What's Wrong WIth The Stalinist WWP? - WWP'S Record for supp

[RedCeltic]

Perhaps the most well organized Leftist group in the United States right now is the Worker's World Party. The Party has used "International Answer" to organize one of the largest Peace movements since Vietnam.

However, I wonder just how commited to Peace these Stalinists really are?

Not only has Worker's World Party defended their support of China over and over, but has openly supported actions taken my China.

They have actively shown support for Mass Murders conducted by the Chinese government, of everything from the Cultural Revolution through Tianamen square.


This is what distinguishes the WWP from other leftist groups.

Their explicit policy of defending mass murders and than assuring the leaders good faith is an outrage.

This small group of like 200 members nationwide.. should not be alowed to become the voicepiece for the larger peacemovement which contains tens of thousands of people.

[Mazdak]

Malte i think this is evidence enough that it is your extreme liberatarian leftists friends who force the stalinists to respond and debate.

And once again, instead of showing some solidarity, he encourages trying to weaken the party, which is, in his own words, the most well organized leftist group. And you expect us NOT to turn this into a stalinist debate again?

[RedCeltic]

Oh I'm sorry Mazdak I didn't realize that you where a member of the Workers World Party.

I was concerned about this issue because I'm involved the Peace movement numbskull.

[SonofRage]

I share RedCeltic's concerns and would like to hear a response as well.

[antieverything]

They've allready turned Mumia's cause into a circus...I can't wait to see how they manage to ruin the peace movement.

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from antieverything on 8:55 pm on Jan. 30, 2003
They've allready turned Mumia's cause into a circus...I can't wait to see how they manage to ruin the peace movement.

Exactly!

Don't get me wrong, it's not the fact that they are Stalinist, nor even their support of China and the Ex Soviet Union.

It's their blind support of every action taken by those goverments that I question.

[truthaddict11]

kinda like they dont support american imperialistic murders but will support the murders by Stalin and Mao.
i believe they do give the peace movement a bad name because the right wingersin the media will and have will always say ANSWER is filled with people who support the murders by Stalin.

[Cassius Clay]

Hmm, I can't say I've ever heard of these lot but if they support the current Chinese government and pacificly Tinamen then I can reasure you they are not 'Stalinist' or Communist.

Do you not think your slightly overexagerating this though, I mean there hardly going to ruin the whole peace movement. If they managed to do that then the problem is quite clearly with the other groups involved.

[RedCeltic]

um.... No.. The Workers World Party is known to be a Stalinist Party. They have been so since 1949. I didn't make that up.

I love it when people who don't know what they are talking about can "Asssure" me.... lol...

The worker's World Party would tell you that they support China as a "Lesser of two Evils" however fully supported China's reaction to the student uprising. Fully supported USSR's invasion of Afghanistan... etc..

Yes they are Stalinist, I'm not the one who labled them as such.

[Saint-Just]

'The worker's World Party would tell you that they support China as a "Lesser of two Evils" however fully supported China's reaction to the student uprising.'

I'm sure they do support the Chinese as a 'lesser of two evils'. I they are indeed anti-revisionist or 'Stalinist' as you call it they are hardly likely to support Deng Xiaoping's revision of Mao Zedong thought outright.

One of the problems of the leftist movement is its inability to unite. Trying to exclude the WWP is symptematic of this. Ever heard the saying 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Even Trotsky advocated this revolutionary morality... maybe you're not a Trotskyist?

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from Chairman Mao on 9:50 am on Jan. 31, 2003
'The worker's World Party would tell you that they support China as a "Lesser of two Evils" however fully supported China's reaction to the student uprising.'

I'm sure they do support the Chinese as a 'lesser of two evils'. I they are indeed anti-revisionist or 'Stalinist' as you call it they are hardly likely to support Deng Xiaoping's revision of Mao Zedong thought outright.

One of the problems of the leftist movement is its inability to unite. Trying to exclude the WWP is symptematic of this. Ever heard the saying 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Even Trotsky advocated this revolutionary morality... maybe you're not a Trotskyist?


You're right, they don't support China in the way of reforms. Their support stems from their support of The Soviet Union, Communist Eastern Europe, and China since 1949. They have attacked other communist groups for saying that the Soviet Union was in fact not Communist. Probobly because Soviet Communism was the type of Communism they support.

Don't get me wrong, I admire the groups ability to organize and mobelize. They put out a well written weekly newspaper at http://www.workers.org

However it's probobly wrong for them, or any political party for that matter to lead the Peace Movement.

I'm sure many would have issues if the peacemovement was organized by the Green Party or the Democratic Party.

Oh... and no I'm not a Trot.

[Cassius Clay]

Red Celtic, sorry perhaps that was the wrong type or wording.

My intention was merely to point out that if they do support Tinamen (spell) massacre then they are most certainly not Communists.

They can call themselves Communists or even try to be 'Stalinists' but actions speak louder than words. Anybody who currently supports the present Chinese regime in my opinion really needs to read the Communist manifesto again.

It's just like Tito, Ceacescu, Deng or Pol Pot, these people can call themselves Communist but they most certainly aren't.

[Saint-Just]

'However it's probobly wrong for them, or any political party for that matter to lead the Peace Movement.'

Ok, I understand what you are saying.

I have no idea about the party or this peace movement however so I can't comment on that or whether the WWP should lead it.

[antieverything]

The WWP is farther from having my support than the vast majority of capitalist organizations.

