We are the Workers Party in America!

[Martin Blank]

Communist League, Supporters, Friends Launch Public Political Organization

By HENRY MILES
UCPA Editor In-Chief
http://www.ucpa.us/node/296 (http://www.ucpa.us/node/296)




http://www.ucpa.us/images/articlepix/20090101a.gifDETROIT, Mich., Jan. 1 — After months of discussion, including the convening of an assembly of the whole membership, the Communist League, along with its supporters and friends, have officially launched a public political organization, the Workers Party in America (http://www.workers-party.com/), for the purposes of coordinating and improving the public activity of the communist workers’ movement in the United States.

The League, since its founding in November 2004, had experimented with various ways to carry out public activity, including establishing public sections of its organization and attempting to work inside other self-described socialist and communist political groups.

With the formation of the Workers Party, League members will now have a consistent avenue for public activity without the problems.

Supporters joined with League members in Detroit to officially celebrate the launching of the new party of working people in the U.S.

The new Chairperson of the Workers Party, Martin Sayles, joined with members in singing labor songs and toasting in the new year, and also officially accepting the handover of the editorial archives of Working People’s Advocate and Workers’ Republic from Robin Wakipajan, representing the League Central Committee.

“Working people finally have a party of their own,” said Sayles. “And I mean, ‘of their own.’ We are a party organized by workers, led by workers, composed of workers, with workers as theoretical developers and practical organizers. We will express the historic principles and view of our class consistently, and we will carry out our work at all times based on that.”

“This was a necessary step for us,” said Wakipajan, who was also discussing future steps with the party’s incoming director of strategic operations, Rae Smith. “Forming the Workers Party came at the right time, given everything happening in the U.S. and the world.”

The next steps now for the Workers Party in America is settling in and getting the final arrangements for its public presence put together, including finalizing the content and design of its website (http://www.workers-party.com/), and preparing new literature and organizing tools for members.

The basic principles and 10-point basic program of the WPA (reprinted here (http://www.ucpa.us/node/294) and here (http://www.ucpa.us/node/295)) were drafted by League members in consultation with supporters, and hold the status of “working drafts” until the Party’s First Convention, to be held this coming summer.

The incoming Central Committee of the party is also finalizing its platform (based on the League’s Platform of Action, with additions and amendments from supporters and friends) and a perspectives document on the development of American capitalism.

These four documents, along with one about the Workers Party as an organization, will be packaged together in the first issue of Workers’ Republic to be produced by the Party.

Both League and Party members present at the launching shared optimism in the success of the new organization, and echoed each other’s calls for readers of WPA and working people who have followed the work and activity of the League over the years to join the Party.

“Anyone from the working class who accepts our program and constitution can join,” said Sayles. “All it takes is contacting us ([email protected]).”



-30-

[Die Neue Zeit]

My apologies for not commenting on this earlier, but this is absolute good news for even the most basic cause of class independence. :)

Now if only the class-strugglists in "the more left-wing" Canada will stop TAILING their American counterparts (CP/WPA, SP-USA, and PSL)... :(

[MarxSchmarx]

I never really understood why Canada and the United States can't have a joint, multi-tendency party. Both countries suffer from considerable sectarianism within the serious left. They both have psuedo-social democratic parties, and local/provincial elections in both countries have shown quite amenable to electing "third-party" candidates. Arguably, certain regions like Southern BC through CA north of SF have more in common with each other than either does to the rest of their countries.

Moreover, many of the unions operate in both countries. If we are serious about tying the workers movement with a socialist political front, it would make sense to have a cross-border party.

The United States and anglophone Canada share quite a bit culturally and even politically. Within the EU there are EU-wide socialist parties, there are parties in other parts of the world that are transnational.

I urge this workers party can expand outside of the traditional "comfort zone" of such organizations to take their vision to places like Puerto Rico and Canada.

[Martin Blank]

I tend to think that if there were working-class people in Canada, Quebec and Boricua (Puerto Rico) who were interested in being a part of the WPA, they would be welcome.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I never really understood why Canada and the United States can't have a joint, multi-tendency party. Both countries suffer from considerable sectarianism within the serious left.

