist, revisionist, inefficient, out-of-touch, and frought with nepotism. They are the textbook example of what is wrong with leftist politics in America.


Marxist [email protected]
The Socialist Party and a handful of "social democratic" or Trotskyist groups are probablly way more reactionary.
No group has done as much damage to revolutionary politics in America than the CPUSA. When we have the revolution, if the CPUSA is still around, they will probably try to undermine the workers state, or inject themselves into it.


Marxist Napoleon
The CPUSA has every right to construct its own model for socialism in America.
What's even 'socialist' about the CPUSA?

They practice sham-Marxism-Leninism.

[Marxist Napoleon]

They endorse democratic candidates for practical reasons. My friend recently went to see a YCL representative at her university. Basically, the CPUSA recognizes that the democrats are not a people's party, but they can be influenced by the people, and they are the only major party that can be influenced by the people. The only feasible strategy, as far as I'm cocerning, is ending the war at all costs and getting universal heatlh care, while building a vanguard party and socialist movement. The Party calls for democratic control of the means of production, a workers' state, and a centrally planned economy; they're socialist.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Marxist Napoleon+November 14, 2007 08:28 pm--> (Marxist Napoleon @ November 14, 2007 08:28 pm) They endorse democratic candidates for practical reasons. [/b]
As do big business, reformist business unions, and so-called liberals.


Originally posted by [email protected]
My friend recently went to see a YCL representative at her university. Basically, the CPUSA recognizes that the democrats are not a people's party, but they can be influenced by the people, and they are the only major party that can be influenced by the people.
Oh, contraire...
In 2006 the Dumocratic Party told America it would pull us out of the Iraq boondoggle. We're still waiting.
They've taken NO action on practically ANYTHING since that election, and now they're pushing a right-winger like Hillary Clinton for 2008.

The Dumocrats listen to the people and IGNORE them, whereas the Repubicans don't listen at all. Doesn't seem like much of an alternative to me.


MN
The only feasible strategy, as far as I'm cocerning, is ending the war at all costs and getting universal heatlh care, while building a vanguard party and socialist movement. The Party calls for democratic control of the means of production, a workers' state, and a centrally planned economy; they're socialist.
About as socialist as the 20th Party Congress in the USSR. :lol:

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

And as far as being effective only CPUSA members have ever held elective office or controlled unions.

Wrong, members of lots of different parties have done both.


My friend recently went to see a YCL representative at her university. Basically, the CPUSA recognizes that the democrats are not a people's party, but they can be influenced by the people, and they are the only major party that can be influenced by the people.

Communists fight for the political independence of the working class. We don't support one capitalist party over another because it's "easier to influence," whatever that even means.

[KC]

In pure numbers its by far the largest

Really? What numbers are these? You mean the amount of people that go and sign up on their site, yet don't participate actively? I used to work with a local YCL circle, and we were the most active YCL circle in the country. "National conventions" had about 50 people, most of whom were relatively inactive, and many of whom sounded more like liberal democrats than revolutionary communists.

Plus don't even let me get into the hierarchical and bureaucratic, anti-working-class nature of the organization. Members shouldn't be harassed because they disagree with some low level bureaucrat over a minor financial discrepancy. They're a bunch of liberal "left" democrats whose only goal is to maintain their position of financial security through harassing active and committed members.

The CP is a joke; they're not communist, they don't focus on the class struggle, and they can go to hell.


and internally it has maintained strict Leninist discipline that has allowed it to survive into 2007.

No it hasn't. It's completely done away with democratic centralism; any cursory analysis of the workings of the organization shows this. They're a bunch of bureaucrats that dictate to the "lower-downs". Of course, the membership base doesn't really help its cause, which is generally impotent and not Marxist in any sense.


Now, they even endorse Dumocratic candidates.

Yeah, but they're not actually supporting them, they're just against the "neoconservative assault on freedom". :wacko:


They endorse democratic candidates for practical reasons.

There is no practical reason to endorse the bourgeoisie.


My friend recently went to see a YCL representative at her university. Basically, the CPUSA recognizes that the democrats are not a people's party, but they can be influenced by the people, and they are the only major party that can be influenced by the people.

And there your Marxist analysis goes out the window; the bourgeoisie can't be "influenced" by the people to any significant extent, and saying so is liberal trash.


The Party calls for democratic control of the means of production, a workers' state, and a centrally planned economy; they're socialist.

They call for it but they don't act towards it; that's a huge difference.

[jacobin1949]

Which Communist Party is bigger?

[Prairie Fire]

About as socialist as the 20th Party Congress in the USSR.

CPUSA is much less socialist then that. They were kruschevites, but now they've retrogressed further to straight-up liberalism/social democracy.

It's like the CPC in Canada, old school kruschevites who now endorse liberal/ social democratic intiatives, while thei ryouth wing refers to genuine communists as "ultra-left". The local CPC in my city is always involved in 9/11 truth commission shit (as if it matters,), and they consider JFK as a "progressive figure" and a fucking left-wing martyr (which I have called them on.) !

No one has taken CPUSA seriously since the days of Earl Browder, and his revisionism. Of couse sold out workers states like China and Vietnam would support this party, as it is so closely mirrors their own. While I am strongly in favour of rectification in CPUSA (and many other groups, they are nothing; labour aristocratic, liberal/social-democrat opportunists.

[KC]

Which Communist Party is bigger?

Tell us how big you think the CPUSA is and we can go from there (i.e. telling you you're wrong).

[jacobin1949]

They claim to have 15,000 members. Probably smaller. But I don't think PLP, RCP, WWP or the rest come close numbers wise.

[KC]

That would be the number of people that have gone to their site and "signed up" but aren't active at all. And it's highly exaggerated as well.