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from Cassius Clay on 11:17 am on Jan. 31, 2003
Red Celtic, sorry perhaps that was the wrong type or wording.

My intention was merely to point out that if they do support Tinamen (spell) massacre then they are most certainly not Communists.

They can call themselves Communists or even try to be 'Stalinists' but actions speak louder than words. Anybody who currently supports the present Chinese regime in my opinion really needs to read the Communist manifesto again.

It's just like Tito, Ceacescu, Deng or Pol Pot, these people can call themselves Communist but they most certainly aren't.




Yes Perhaps they are a poor example of a Stalinist party. The CP-USA under Guss Hall was perhaps a better example.

The Workers World Party actually broke off from the CP-USA because of some ideological difference... I'm not to sure what that was exactly as they both supported the USSR at the time.

[Cassius Clay]

Hmm, alot of the left split in the 1960's and 70's. Some believed the USSR had become Capitalist (a view which I must admit to sharing), others believed the USSR was still the example to follow. Some believed the alternative lay in Mao and the PRC while a few thought both were as bad as eachother or thought they were both shining example's of 'workers paradise's'.

Ofcourse as they say they were all as bad eachother.

If you have the time and energy read Enver Hoxha's 'Revolution and Imperialism' I think that goes someway to explaining the flaws and criticisms in both the USSR under Brezheve and the PRC under Mao and especially Deng and co.

[Xvall]

Although that saying may sometimes be helpful Mao, I wouldn't rely on it. After all, Nazis go against the Untied States government; but it will be a long while before I would befriend myself with one.

[Saint-Just]

Yes, you're right, I didn't mean it as a blanket statement that covers all circumstances. But it can be effectively applied. It is an issue that is covered in depth in various Marxist works and in those the parameters for the application of this theory can be found.

[Tavarish Spetsnaz]

Ok first of all...the WWP is NOT leading the anti-war movement. The anti-war movement is not led by anyone...it encompases from communists to religions organizations to tree hugers. It can't possibly be led by anyone.

What is WWP??? It is defenately a leftist organization... perhaps many good comrades...some bad ideologies however. If they support the USSR of the 70s and so, China of today and so forth...than they are not much communist. Clearly...these people are not true Marxist-Leninists if they cannot see the difference ebtween supporting a nation like the USSR when it fights against US imperialism...and supporting the USSR when it turns to revisionism and invades Afghanistan and so forth.

Calling them..."Stalinist"...makes little sense. They may support Stalin...but it is becasue they have no idea who he is. Any "Stalinist"...would not support the USSR that followed him...or support the China of today (most would not support the China of Mao either).

NEVERTHLESS...They were able to organize this demonstration...they have been able to do many such actions...they have been able to create the International Action Center and so forth...They are doing good work!!

Saying they should not be included...as if you had the power to exlude them from anything...makes little sense...sepecially on what you are criticizing them...of being "Stalinist".

Becasue I could also say all Trot parties and organizations should be exluded...for supporting Trot's ultra-left beurocratic anti-Bolshevik trechory in barcelona in 1937...;)...but I won't :)

[SonofRage]

I've heard them referred to as "Neo-Stalinist," whatever that means.

[Ian]

Cassius Clay, I was just wondering, what do you think makes Tito not communist? It is my conviction that he was quite communist, although unaligned and isolationist in some regards I still believe he was communist and internationalist.

Also, just a small query, but is the theory that the USSR became State Capitalist a theory held by many other stalinists?

[Cassius Clay]

Ian Rocks, the reason I don't believe Tito was a Communist is because of the man's actions both internally and in terms of international policies. First of all he openly declared that he would side with NATO against the Soviet Union in the event of war. He became a U$ ally and western companies flooded Yugoslavia and oppressed Yugoslav workers. More importantly is what he did to thousands of Yugoslav Marxist-Leninists, they were literally thrown in concentration camps and died through the most sadistic ways. It is also worth noting that Tito was a extreme nationalist, people like Milosevich and Tudgman rose under Tito. Serbia and Croatia enjoyed the full benefits of life in Yugoslavia while the other republics were oppressed, the people of Kosovar would of preffered to of lived under that evil 'Stalinist' Hoxha in 1968 then put up with Tito any longer.

BTW I will provide a few links to back up the above, just give me some time. I also remember reading that Yugoslavia had something like 1.6 million unemployed by the time Tito died, hardly 'Socialist'.

Yes the theory that the USSR of the 1960's,70's and 80's became State Capitalist is a view shared by alot of 'Stalinists'. I personally came to the view after reading a number of articles which basically said that the workers were just as much oppressed as they were in the west. The introduction of hiring and firing and the fact that prouduction and labor became mere commodities to the ruling elite (although they worded it more intelliegently, LOL).

Ofcourse that view isn't shared by everybody who supports Stalin, Revolution Hero on this board for example.

[redbhoy59]

I have to pipe in here for a second and share. I work with some members of the WWP on some committees i'm with and also in the Anti-war movement. To me they seem very dedicated to work for social justice and come together with other groups to further the goals of the left generally. I've talked at length with many of them and they aren't really shouting pro-Stalinism from the roof-tops. I'm not saying they aren't supporters of Stalin and China, but I feel, like a growning number of us on the left, they are dedicated to coming together with other parties and organizations to further a common agenda instead of splitting and controling the agenda like some groups do.
I disagree with them on many,many issues, but I guess I'm trying to say that we have to come together to make change. Let's fight about Ideology after we've taken the state.