Comrade chegitz said that it was illegal in the US to join an international revolutionary group or something, yet for some reason it's legal to affiliate. That's why the SP-USA hasn't expanded elsewhere.

[fredbergen]

Two, three, four, ten thousand centrist Potemkin villages!

When do classes start at the "class war college"?

How's your "international" humanitarian relief arm doing? How many band-aids does it own?

Your latest phony group has more "under construction" websites, yet-to-be-published "journals" and grandiose "mass organizations" than it has members!

[Martin Blank]

Your latest phony group has more "under construction" websites, yet-to-be-published "journals" and grandiose "mass organizations" than it has members!

Please, oh please!, keep believing that, Fred. The more you're out of our hair, the better for our class.

[fredbergen]

Oh and let's not forget the new international "industrial union!" of yours! While the present-day IWW occasionally makes contact with actual workers struggles, the "Workers International Industrial Union," exists in the pure Platonic sphere of certified 100 per-cent proletarian eternal ideas! (Wait, Plato was a worker, right?) I can hear the downtrodden masses on every continent flocking to the banner of this new union web-site!

I eagerly await the day when a mass plenary of all your teeming mass organizations resolves by resounding, ecstatic and prolonged acclamation that, henceforth and forever more (or at least until the leases on the proper Internet domain names run out), "Henry Miles" (a certified gen-u-ine worker, no less) is the King of Spain!

[Martin Blank]

Oh and let's not forget the new international "industrial union!" of yours! While the present-day IWW occasionally makes contact with actual workers struggles, the "Workers International Industrial Union," exists in the pure Platonic sphere of certified 100 per-cent proletarian eternal ideas! (Wait, Plato was a worker, right?) I can hear the downtrodden masses on every continent flocking to the banner of this new union web-site!

Did Norden and Stamberg write this for you? Or did it actually take you three days to come up with this one yourself?


I eagerly await the day when a mass plenary of all your teeming mass organizations resolves by resounding, ecstatic and prolonged acclamation that, henceforth and forever more (or at least until the leases on the proper Internet domain names run out), "Henry Miles" (a certified gen-u-ine worker, no less) is the King of Spain!

Aw, you're just mad because I exposed your attempt at an entry into the Socialist Party. That's all this really is. If it was anything else, you'd have actually made a political argument, instead of whining.

[KC]

I wish it was possible to rep a thread.

This one is full of win.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Aw, you're just mad because I exposed your attempt at an entry into the Socialist Party. That's all this really is. If it was anything else, you'd have actually made a political argument, instead of whining.

Miles, please spill the details!



Anyway, I just read the Platform, and I must say that it is nothing else short of excellent in its anti-economism (even if for obvious reasons it is merely a national platform - KC and fredbergen, please take note of this showcasing of Trotskyist programmatic economism):

http://www.workers-party.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=62

Just to highlight only some of the key content there (my profoundly true and important thanks to the CL / WPA comrades):


elected on the basis of closed-list, party-recallable proportional representation

[...]

Recognition of professional education from abroad, professional education standardization, etc., to counter underemployment of educated immigrants

[...]

or living wage equivalent, whichever is higher, properly adjusted and tied, on a non-deflationary basis, to the cost of living [...] Similar adjustments for all other non-executive remunerations and benefits

[...]

The right of all working people, including enlisted personnel in the military, to organize themselves into unions and workplace committees in defense of their rights and interests



I have minor issues with the five-day, 30-hour workweek, though. To me, a whole day off is more important than a couple of hours each day (hence the 32-hour workweek). I didn't know that the proposed workweek would include "time for participation in workplace committees and assemblies." Is this for purely workplace concerns, or for political concerns?

[The way I "concocted" my proposal would be that the extra day off would serve as extra time for political participation, whereas any workplace democracy would be addressed within the shortened workweek.]