[RedCommieBear]

Originally posted by Zampanò

TOTAL MEMBERS: 243

WOMEN:76
MEN: 152
UNKNOWN:15

PEOPLE OF COLOR:112
WHITE: 99
UNKNOWN: 32

As far as how many people attended the national convention, I don't know. But according to this (http://www.pww.org/index.php/article/articleview/9067/1/320/), they raised $65,000 in one month to fund the convention, and another $60,000 was needed finish the funding.

Edit: Spelling

[jacobin1949]

I never denied the CPUSA was small, as are all Marxist parties in the west. But so far no one has denied its by far the largest by comparison.

[msucommie77]

so tell me then CPUSA haters, how would you plan on bring socialism to the US? defeating the republicans in '08? getting us out of the Iraq war? getting universal heathcare? getting the Employee Free Choice Act passed? and stopping Right to Work legislation?

i don't like the democrats (Kucinich is ok, minus his love of gun control), but how do you realistically hope to stop 4 more years of Republican fascist rule in the white house that will lead to more war abroad and on the working class at home?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

"Republican rule" is capitalist rule, plain and simple. We do not live under fascism.

Communists don't call everyone and everything they oppose fascism. Fascism has a very real meaning, and it's dangerous -- and disarming -- to throw the word around.

Anyway, what you call "Republican" rule is just as much "Democrat." The Democrats have a majority in the Senate (with Bernie and Joe) and House.

So why do we need to stop "Republican fascist rule"? How would it differ if the president was a Democrat?

Fundamentally, it wouldn't. Communists look at things in terms of class. The Demlicans and Republocrats are both capitalist parties. We live under a capitalist state. The duty of revolutionaries is to make revolutions, not to tie working people to a party of their exploiters.

The CPUSA has tricked people into supporting the capitalist Democrats for years by declaring every presidential election "the most important election in history." It's the Popular Front repeating itself, as Marx would say, this time as farce.

The Democrats won't stop war "abroad and on the working class at home." The Democrats are historically a war-mongering party, just like the Republicans. Have you heard of the Viet Nam War? The Korean War? Clinton's welfare cuts? The U.S. will be an imperialist country whether or not it has a Democrat for president.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 12:19 am
I never denied the CPUSA was small, as are all Marxist parties in the west. But so far no one has denied its by far the largest by comparison.
How could it be the largest "Marxist party" when it has rejected Marx's contributions?

[msucommie77]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 21, 2007 10:34 pm
Communists don't call everyone and everything they oppose fascism. Fascism has a very real meaning, and it's dangerous -- and disarming -- to throw the word around.


fine, it's not fascism, but it's working its way there. War Corporatism may be a better way to define it. Halliburton and various other war profiteering companies don't even have to compete for contracts in iraq, it's just handed to them by their friends in congress.

video on war corporatism:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12017.htm

14 points of fascism:
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm


from: http://toykeeper.net/soapbox/fascism


"Fascism: 1. A philosophy or system of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism." - The American Heritage Dictionary

"A dictatorship would be a lot easier." - G.W. Bush, Governing Magazine, 7/98.

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." - G.W. Bush, CNN.com, December 18, 2000

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it." - G.W. Bush, Business Week, July 30, 2001

Events / Examples


I hope to collect examples demonstrating the above concepts happening within the US in recent years. I know I've seen most of the things in this list happen at least a few times since Bush entered office, but I forgot what many of them were. Feel free to send me links and ideas, though. :)
Powerful and continuing nationalism
Dropping out of the United Nations was a nice touch, when they tried to actually be, um, ethical.

Disdain for human rights
One thing which comes to mind... the thousands of people in California who were put into concentration camps right after 9/11. Not only does it violate several basic human rights, but it's a tactic straight from Hitler. No dogs or Palestinians allowed?

Don't forget that Bush made a new record for executions when he was governor of Texas.

Identification of enemies / scapegoats as a unifying cause
This should be obvious, but apparently many people still don't know that there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. So, tell me again why it was that the US forcefully invaded Iraq, and still continues to fight for control over it?

Supremacy of the military

Rampant sexism

Controlled mass media
Oi, there are a lot of examples here, if only I can find them again. They are, by their nature, not well-publicized.

Obsession with national security
This one should be obvious. I mean, have you seen the amount of "terror alerts" in the past few years, or paid any attention to military spending?

Religion and governmment intertwined
Bush appeals primarily to two groups of people: the rich, and the religious right. Now, there's nothing innately wrong with that, but a lot of people don't understand separation of church and state, and Bush uses that to his advantage by encouraging national political decisions based on religion rather than reason.

Whatever happened to the proposed laws banning gay marriage? And why should a religious belief be anywhere near the government? For that matter, I'd rather that marriage was handled strictly at religious or personal levels, leaving the government to deal only with civil unions.

Corporate power protected
Remember how, right after Bush entered office, the DoJ antitrust case against Microsoft was suddenly dropped?

Labor power suppressed
Unemployment sure reduces the power of the people, and Bush reigned over the biggest recession since the 1930's Depression. Just an observation.

Disdain for intellectuals and the arts

Obsession with crime and punishment
One thing which comes to mind is the thousands of people in California who were put into concentration camps right after 9/11.

Rampant cronyism and corruption
Enron is a good place to start. You can bet Bush would have done the same thing if he was in Ken Lay's place, and clever enough to think of it.

The events involving Cheney, Halliburton, and the oil fields smell sharply of corruption too. No, strike that -- it's downright obvious: Halliburton's former CEO, who still receives a hefty Halliburton salary, invaded a country, seized control of extremely valuable resources, and handed them over to his former company (along with a huge bonus check). Was he acting in the best interest of the US (and the world), or was he just pulling a massive greedy heist?

Fraudulent elections
To start with, there's the obvious example: Bush lost the election in 2000, yet got into office anyway.

So, what does this all prove? Nothing, really. Remember that the plural of anecdote is not data. However, it should also be noted that leaders should use their power wisely, not widely. Hopefully the contents of this page will be sufficient to help a few people question authority and raise a few eyebrows about what's been going on lately.

[msucommie77]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 21, 2007 10:34 pm
Anyway, what you call "Republican" rule is just as much "Democrat." The Democrats have a majority in the Senate (with Bernie and Joe) and House.

So why do we need to stop "Republican fascist rule"? How would it differ if the president was a Democrat?
uhhhh, you must have missed Bush's vetoes or threats to veto progressive legislation.

the Democrats aren't the answer to the problem, but who would you rather have in the white house?

a Democratic president and Congress would differ from our present situation, in that there would be an end to domestic spying, the PATRIOT Act, the war, etc. Progressive Legislation such as single payer health care, The Employee Free Choice Act, and various other could get passed.

once again, what is your solution to the '08 elections?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

uhhhh, you must have missed Bush's vetoes or threats to veto progressive legislation.

What kind of reformist nonsense is this?

Any gains made by workers are made through struggle, no matter which of the two capitalist parties controls the white house, house and senate.

The Democrats aren't some charitable group that helps workers out of the goodness of their hearts.

When something is pushed through that can benefit workers, it is either the result of struggle on behalf of the workers, or a strategic move by the capitalists.


War Corporatism may be a better way to define it. Halliburton and various other war profiteering companies don't even have to compete for contracts in iraq, it's just handed to them by their friends in congress.

That's capitalism. And it won't change a bit if a Democrat is in the White House.

Remember too that Bill Clinton laid a lot of the ground work for the police state measures enacted under Bush.


the Democrats aren't the answer to the problem,

But that doesn't stop you from supporting them.

The truth is the Democrats are a part of the problem.


a Democratic president and Congress would differ from our present situation, in that there would be an end to domestic spying, the PATRIOT Act, the war, etc. Progressive Legislation such as single payer health care, The Employee Free Choice Act, and various other could get passed.

You're either delusional or having been paying attention. The Democrats backed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They also backed the Patriot Act. They haven't even tried to end the war or revoke the patriot act since gaining control of the House and Senate. None of the leading Democratic presidential candidates plans to end the occupation in Iraq. They all want to keep up the attacks on Iran and fight for counterrevolution in Cuba.

Any "universal healthcare" brought into being under a Democratic president will be oriented to maintaining, and even expanding the profits of the insurance corporations.

The Employee Free Choice Act represents a gain in the acceptance of authorization cards, and a huge set-back in the forced arbitration clause.

You're turning the day to day fights of workers into principle, and you're ending up with some form of economism that has you supporting their exploiters.

"...electoral struggles of small importance, some electoral progress here and there, two representatives, one senator, four mayors, a great popular demonstration, which is scattered by shots, an election lost with fewer votes than the earlier one, one victorious strike, and ten defeated ones, one step forward, ten steps back, one victory in one sector, ten defeats in another one. And at a certain moment the rules of the game turn out to be changed, and we must start everything again from the very beginning." - el Che


but who would you rather have in the white house?

The working class.


once again, what is your solution to the '08 elections?

Fight for revolution. That's the task of the revolutionary.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 05:12 pm
so tell me then CPUSA haters, how would you plan on bring socialism to the US? defeating the republicans in '08? getting us out of the Iraq war? getting universal heathcare? getting the Employee Free Choice Act passed? and stopping Right to Work legislation?
Sounds like the same old reformist cack the CP is used to promoting!

I assure you that that is NOT what we plan to do! :lol:

[msucommie77]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 22, 2007 12:32 am



but who would you rather have in the white house?

The working class.


once again, what is your solution to the '08 elections?

Fight for revolution. That's the task of the revolutionary.
nice call on the white house question, you win that one.


but what are we do to until a revolution in the US becomes possible?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Revolution is possible now.

But to get at the core of your question:

1. Organize local groups as parts of national sections, which will themselves belong to an international organization with an overall plan of action.

2. Increase our influence in society by carrying out cultural work (by utilizing periodicals, radio, video, music, the internet, and other forms utilized by workers and farmers to spread our revolutionary outlook), launching survival programs (such as providing food, education, healthcare, childcare and general relief to workers and farmers in need, both to gain their support and trust and to allow them to participate in political life more freely), fighting for increased democratic rights and against repressive measures by the capitalist states, building popular assemblies, diligently struggling in the labor and student unions and forming revolution bodies in various areas of work.

3. Forge the strongest and broadest possible revolutionary organizations in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries – as sections of an international movement – with dedicated communist militants at their centers. Work to ensure that these movements are rooted among the working-class (with a special focus on organized workers in vital industries as well as the most exploited workers and the unemployed) and among small farmers.

4. Forge broad, democratic liberation fronts – made up of large masses of people, with communist militants at their cores – in the imperialist-oppressed countries. Ensure that these fronts consist of all those who can be united under the banners of national independence, the overthrow of imperialist domination (whether in the form of neocolonialism or outright colonialism) and genuine democracy. Work to greatly expand these fronts (especially among industrial and agricultural workers, the vast unemployed masses, women, small farmers, slum/shanty town dwellers and oppressed nationalities) in the shortest possible time, to best build a foundation for revolutionary struggle. Mobilize these fronts, when conditions are right, to support armed struggles initiated by the above mentioned communist militants with the intention of building large popular armies capable of seizing power.

5. Recognize that some of the above mentioned armed struggles will fall short of their goals, but will serve as shining examples for oppressed and exploited people around the world. Understand that some of the above mentioned armed struggles will be successful, and that the odds of success will increase not only with each victory, but also with each new struggle that breaks out (lessening the then-overextended imperialists' ability to intervene) – this is what el Che described in his call to create "many Vietnams."

6. Utilize the broad revolutionary organizations in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries to militantly struggle against any intervention into the above mentioned armed conflicts.

7. Fully grasp the fact that each successful struggle in the imperialist-oppressed countries will weaken the world imperialist system, thus creating crises in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries, which revolutionary organizations in those countries must act upon. Also understand that a significant weakening of the world imperialist system could, and would, bring about crises in the imperialist countries along the lines of what occurred during the Great Depression – when class struggle was at a historical high – and orient ourselves accordingly.