Also notable is the splitting of the "economic" section into two (I think inspired by my separation of "economic national-democratization" from other parts of the minimum program in my draft). :thumbup1:


A publicly-owned construction-industrial program to build and rebuild public service and recreation facilities, residential neighborhoods and communities, schools, workplaces, urban farms, and societal infrastructure

Trying to avoid the word "complex," eh? ;) :D


Mandatory annual review and amendment of taxation rates, including rates on capital gains, dividends, rent, property and income taxes

[Should have said "by plebiscite" or something to that effect]


Abolition of all restrictions on the non-commodity economy, such as “peer-to-peer” sharing and “open source” programming. Abolition of “intellectual property” laws.

Now I know just how far behind I am in my programmatic commentary :D


Immediate placement of all failing, closing and bankrupt companies and workplaces into cooperative or public ownership, under the control of elected workers’ councils or assemblies

Pre-coop worker buyouts, baby! :thumbup1:



However:


Abolition of the standing military in favor of a civilian-soldier defense force, under the direction, when necessary, of local self-defense commissions, and under the control of workers’ councils and assemblies

Goes against this and goes against practical considerations of spreading revolution (and defending against foreign threats):


Disbanding of the military officer corps (including non-commissioned officers). Abolition of all ranks and orders, replaced by elected task- or unit-designated positions. Organization of all military personnel into unit councils to administer organization.

And this phrase:


without compensation

This REALLY needs modification! What about employees and outside workers who have shares?

[Devrim]

The whole idea of a small group of militants proclaiming themselves to be the party is absurd.

Devrim

[Die Neue Zeit]

More party-pooping ultra-leftismus infantilis in this thread, I see:

http://z11.invisionfree.com/Kasama_Threads/index.php?showtopic=366

But wait: Rosa Luxemburg did worse, by insisting on the organizational independence of an SDKPiL (apart from the RSDLP) that wasn't destined to be a class-encompassing party!

[Martin Blank]

Miles, please spill the details!

For a while, Fool and the Gang were putting out occasional articles about the SP in relation to their electoral campaign.

For those from the Spartacist doctrine, this article writing is preparatory work for beginning an entry. They then take these articles in leaflet form and shove them into the hands of as many members of the "Ostensibly Revolutionary Organization" they targeted as possible. That's Phase I.

Phase II is when they get one or two people from the target ORO to go along with them. Then the occasional articles become just this side of a flurry, with the content effectively outlining an opposition platform for the nascent faction.

Phase III is the inevitable "political struggle", which may or may not actually be a faction fight. In the end, though, the supporters very loudly split from the ORO and join the Spartacoid group. Sometimes there's follow-up for three to six months, to try to pick up any stragglers or elements that are seen as "worth saving".

Sometimes the people stay, sometimes they don't.


However:


Abolition of the standing military in favor of a civilian-soldier defense force, under the direction, when necessary, of local self-defense commissions, and under the control of workers’ councils and assemblies

Goes against this and goes against practical considerations of spreading revolution (and defending against foreign threats):


Disbanding of the military officer corps (including non-commissioned officers). Abolition of all ranks and orders, replaced by elected task- or unit-designated positions. Organization of all military personnel into unit councils to administer organization.

First, to be clear, the former of the two demands listed here is for after the success of the revolution. And, personally, I don't expect it to be something that happens the next day. It may take a while before implementing that demands is feasible. Nonetheless, it is a demand we raise because it is something we seek to do.


And this phrase:


without compensation

This REALLY needs modification! What about employees and outside workers who have shares?

In a working people's republic? Why? Most (if not virtually all) workers have shares in other companies as a part of their 401(k) retirement package. Since pensions and retirement would no longer be private, what's the point of an added compensation? (Incidentally, we are talking about adding a demand about expropriation of the capital derived from the use of pension funds, to go along with the main pension fund demand.)

[Martin Blank]

The whole idea of a small group of militants proclaiming themselves to be the party is absurd.

Personally, I don't think anyone in the WPA believes we've earned the right to call ourselves "THE party". We are a party ... building the party. Our tasks are those of a party, not a propaganda sect.

Besides, even if we did decide to call ourselves "THE party", it's not like there are any other serious challenges to such a bold contention out there.

[Die Neue Zeit]

For a while, Fool and the Gang were putting out occasional articles about the SP in relation to their electoral campaign.