8. Be prepared at all times to act on any "cracks" in the systems of the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries which may occur due to the struggles in the imperialist-oppressed countries or other contradictions of the capitalist system.

[msucommie77]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 22, 2007 01:23 am
Revolution is possible now.

But to get at the core of your question:

1. Organize local groups as parts of national sections, which will themselves belong to an international organization with an overall plan of action.

2. Increase our influence in society by carrying out cultural work (by utilizing periodicals, radio, video, music, the internet, and other forms utilized by workers and farmers to spread our revolutionary outlook), launching survival programs (such as providing food, education, healthcare, childcare and general relief to workers and farmers in need, both to gain their support and trust and to allow them to participate in political life more freely), fighting for increased democratic rights and against repressive measures by the capitalist states, building popular assemblies, diligently struggling in the labor and student unions and forming revolution bodies in various areas of work.

3. Forge the strongest and broadest possible revolutionary organizations in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries – as sections of an international movement – with dedicated communist militants at their centers. Work to ensure that these movements are rooted among the working-class (with a special focus on organized workers in vital industries as well as the most exploited workers and the unemployed) and among small farmers.

4. Forge broad, democratic liberation fronts – made up of large masses of people, with communist militants at their cores – in the imperialist-oppressed countries. Ensure that these fronts consist of all those who can be united under the banners of national independence, the overthrow of imperialist domination (whether in the form of neocolonialism or outright colonialism) and genuine democracy. Work to greatly expand these fronts (especially among industrial and agricultural workers, the vast unemployed masses, women, small farmers, slum/shanty town dwellers and oppressed nationalities) in the shortest possible time, to best build a foundation for revolutionary struggle. Mobilize these fronts, when conditions are right, to support armed struggles initiated by the above mentioned communist militants with the intention of building large popular armies capable of seizing power.

5. Recognize that some of the above mentioned armed struggles will fall short of their goals, but will serve as shining examples for oppressed and exploited people around the world. Understand that some of the above mentioned armed struggles will be successful, and that the odds of success will increase not only with each victory, but also with each new struggle that breaks out (lessening the then-overextended imperialists' ability to intervene) – this is what el Che described in his call to create "many Vietnams."

6. Utilize the broad revolutionary organizations in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries to militantly struggle against any intervention into the above mentioned armed conflicts.

7. Fully grasp the fact that each successful struggle in the imperialist-oppressed countries will weaken the world imperialist system, thus creating crises in the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries, which revolutionary organizations in those countries must act upon. Also understand that a significant weakening of the world imperialist system could, and would, bring about crises in the imperialist countries along the lines of what occurred during the Great Depression – when class struggle was at a historical high – and orient ourselves accordingly.

8. Be prepared at all times to act on any "cracks" in the systems of the imperialist and imperialist-partner countries which may occur due to the struggles in the imperialist-oppressed countries or other contradictions of the capitalist system.
good post, i agree

but is it bad to vote democrat while this is happening rather than just drop out of electoral politics? Unless a mass workers party was to form, then voting for them would be obvious.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

What you, as an individual, do in regards to voting isn't important. But we're supposed to be communists - the workers who have already gained class consciousness and can point the way out of this mess. It's our duty to raise the consciousness of our fellow workers. Encouraging them to vote for the Democrats actually goes against that, and ties them to their exploiters.

[Marxist Napoleon]

I agree, we can't go around labeling all of our enemies as fascists. But I actually do consider Mitt Romney a fascist. The ultra-right is the greatest threat to the working class movement in the United States. The Democrats ARE NOT a solution, the Party knows this. The only reason the Party "supports" the Democrats is so the country will shift to the left and we don't have to be on the defensive anymore.

And what's this nonsense about the Party not being Marxist? I've heard claims about their anti-Leninism (which are still unjustified), but there's absolutely no argument for the Party's supposed anti-Marxism. The Party frequently quotes Marx, and more importantly, they justify every single campaign and strategy, including the support of the Democrats, with Marxist and Leninist theory. And what right does a member of the Free People's Movement have to insult the Communist Party concerning ideological purity? Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for your group, but it certainly doesn't stick to a specific socialist theory like the Communist Party does. The ideology of the Communist Party is Marxism-Leninism.

[KC]

The only reason the Party "supports" the Democrats is so the country will shift to the left and we don't have to be on the defensive anymore.

The country will never shift to the left with democrats in power. They already control congress.


And what's this nonsense about the Party not being Marxist? I've heard claims about their anti-Leninism (which are still unjustified), but there's absolutely no argument for the Party's supposed anti-Marxism.

They support the democrats. They support the bourgeoisie.


they justify every single campaign and strategy, including the support of the Democrats, with Marxist and Leninist theory.

You mean they justify it with Marxist rhetoric.

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 12:29 am
fine, it's not fascism, but it's working its way there. War Corporatism may be a better way to define it. Halliburton and various other war profiteering companies don't even have to compete for contracts in iraq, it's just handed to them by their friends in congress.
14 points of fascism:
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
Bush sure as hell isn't cementing a fascist dictatorship, or even "corporatism". I didn't see any fascist coup when the Democrats regained Congress. And the US Army won't be launching a coup when the Hildebeast gets elected into office and continues the war along with companies like Halliburton and "their friends in Congress", like the Democrats that the CP-USA wants you to vote for. If Clinton even thinks about bringing universal health care to the USA (hah!), soon enough a bunch of economists will pay her a visit and politely inform her that such a thing is an economic impossibility in a capitalist system.

2012 will then be even funnier when Hillary goes for re-election. I wonder if it will still be "the most important election in history."

Anyway, this "14 points" thing is plain old liberal crap. Watch this thoroughly unmarxist analysis of fascism (why a communist would even peddle that kind of crap is beyond me) being disected here (http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?p=532570&highlight=#532570). The main gist of it is that almost all of those "14 points" are common in any bourgeois class dictatorship.

Many of them occured under Bill Clinton too, and will continue under his wife. Yes, even "rampant sexism". Perhaps in some far future, we will have a female, transgendered, lesbian president with black, hispanic and Asian blood in the mix. It still won't matter jack shit if the structural problems of capitalism and all of its values have not been smashed by proletarian revolution. Systematic discrimination will always exist under the current system.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15, 2007 05:10 am
Communists fight for the political independence of the working class. We don't support one capitalist party over another because it's "easier to influence," whatever that even means.
Right. As Marx said:


Instead of lowering themselves to the level of an applauding chorus, the workers, and above all the League, must work for the creation of an independent organization of the workers' party, both secret and open, and alongside the official democrats, and the League must aim to make every one of its communes a center and nucleus of workers' associations in which the position and interests of the proletariat can be discussed free from bourgeois influence.

...

Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers' candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.

Marx's address to the Central Committee of the Communist League (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm)

[msucommie77]

Originally posted by Marxist [email protected] 22, 2007 03:07 am
I agree, we can't go around labeling all of our enemies as fascists. But I actually do consider Mitt Romney a fascist. The ultra-right is the greatest threat to the working class movement in the United States. The Democrats ARE NOT a solution, the Party knows this. The only reason the Party "supports" the Democrats is so the country will shift to the left and we don't have to be on the defensive anymore.

And what's this nonsense about the Party not being Marxist? I've heard claims about their anti-Leninism (which are still unjustified), but there's absolutely no argument for the Party's supposed anti-Marxism. The Party frequently quotes Marx, and more importantly, they justify every single campaign and strategy, including the support of the Democrats, with Marxist and Leninist theory. And what right does a member of the Free People's Movement have to insult the Communist Party concerning ideological purity? Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for your group, but it certainly doesn't stick to a specific socialist theory like the Communist Party does. The ideology of the Communist Party is Marxism-Leninism.
well said comrade.

[AlanMaki]

Sam Webb is clearly a revisionist out to liquidate our Party: the Communist Party USA.

Webb is letting a bunch of dumb donkeys do his thinking for him.

He has been vague about his intentions, and completely dishonest with membership figures which continue to dwindle.

Webb and this bunch have refused to assist working people in building Communist Party Clubs and the Party press.

Webb and his revisionist colleagues have dug in over the issue of saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant/Hydro Dam and two thousand jobs.

I recently articulated the Communist Party's real position on this issues in a letter to the editor of the Minneapolis Star Tribune. That letter, published on Sunday, December 2, 2007; Page OP 4--- reads:

Your excellent editorial (Sunday, Nov. 25, 2007) on saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant missed one important point.

For all practical purposes there is little chance of saving this plant unless it is brought under public ownership; free enterprise has failed to save the plant and the jobs.

Tax-payers already have a huge investment in this plant. More tax-dollars should be invested to save this plant and these important manufacturing jobs.

What tax-payers finance they should own.

Minnesota legislators have a fiduciary responsibility to see to it that this plant survives through public ownership.

Alan L. Maki
Warroad, Minnesota

While I find it interesting that much is being made of the expulsion of most of the members of the Minneapolis Club of the Communist Party USA for supporting the developing campaign which is taking on a broad based character to save the Ford plant and 2,000 jobs, I would point out that all of those expelled by Webb, contrary to the CPUSA Consitution, have reconstituted themselves as the "Gus Hall Action Club" and these comrades are doing amazing work in bringing the issue of public ownership forward as a means of saving the Ford Plant/Hydro Dam and 2,000 jobs.

I hope that in pointing out the revisionist errors of Webb all of you will join us in the struggle to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant through public ownership instead of using this issue to vent whatever frustrations and disagreements you have with the CPUSA.

If you would like to read further about the Ford Plant issue please check out my blog on this site or, for more indepth information, go to:

http://capitalistglobalization.blogspot.com/

This post submitted by:

Alan L. Maki
Secretary/Treasurer,
Minnesota/Dakotas District CPUSA

[Dros]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 04:43 pm
Which Communist Party is bigger?
The question you should be asking is: What Communist Party is better?

Probably one that is not a reformist piece of crap. I like the RCP. If you don't there are still revolutionary Communist groups in the US that don't suck as hard as the CPUSA.

[AlanMaki]

Originally posted by drosera99+December 09, 2007 11:00 am--> (drosera99 @ December 09, 2007 11:00 am)
[email protected] 15, 2007 04:43 pm
Which Communist Party is bigger?
The question you should be asking is: What Communist Party is better?

Probably one that is not a reformist piece of crap. I like the RCP. If you don't there are still revolutionary Communist groups in the US that don't suck as hard as the CPUSA. [/b]
What about an even better question than the one you ask:

How can we all begin to work together for a change (pun intended)?

I hope everyone will focus on the issues facing the working class. Since the topic of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant in Minnesota was raised prior to my posting, I posted a topic of relevance.

In case there are those wondering what they can do even though they may not live anywhere near the Twin Cities or even in the United States for that matter; you might start by submitting one of the following resolutions to your Party, your union or community organization in order to help us create awareness of this struggle.

Here are the two resolutions we are circulating, feel free to draft your own or modify them as you see fit:

Resolution #1 (Short Version) 0n the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant/Hydro Dam and 2,000 Union Jobs

Whereas Ford Motor Company has stated its intent to close the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, sell the hydro dam to a foreign corporation, and displace two-thousand workers in the near future without consultation from the workers, the community, or local and state governments;

Whereas this plant, its operations, and the hydro dam have received continued support from every level of government including tax-payer funding, tax-breaks and tax abatements under promises to maintain manufacturing operations and with assurances workers would have job security in St. Paul, Minnesota;

Therefore be it resolved (name of union/organization here) supports public ownership should be used to save this plant, hydro dam, and two-thousand jobs.