For those from the Spartacist doctrine, this article writing is preparatory work for beginning an entry. They then take these articles in leaflet form and shove them into the hands of as many members of the "Ostensibly Revolutionary Organization" they targeted as possible. That's Phase I.

Phase II is when they get one or two people from the target ORO to go along with them. Then the occasional articles become just this side of a flurry, with the content effectively outlining an opposition platform for the nascent faction.

Phase III is the inevitable "political struggle", which may or may not actually be a faction fight. In the end, though, the supporters very loudly split from the ORO and join the Spartacoid group. Sometimes there's follow-up for three to six months, to try to pick up any stragglers or elements that are seen as "worth saving".

Was that within the context of the *recent* election, wherein I posted stuff attacking the Spart "critique" of the SP-USA? [If so, it's a good thing to know that you and the revolutionary majority of the SP-USA can work together.]

This entry-to-poach-supporters tactic is so conspiratorial and so Bakuninist. :rolleyes:




First, to be clear, the former of the two demands listed here is for after the success of the revolution. And, personally, I don't expect it to be something that happens the next day. It may take a while before implementing that demands is feasible. Nonetheless, it is a demand we raise because it is something we seek to do.

If anything else, comrade, raising the demand to abolish the standing armed forces, even if it is something to be carried out on a transnational basis, does illustrate the inherent limitations of national programs (I haven't included this as a "directional demand" only because it isn't linked to my eight-point programmatic analysis of imperialism / "macro-capitalism"). ;)

[But enough ranting]


In a working people's republic? Why? Most (if not virtually all) workers have shares in other companies as a part of their 401(k) retirement package. Since pensions and retirement would no longer be private, what's the point of an added compensation? (Incidentally, we are talking about adding a demand about expropriation of the capital derived from the use of pension funds, to go along with the main pension fund demand.)

Then I suggest the phrase "without redundant compensation" to clarify on this (and perhaps provide additional clarification, too). "Ordinary workers" would be a LOT less generous in their reaction to the phrase "without compensation" than I have been above:

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/18962


Well, since the stock market has tanked, let the government step in and buy up those now near-worthless shares of the publicly-traded non-financial corporations. (The price tag may well be less than Paulson's $700b. The government can print the money, if need be. In a depression it's essential to stimulate the economy by pumping money into it.) Suddenly our government has controlling interest in all the major corporations. (Notice, these assets are not "expropriated" by the government. They are paid for at full market value.)

[KC]

KC and fredbergen, please take note of this showcasing of Trotskyist programmatic economism

No, I won't take note, because it didn't happen. Your delusion that Trotskyism is Economism was destroyed by myself and LZ on a few occasions, to which you ran away with your tail between your legs.



The whole idea of a small group of militants proclaiming themselves to be the party is absurd.More party-pooping ultra-leftismus infantilis in this thread, I see:

Not really. Devrim is obviously right. Sectism isn't Marxism.

[PoWR]

The whole idea of a small group of militants proclaiming themselves to be the party is absurd.

party (noun) - An established political group organized to promote and support its principles and candidates for public office.

It doesn't say anything about a required number of members.

[Die Neue Zeit]

No, I won't take note, because it didn't happen. Your delusion that Trotskyism is Economism was destroyed by myself and LZ on a few occasions, to which you ran away with your tail between your legs.

I didn't say that Trotskyism is economism; I said that the Transitional Programme specifically suffers from broad economism (see my current blog link and this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/socio-income-democracy-t92929/index.html)). I've read the past responses from you (http://www.revleft.com/vb/againstwage-t80931/index.html?p=1168468) and LZ (http://www.revleft.com/vb/program-new-type-t83818/index.html), and they were woefully brief and off-topic.

In regards to "running away with my tail between my legs," I suggest you read my "sliding scale of wages" article (http://www.revleft.com/vb/sliding-scale-wages-t98609/index.html). :)


Not really. Devrim is obviously right. Sectism isn't Marxism.

But he was attacking the Communist League / Workers Party in America.

[fredbergen]

I really shouldn't be responding, because to do so only lends credibility to those who should have absolutely none...

But just to set the record straight: the Trotskyists are not "entering" the SP, we aren't even oriented to it, except in the fervid minds of some nattering 'net ninnies. Personally, I would be highly suspicious of anyone who stayed in the SP for more than six months and didn't quit of her or his own accord. Beyond a certain point, you're either a hardened opportunist or you're not. We just thought it was noteworthy that they ran an anti-immigrant "lock-em-up" law and order fanatic for president, so we included a note about that in an article that was mostly about our somewhat more serious political opponents.

Now let me be clear, what I'm ridiculing Miles/Paris/etc. and his phony party about is not his number of members, or whether he calls himself a league, a party or a yellow submarine. What makes the latest website from Detroit, or the "Party of World Revolution"/Free peoples Movement/etc. a joke (or something more sinister) is that they claim to be things that they obviously aren't. Let me spell this out for the educational benefit of the more gullible around here:

IS THIS A PHONY PARTY?



Does it claim affiliated mass organizations ("movement" fronts, aid societies, arts leagues, educational institutes, unions) that consist of a p.o. box and a placeholder website?
Does it claim to sponsor a union (an international union no less!) that can claim not one workplace organized by it or ever organized by it, which was never even a recognized tendency in an actually existing union?
Does it have a habit of gaining "international" affiliates, which invariably disappear or "split" shortly thereafter because they only amounted to some random guy who exchanged a few emails with the "party"?
Does it offer an impressive spread of publications (theoretical journal, "mass propaganda organ," agitational sheet, cultural revue etc.) when it can't even publish one on a regular schedule, and all are pretty much written by one guy with different pen names?
Is its ideology an eclectic hodgepodge of the programs of existing groups (whose existence, no matter how modest, can be verified without recourse to Google), plus the eccentric hobby horse of its Founder and Chairman? (For example, workerism or Fidel Castro worship.)
Does it recruit and function mostly over the internet, instead of using its internet presence as a supplement and reference to its non-web-based activities.

If one or more of these conditions apply, then you may be dealing with a phony organization.

[KC]

But he was attacking the Communist League / Workers Party in America.

And?

[Devrim]

party (noun) - An established political group organized to promote and support its principles and candidates for public office.

It doesn't say anything about a required number of members.

Communist theory does have some ideas about the idea of a party that go beyond the dictionary definition.

For communists the idea of the party is about the class organised as a party. It is something that is built through struggle, not proclaimed by a small group, and although it doesn't have a 'required number of members', it does imply something that represents the political life of the class, and is more than a handful of people.

But then it would be difficult for you to agree with this as your 'party' is pretty much the same.


More party-pooping ultra-leftismus infantilis in this thread, I see:

It is not 'party-pooping'. The communist left is for a party. We don't believe that that party exists yet, and we don't believe that it exists in America now because a few people claim it to be so. The task of the communists is to build the party, not imagine it into being.


Personally, I don't think anyone in the WPA believes we've earned the right to call ourselves "THE party". We are a party ... building the party.

Yes, I suppose that this sort of works if you use a dictionary definition of a party and not a communist one.


Our tasks are those of a party, not a propaganda sect.

Please explain this. A least here there seems to be a conception of what a party means to communists. However, if you think a handful of people can construct the class party alone, you are suffering from not only a terrible analysis concerning the period, but also a severe case of voluntarism.


Besides, even if we did decide to call ourselves "THE party", it's not like there are any other serious challenges to such a bold contention out there.

No, you can just add another one to the list of people claiming to be 'the party'.

Devrim

[Led Zeppelin]

I've read the past responses from you (http://www.revleft.com/vb/againstwage-t80931/index.html?p=1168468) and LZ (http://www.revleft.com/vb/program-new-type-t83818/index.html), and they were woefully brief and off-topic.

Even though this is off-topic, that's not actually true though you may consider it to be so.

People can see for themselves whether or not our replies were "woefully brief and off-topic" (especially compared to your own) by clicking the links you provided.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Communist theory does have some ideas about the idea of a party that go beyond the dictionary definition.