Resolution #2 (Full version) 0n the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant/Hydro Dam and 2,000 Union Jobs

Whereas Ford Motor Company has stated its intent to close the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, sell the hydro dam to a foreign corporation, and displace two-thousand workers in the near future without consultation with the workers, the community, or local and state governments;

Whereas this plant, its operations, and the hydro dam have received continued support from every level of government including tax-payer funding, tax-breaks and tax abatements under promises to maintain manufacturing operations and with assurances workers would have job security in St. Paul, Minnesota;

Whereas this Plant forms an important an integral component of Minnesota’s industrial base;

Whereas the closing of this Plant will cause very significant economic harm to the local community and the state including placing a strain on already overburdened social services which have already been drastically cut back;

Whereas all conciliatory efforts, as demanded, in favor of the management of Ford Motor Company have been granted by all levels of government under the promise Ford would maintain operations in St. Paul;

Whereas a similar threatened plant closing of the New Flyer Plant in Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada during the 1970’sresulted in all levels of government intervening on behalf of the members of the United Automobile Workers union resulting in the public takeover of the operation with continuing successful operation at present;

Whereas “the free market” has not resulted in a solution to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, the hydro dam which powers the plant along with two-thousand union jobs;

Be it resolved that the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party instruct its State Legislative Caucus to bring forward the previous resolution in the form of legislation supported by the United Auto Workers Union and its members of Local 879 to save the plant and dam intact until a solution is found to continue operations and production;

Be it further resolved that the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party instructs all of its federal, state, and local Twin Cities elected officials to convene a special conference to explore public ownership as the remedy to saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, the hydro dam, and two thousand union jobs;

Be it further resolved that the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party support public ownership and democratic control of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant with production taking place in the best interests of the workers and the people of the State of Minnesota;

Be it further resolved that public ownership is the only viable means of saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant as all other means have been tried and exhausted;

Be it further resolved that funding is not an issue since any country which can squander billions of dollars on the occupation of Iraq can find the resources for saving this Plant, dam, and jobs;

Be it further resolved that the very significant burden of health care costs for employees be resolved through the State of Minnesota enacting legislation implementing single-payer, universal health care.


The real question isn't what Communist Party is bigger; or what Communist Party is better... the real question is: How can we work together to advance the class struggle in a way that makes life better for working people as we simultaneously work to get rid of capitalism and establish socialism.

Working together we can become a very powerful force; we can discuss our differences as we work together to save the Ford Plant and two-thousand jobs.

[Honggweilo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14, 2007 03:20 am
The Communist Parties of Yugoslavia, Japan, Germany, Vietnam and China all recognize the CPUSA as the vanguard party in the USA.

In pure numbers its by far the largest, and internally it has maintained strict Leninist discipline that has allowed it to survive into 2007.

I wont dispute attacks on its effectiveness, but FRSO, PLP and RCP aren't exactly leading a revolution either and are far smaller and less active. With the exception of FRSO all other Marxist parties adapt a hopeless nihilist notion that all existing socialist nations of the 21st century are revisionist. And as far as being effective only CPUSA members have ever held elective office or controlled unions. The NYC Transit Union was led by a CP member.
Note that the Yugoslavian, German (DKP), and the Vietnamese also maintain contacts with parties like the FRSO's, WWP ect..

The Japanese "communist" party is by far the most revisionist and reactionary party in the world who dares to call itsself communist..

I hope the CPUSA membership tries to bestow Sam Webb from his ivory tower ASAP if it wants to save their almost vanished rich history before it desolves in to the democratic party.

AlanMaki: could you tell something more about the "Gus Hall Action Club", is it comparable to the "Pole de Renaissance Communiste (http://www.initiative-communiste.fr/)" in France who got expeled from the PCF?

[long_live_the_revolution]

The Communist Parties of Yugoslavia, Japan, Germany, Vietnam and China all recognize the CPUSA as the vanguard party in the USA.

communist pary of Yugoslavia????

there is no Yugoslavia :(

[AlanMaki]

I have received several e-mails and phone calls since my first posting on this topic asking me what the "official" position of CPUSA Chair, Sam Webb, and the National Board of the Communist Party USA is on the issue of the closing of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant.

I hope Webb or a member of the National Board will respond here on this list serve so you can get it "straight from the horses mouth" so to speak, or more appropriatey, straight from the donkey's ***.

However, I am in receipt of an e-mail from the Chair of the St. Paul Club who is also a prominent national leader of the CPUSA and an elected official in his union---M.A.P.E. (Minnesota Association of Professional Employees--- irinically this guy is a number cruncher and statistician for the office which deals with plant closings and job losses); that letter, written in response to a letter I sent to him asking why the St. Paul Club was doing nothing on the Plant closing issue, reads:

Alan,

The closure of the Ford plant in St Paul is a done deal.
There was an agreement reached regarding the affected
employees signed by the UAW and Ford Motor.

The campaigns we are involved with in St Paul do not
center around the closure issue. Both Mark Froemke and
Scott Marshall have advised our district that there is nothing
we can do regarding the closure.

Dean Gunderson,
Chair,
St. Paul Club CPUSA

I would note that Scott Marshall is a national co-chair of the CPUSA and heads up the national Labor Commission.

Mark Froemke is a District Organizer for the CPUSA, a member of the CPUSA National Committee, and is an elected official of the state body of the Minnesota AFL-CIO.

I would also point out that Ford Motor Company never consulted with the workers or the community in making the decision to close this plant; yet, Chair Sam Webb talks about advocating a "Bill of Rights Socialism" as if this does not have a class component.

Don't working people who have produced the wealth, and the tax-payers who have subsidized this plant and hydro dam which has powered the plant for over 80 years, have a right to have a say in the future of this very modern, efficient, high-tech plant which operates solely on clean "green" hydro power?

Isn't this what "Bill of Rights" socialism is supposed to be all about? Workers' rights; not the right of corporations to exploit and control while making all decisions.

I have sent Sam Webb, Scott Marshall, Dean Gunderson and Mark Froemke these postings. I think they have an obligation to respond since Communists have never considered what the capitalist class does to be a "done deal."

In fact, Ford workers and their Union, UAW Local 879, have insisted this plant should remain in operation. To these ends they have been struggling to get legislation through the Minnesota legislature to save this plant, hinderd in their efforts by the dominant section of the Democratic Party beholden to big capital.

Webb and company are alone in thinking this is a "done deal" as anyone who reads the mainstream media quickly understands.

In fact, Webb and this small handful of revisionists who have hi-jacked our Party are alone--- with the business elements and real estate speculators--- in declaring this a "done deal" since even the Ford Site Planning Committee which was established for the purpose of planning to build up-scale, racially segregated housing in place of the plant has now declared they no longer can make their plans because the resistance we have organized has now created a highly volatile political situation.

The Minnesota Democratic Party is being torn apart by this plant closing issue with rank and file and community activists on one side and Ford Motor and the St. Paul Chamber of commerce on the other side.

Now the most influential daily newspaper in the State of Minnesota has stepped into the frey saying: Not so fast; this plant is an important part of Minnesota's industrial base... if Ford wants to abandon this plant we better try to find an alternative.

So far, the ONLY alternative put forward towards saving this Plant which produces Ranger pick-up trucks is our proposal to bring it under public ownership. All other efforts have failed.

That CPUSA Chair Sam Webb would personally order the expulsion of the majority of the members of the Minneapolis Club of the Communist Party for their involvement in this struggle is unacceptable; the manner in which it was done in such an undemocratic manner without any trials or even discussion is the epitome of everything a Communist Party is not supposed to do--- especially when Sam Webb boasts, as he has done in the article above, that has set off these posts, that he is for "democracy."

The members of the Minneapolis Club, one of the largest Communist Party Clubs in the United States--- or, it was until Webb wiped it out (those who weren't "dropped," or expelled, quit)--- after much discussion voted to take up the question of public ownership and instructed the "Action Coordinator" of the Club to develop a plan of work around the issue of public ownership. When he did what he was told to do, this is when Sam Webb intervened. There was never any problem in this Club, one of the oldest and most active Communist Party community clubs in the nation, until Webb decided put an end to all talk of public ownership; because, again, according to Webb, "it was creating an embarassing situation for the Democratic Party."

[AlanMaki]

Originally posted by ddxt301+December 09, 2007 11:47 am--> (ddxt301 @ December 09, 2007 11:47 am)
[email protected] 14, 2007 03:20 am
The Communist Parties of Yugoslavia, Japan, Germany, Vietnam and China all recognize the CPUSA as the vanguard party in the USA.

In pure numbers its by far the largest, and internally it has maintained strict Leninist discipline that has allowed it to survive into 2007.

I wont dispute attacks on its effectiveness, but FRSO, PLP and RCP aren't exactly leading a revolution either and are far smaller and less active. With the exception of FRSO all other Marxist parties adapt a hopeless nihilist notion that all existing socialist nations of the 21st century are revisionist. And as far as being effective only CPUSA members have ever held elective office or controlled unions. The NYC Transit Union was led by a CP member.
Note that the Yugoslavian, German (DKP), and the Vietnamese also maintain contacts with parties like the FRSO's, WWP ect..

The Japanese "communist" party is by far the most revisionist and reactionary party in the world who dares to call itsself communist..

I hope the CPUSA membership tries to bestow Sam Webb from his ivory tower ASAP if it wants to save their almost vanished rich history before it desolves in to the democratic party.

AlanMaki: could you tell something more about the "Gus Hall Action Club", is it comparable to the "Pole de Renaissance Communiste (http://www.initiative-communiste.fr/)" in France who got expeled from the PCF? [/b]

AlanMaki: could you tell something more about the "Gus Hall Action Club", is it comparable to the "Pole de Renaissance Communiste" in France who got expeled from the PCF?


I am sorry, I am not familiar with the: AlanMaki: "Pole de Renaissance Communiste" in France who got expeled from the PCF?

If you could provide a link to what this is in English I might be able to tell you.

I am not a member of the Gus Hall Action Club. I will ask a member of that club to respond to your question as soon as possible. They do have a blog:

http://gushallactionclub.blogspot.com/2007...nist-clubs.html (http://gushallactionclub.blogspot.com/2007/10/communist-clubs.html)

I will say this about the Gus Hall Action Club; it is not an anti-communist Party Club; these special circumstances required it be created until this problem in our Party is resolved.

I would further point out that while Sam Webb has referred to this as "The Minnesota Problem;" the problem obviously goes much further and deeper than being a problem peculiar to Minnesota. Similar problems have surfaced in Pennsyvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, and California. I don't think it is coincidental that the struggle against this revisionism is taking place in the industrial heartland and the focus of these struggles is about how we will be involved in the class struggle.

I would encourage everyone to request that Sam Webb, Scott Marshall, Mark Froemke and/or Dean Gunderson join this discussion; their e-mail addresses are:

Sam Webb: [email protected]

Scott Marshall: [email protected]

Mark Froemke: [email protected]

Dean Gunderson: [email protected]

In my opinion, when someone like the head of the Communist Party USA makes the kinds of statements that have been attributed to him in the article that has initiated these postings, that person has an obligation to respond in the public forum.

Obviously these things are not "internal" Party matters as Sam Webb has repeatedly stated. The issues are out here on the Internet and are being talked about all over the country, in Canada and around the world. Calls and e-mails have come to us from Finland, Sweden, Canada, Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, Greece, Italy, France, Laos, South Africa, Israel, Iran and Iraq. Everyone wants to know what the heck is going on in the CPUSA.

Personally, I was very shocked to have had the article posted on your list serve sent to me. I was not aware that Sam Webb had been making such outlandish and revisionist statements for so long.