For communists the idea of the party is about the class organised as a party. It is something that is built through struggle, not proclaimed by a small group, and although it doesn't have a 'required number of members', it does imply something that represents the political life of the class, and is more than a handful of people.

So how come the ICC's revolutionary-epoch "theory" of the party flies against what you've said? [That there is still a separate "vanguard" "party"]


It is not 'party-pooping'. The communist left is for a party. We don't believe that that party exists yet, and we don't believe that it exists in America now because a few people claim it to be so. The task of the communists is to build the party, not imagine it into being.

Funny, because that is the exact emphasis of the "Kautskyan" Marxist center (to which the Bolsheviks belonged), as opposed to the "Hegelian" Marxist left (Gorter, Luxemburg, Pannekoek, etc.). :glare:

[Devrim]

Jacob, I can't be bothered to discuss through all of your jargon about the 'Hegelian' Marxist Left, or whatever other nonsense you are peddling at the moment.

Please, answer the question yes or no, no links quotes from your book or obscure terms;

Do you think that the class party was founded in Michigan last week?

Devrim

[Pogue]

I really shouldn't be responding, because to do so only lends credibility to those who should have absolutely none...

But just to set the record straight: the Trotskyists are not "entering" the SP, we aren't even oriented to it, except in the fervid minds of some nattering 'net ninnies. Personally, I would be highly suspicious of anyone who stayed in the SP for more than six months and didn't quit of her or his own accord. Beyond a certain point, you're either a hardened opportunist or you're not. We just thought it was noteworthy that they ran an anti-immigrant "lock-em-up" law and order fanatic for president, so we included a note about that in an article that was mostly about our somewhat more serious political opponents.

Now let me be clear, what I'm ridiculing Miles/Paris/etc. and his phony party about is not his number of members, or whether he calls himself a league, a party or a yellow submarine. What makes the latest website from Detroit, or the "Party of World Revolution"/Free peoples Movement/etc. a joke (or something more sinister) is that they claim to be things that they obviously aren't. Let me spell this out for the educational benefit of the more gullible around here:

IS THIS A PHONY PARTY?



Does it claim affiliated mass organizations ("movement" fronts, aid societies, arts leagues, educational institutes, unions) that consist of a p.o. box and a placeholder website?
Does it claim to sponsor a union (an international union no less!) that can claim not one workplace organized by it or ever organized by it, which was never even a recognized tendency in an actually existing union?
Does it have a habit of gaining "international" affiliates, which invariably disappear or "split" shortly thereafter because they only amounted to some random guy who exchanged a few emails with the "party"?
Does it offer an impressive spread of publications (theoretical journal, "mass propaganda organ," agitational sheet, cultural revue etc.) when it can't even publish one on a regular schedule, and all are pretty much written by one guy with different pen names?
Is its ideology an eclectic hodgepodge of the programs of existing groups (whose existence, no matter how modest, can be verified without recourse to Google), plus the eccentric hobby horse of its Founder and Chairman? (For example, workerism or Fidel Castro worship.)
Does it recruit and function mostly over the internet, instead of using its internet presence as a supplement and reference to its non-web-based activities.
If one or more of these conditions apply, then you may be dealing with a phony organization.

Brilliant.

[Martin Blank]

So, for the benefit of those around, let's go through these points:


Does it claim affiliated mass organizations ("movement" fronts, aid societies, arts leagues, educational institutes, unions) that consist of a p.o. box and a placeholder website?

Are the affiliates I listed "mass organizations"? Define "mass organization"? The Albert Currlin Institute is a thinktank (i.e., NOT a "mass organization"). The UCPA is a press collective (not a "mass organization"). The CWC is also a kind of thinktank, but specialized (again, not a "mass organization"). The League is not a mass organization, and the WPA -- still less than two weeks old -- is not yet a mass organization.

The Red Star Society, which seems to have a special place in Fool and Gang's heart, may not be a mass organization, but it has done good work dealing with victims and survivors of hurricanes in the Gulf Coast area. One doesn't need to be a "mass organization" to do good work among the "masses".