This article helped us to understand better what we knew; that Webb has given up on the industrial working class. As such, he has rejected and abandoned Marxism-Leninism in favor of the "non-Marxist socialism" which is the latest revisionist rage.

Everyone should feel free to ask any questions or make any comments on this situation. I will answer all questions to the best of my ability; or, find the appropriate person to respond.

Thank you for allowing me this forum.

[Asoka89]

Many of the defenses of the CPUSA are valid in my opinion so I see no need to reiterate them.

First of all we cant negate the value of short-term struggles. For working-class Americans like me Democratic rule will mean health care and a higher wager (minimum wage up to 9.50).. its a start and it matters to me and I'm glad reformist socialist are fighting for these gains for the working class.

Nothing wrong with valuing short-term struggles; real socialism is far off in America, we need to start somewhere

[Asoka89]

Let me add something, the Left-Wing of the Democratic Party have operative social democratic policies, if we can support and continue to move the party left, union rates will rise, real wages will rise, universal health care will be achieved.

So then what do you have, long term? Virtual social democracy

An America free of poverty, with opportunity for all, but not free of Capitalist exploitation.

I think that's the best we can get in America, realistically, the 3rd world, where to quote Che (who was actually talking about a Leninist theory, "the limbs of imperialism is weak", will be the ones to break with Capitalism or have revolutions soonest, for the short-term, decades and decades unless there is major depression or world war, Capitalism is here to stay, so I will continue to be proud of work to help the workers of America, I hope reformists will keep their Marxist tradition and analysis, but that doesnt mean the CPUSA isnt right to expand its base and support reformists in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 12:27 am
Let me add something, the Left-Wing of the Democratic Party have operative social democratic policies, if we can support and continue to move the party left, union rates will rise, real wages will rise, universal health care will be achieved.

So then what do you have, long term? Virtual social democracy

An America free of poverty, with opportunity for all, but not free of Capitalist exploitation.

I think that's the best we can get in America, realistically, the 3rd world, where to quote Che (who was actually talking about a Leninist theory, "the limbs of imperialism is weak", will be the ones to break with Capitalism or have revolutions soonest, for the short-term, decades and decades unless there is major depression or world war, Capitalism is here to stay, so I will continue to be proud of work to help the workers of America, I hope reformists will keep their Marxist tradition and analysis, but that doesnt mean the CPUSA isnt right to expand its base and support reformists in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The left wing of the Democratic Party is full of confused liberals who couldn't launch a successful campaign to save their lives. Dennis Kucinich represents everything so pathetic and ineffectual about this camp. We should not waste our energy with these clowns.

Social Democracy has always failed because it does not undestand the very dynamics of capitalism. Trying to make capitalism devoid of poverty and exploitation is like trying to make a beach without waves. They go hand-in-hand. If you preserve private property, you will have exploitation and poverty and deprivation and concentration of wealth and worse. Capitalism will rip through your petty liberal regulations like a grenade exploding in a doll house. These liberal measures are completely worthless, for the ONLY way to create socialism is through the "forceful overthrow of all existing social conditions" (Marx and Engels, the Communist Manifesto).

[kromando33]

The CPUSA is completely revisionist, and useless. Reflections on Socialism is a work of utter rubbish. I burned the copy they sent me. Sam Webb is as useless as the CPUSA.

In all honesty I would not be surprised if they have already been infiltrated by the FBI. Also you might want to read some other party publications before you make up your mind. The CPUSA's program is aimed at getting Democrats elected rather than having a proletarian revolution. I should not need to tell you that the difference between a Democrat and a Republican is the letter that follows their name.

If you find yourself agreeing with Marxism-Leninism more and more, you would see that the CPUSA is a dieing party, and with good reason. Perhaps you might want to check out the PLP, or RCP instead.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ What a reductionist statement on your part, "comrade." :rolleyes:

[And yes, although I do believe that a huge chunk of the CPUSA, like its Canadian and French equivalents, reeks of reformists, Alan Maki is not one of them.]

[RNK]

You have to ask yourself what, exactly, has changed since 20 years ago (if you can even remember)? Nothing. The US is attacking and invading countries as it was back then; conditions for workers in the United States has remained the same; US corporate interests still strangle the life of hundreds of millions.

[Keyser]

It is of no suprise that the CPUSA has become more irrelevant, more pointless, more reformist and more meaningless to the working class in general.

It is only a matter of time before the CPUSA is consigned to the dustbin of history, where it rightly belongs.

The working class don't forget, nor do real communists and revolutionaries, of the CPUSA's reformism, it's anti-Marxism, it's support for a ruling bourgeois capitalist party (the Democrats), it's open rejection of a working class social revolution and the establishment of a communist society and it's support for anti-communist revisionist 'communist parties', like Gorbachev's CPSU and todays ruling and openly capitalist Chinese Communist Party.

Godd riddance to bad rubbish!

[RNK]

An America free of poverty, with opportunity for all, but not free of Capitalist exploitation.

I just want to point out that here in Canada we have many of these things; we have a union-friendly economy that routinely hold thousand+ rallies on International Worker's Day; we have universal health care; minimum wage is increased every few years (currently $7.50 on par with USD) and we have a large social-democratic party alongside the "Democlones" and "Republoclones" parties.

Poverty rates are virtually identical to the US. Despite free health care, millions do not have access to basic health needs, and when they do, the healthcare system is plagued by enormous wait times (plan on being at the hospital for 7 hours before being seen by a doctor, or at clinics a comparitive amount of time waiting to get a prescription for antibiotics..), and overall, things are just about as bad as they are down south.

[Xiao Banfa]

conditions for workers in the United States has remained the same


They've got worse, haven't they?

[jacobin1949]

Anyone have any updates on the situation in Minnesota?

[Xiao Banfa]

What I have gathered after investigating, is that the CPUSA couldn't lead an ant colony to spilt honey. Also I recall that most of their leading members are notoroius tailists. The need a sponsor.