Does it claim to sponsor a union (an international union no less!) that can claim not one workplace organized by it or ever organized by it, which was never even a recognized tendency in an actually existing union?

Reviving the WIIU was not our idea. We were approached by others who asked if we were interested. We were. Politically, we agree with their approach, and the WPA has a member on the WIIU's General Organizing Committee. Will it come off and actually be re-launched? I don't know. We'll have to see.


Does it have a habit of gaining "international" affiliates, which invariably disappear or "split" shortly thereafter because they only amounted to some random guy who exchanged a few emails with the "party"?

You might think he has something here, but he doesn't. In fact, since we removed the agents provocateur from our organization in September 2007, we've only made one foray into international organizing, and that was among our contacts in Canada following the coup there last December.


Does it offer an impressive spread of publications (theoretical journal, "mass propaganda organ," agitational sheet, cultural revue etc.) when it can't even publish one on a regular schedule, and all are pretty much written by one guy with different pen names?

Working People's Advocate comes out weekly. Has since last September. Between July and September, it was produced three times a week. It may take an extra day or so from the Monday publishing day to make it onto the Internet, but, as I said earlier, that is due to the weaknesses we have in our collective of comrades who do that work. The Communist Monthly comes out on the 15th of every month except December. Workers' Republic has went through some problems, but those are being resolved.

As for the accusation that "one guy with different pen names" writes our publications, I and the others who write for our publications would be interested in seeing Fool and the Gang's evidence for this. I suspect that we'll be waiting a long time.


Is its ideology an eclectic hodgepodge of the programs of existing groups (whose existence, no matter how modest, can be verified without recourse to Google), plus the eccentric hobby horse of its Founder and Chairman? (For example, workerism or Fidel Castro worship.)

The Communist League began by declaring itself against doctrinaire sectism. The WPA continues that. We make no bones about the fact that we are not a doctrinaire sect, and that any working person who agrees with our political foundations is eligible for membership.

Fred's argument is, and remains, founded on hostility to such views and a belief that the workers' revolution will be carried out by a petty-bourgeois socialist sect espousing one of the narrow doctrines that emerged in the 20th century. Those who see such views as brilliant are as much stuck in the past with him.


Does it recruit and function mostly over the internet, instead of using its internet presence as a supplement and reference to its non-web-based activities.

Again, Fred might think he has a point. And if he was talking about us a few years ago, he would have. But after the experiences of the first phase of the League's development, we said goodbye to exclusively Internet-based discussions.

Today, we use our Internet presence "as a supplement and reference to its non-web-based activities". But we also continue to use it as an outreach tool, allowing people who are interested in us to contact us and learn more, begin discussions (pending face-to-face meetings and exchanges) and have access to our materials for the benefit of extending outreach beyond the Internet.


If one or more of these conditions apply, then you may be dealing with a phony organization.

There are other conditions that define a phony organization, too:


Calling yourselves a "workers organization" when you have no workers in your leadership and only a marginal amount in your membership.
Subscribing to a doctrine that is inherently incapable of dealing with new or unfolding events, forcing its subscribers to "lean on corpses" and rote catechism for their theoretical survival.
Claiming a political and/or organizational tradition is the best and most "r-r-r-revolutionary", even though it has a history of betrayal of the working class in critical moments ("Fly, fly, fly", anyone?).
Believing that "professional revolutionary leadership" means recruiting as many petty-bourgeois students as you can get your hands on (while not even asking them to proletarianize, for the sake of the organization's bank accounts) to help drag the working class around "like a big bag of shit".
Being willing to "out" non-public members of "opponent organizations" -- their real identities and names, attempting to link them to past organizations, etc. -- because you disagree with them, effectively aiding and abetting the capitalists in their surveillance and tracking of the left (they used to expel people or cut off relations with them for things like that, but that's when those groups had some semblance of principles).
Abusing phrases like "democratic centralism", "revolutionary party" and "dialectical development" to rationalize a failure to make any in-roads into the working class (save for some contact with low-level union officials and a couple of ex-leftists) and grow beyond the status of a minor propaganda sect.

"If one or more of these conditions apply, then you may be dealing with a phony organization". Indeed, there are all sorts of ways to define phony organization. For some, young working-class groups that refuse to play by the rules defined by the petty-bourgeois left are seen as "phony" by them (and, let's be clear, ONLY by them -- workers tend to disagree).

For us, petty-bourgeois groups that, at best, go "slumming" in the working class to troll for one or two adherents (and, at worst, consider the working class not worth their time because "oppression oppresses") are more appropriately labeled phony, especially when the road of "revolutionary continuity" they claim is littered with broken bodies and betrayal.

Fred, you may think you know me -- know us. But I definitely know you, just like I know Norden and Stamberg, Robertson and Seymour, Riley and Logan, North/Green and White. You're all the same to us. We exist because you and your kind have existed. You wasted the 20th century -- the century of wars and revolutions -- for the sake of your own sectarian doctrines and shibboleths. And what have you to show for it? Your memberships are dwindling; your organizations are dead leftists walking. You might want to make it two for two, but that won't happen. We won't waste this century.

You and your kind are the echo of the past, and you should just shut up and stay there -- be a kind of travelling museum piece that only goes on display at public protests and the occasional college teach-in. Leave the task of organizing for workers' revolution to those who know what they're doing ... because obviously you don't.

[Martin Blank]

I know Fred's in here right now. Let's see what he can come up with off the cuff....

[More Fire for the People]

This has probably been asked before but how does the WP differ and relate to the CL?

And, what role do students, high school and college, play in WP organization?

Also, what is the WP position on the role of communist in Hispanic, African American, and Asian communities?

Finally, what is the WP position on the socially conservative rural whites of the Ozarks and Appalachia in particular and the South in general?

[Martin Blank]

This has probably been asked before but how does the WP differ and relate to the CL?

The WPA is a public organization, whereas the League is clandestine, meaning that the Party will be more high-profile, more engaging and active in public events. The League is a charter organization of the WPA, meaning that it is a sponsor of its organization and its upcoming Convention in July. You don't have to be involved with the League to be in the WPA, even though it should be understood that you will be working with them as fellow Party members.


And, what role do students, high school and college, play in WP organization?

If they come from working-class backgrounds, or are working and entering the working class, they play the same role as non-students and are welcome in the Party.


Also, what is the WP position on the role of communist in Hispanic, African American, and Asian communities?

To organize and promote the perspective of indigenous (from within their communities) working-class leadership in the struggle to defeat capitalist rule and establish a working people's republic. You'll have to be more specific in your question to get a more specific answer.


Finally, what is the WP position on the socially conservative rural whites of the Ozarks and Appalachia in particular and the South in general?

We don't write anyone off, but we also don't concede to social backwardness in terms of membership. If "socially conservative rural whites" are engaging in a socially-progressive act (e.g., a strike or a political protest against the capitalist order), we'll support them, but we'll also seek to educate about how the "socially conservative" views they hold are a restraint on their own struggle. Again, if you have a more specific question, please ask it, and I'll give you a more specific answer.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The WPA is a public organization, whereas the League is clandestine, meaning that the Party will be more high-profile, more engaging and active in public events. The League is a charter organization of the WPA, meaning that it is a sponsor of its organization and its upcoming Convention in July. You don't have to be involved with the League to be in the WPA, even though it should be understood that you will be working with them as fellow Party members.

Will the party be standing on its own during elections? I was thinking of my old thread on electoral tactics, referendum drives, "direct action," and democratic centralism (http://www.revleft.com/vb/electoral-tactics-referendum-t93347/index.html).

Perhaps, in order to avoid charges of "frontism," some sort of "electoral platform" consisting solely of WPA members can register as an official "political party"?

[More Fire for the People]

Participation in elections as a tactic has strategic advantages but, in the United States at least, it can be very costly.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Participation in elections as a tactic has strategic advantages but, in the United States at least, it can be very costly.

Never mind the "costly" part (financially speaking). It is indeed a tactic precisely because, for example, the "social-democratic" NDP in Canada doesn't have much grassroots activity (electioneering at the expense of grassroots connections).