RCP's new REVOLUTION newspaper

[redwinter]

Originally posted by redstar2000@Jun 3 2005, 03:48 AM
I want to read some RCP literature that is not written by Bob Avakian.

I'm sure they must have some...

um...don't they?

Yeah, there is RCP literature written by people other than Bob Avakian. Off the top of my head I know that several books have been written by Raymond Lotta (on political economy and other topics) and there is an excellent pamphlet by Lenny Wolff called "The Science of Revolution." A lot of party literature is also published that isn't attributed to an author.

I think the whole tone of all the anti-RCP and anti-Bob Avakian sentiment on this thread is just a bunch of people trying to compete to see who can sound like the biggest smart aleck. Which is not a level where I think anyone wants to descend to. I'd like to argue about the ideas, not the people putting them forward.

[Raisa]

That is a real damn good point!
We need to be productive speakers with each other.

I never hear anyone debating Avakian's actual ideas. Is anyone actually familiar with any of his ideas?

[flyby]

heh. I feel you, redwinter and Raisa! Exactly

Red winter, you write "I'd like to argue about the ideas, not the people putting them forward."

I have a slightly different take.

I want to argue about content and ideas. YES! Of course.

And I'm frustrated by know-nothingism (an imitation bush-style ignorance that seeps into the left too..... obviously) -- where people attack without investigating, or reject without even knowning.

But, at the same time, i do want to argue about the people putting forward the ideas, not JUST the ideas themselves.

And in particular, i want to argue for Bob Avakian, his body of work, his method and approach.

Cuz, frankly i think unless many mor thousands of people get with this communist approach, now, in the period ahead, we may not have a chance. I think it is that important.

If we apply this communist method.... if we grasp the approach he calls for (in preparing and making revolution)... if we dare to think through his re-envisioning of how socialism would be, and how communism would be reached, and what communism will be... it can have an impact on the future itself.

There are powerful sentiments against the swine running this system -- but it is diffuse, confused, trapped by Democrats, demoralized, lowered sites, confused about whether communism is possible, and so much more -- and all these issues are being taken up, sharply and convincingly by BA. His work (and him as a person and a leader) is potentially a very very powerful positive force for revolution in this moment.

[Clarksist]

Originally posted by flyby@Jun 8 2005, 01:10 AM
Let me give you an example:

I post on this message board. But frankly when i post i try to "represent" what the most advanced thinking is within the international communist movement. I don't just post whatever randomn thought or opinion wiggled across my wrinkled and fevered brain. Because, frankly, my personal little musings are not as deep, or as important, or as correct, or even as interesting, as what the ORGANIZED communist forces are struggling with, and what a leader like Avakian is articulating.

Wait, what? You don't post what you believe, but what others believe? And you still say that you aren't part of a cult when you let the "leaders" tell you what to say?

Free your mind.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

How could a Aviakanist revolution ever lead to classlessness, when you even admit not to think for yourself or consider yourselves as equals? Isn't a strong independant minded workingclass the first step and one of the most important steps in freeing ourselves from the bourgeoisie?

[flyby]

Originally posted by Clarksist@Jun 8 2005, 02:53 AM
Wait, what? You don't post what you believe, but what others believe? And you still say that you aren't part of a cult when you let the "leaders" tell you what to say?

Free your mind.

ah, well, let's dig into this.

First of all, what we are trying to accomplish is not a poetry event. This is not about each of us hauling out personal opinions and partial insights (however valuable they may be in individually or aggregated.)

We are trying to confront, and defeat U.S. imperialism. Marshal the forces of humanity to fight for a radical new society, worldwide... abolish classes, and all oppression forever.

Now to do that we need some profound theory, philosophy. We need to sum up the past, understand the future, have a deep grasp of the practical movement and the masses of people.

And though some of us may be new to all this, these issues and questions have been deeply explored (over the last decades) by truly visionary thinkers and leaders -- including (imho) Avakian.

So yes, I am willing to share with you some of my personal insights.... and my personal musings... but fundamentally, what i am trying to do is understand what the revolutionary communist movement has summed up, where it is going....

After all, we will not beat the empire with just our individual scattered thoughts -- we need a unified, powerful revolutionary movement -- led by the most advanced and prfound ideas, and by leaders who have emerged and proven themselves in this whole process.

Or let me give another example:

You go for surgury. And ask the doctor what the plan and his approach is.... and he says "I don't let others tell me what to think, I have my own theories on how the body works, so lets not dig into the ideas or discoveries of others in some cultish way, lets just go with my own ideas on all this. You want MY opinion, right, not the approach of leaders and researchers in medicine!"

Would you feel confident that ths surgury was going well?

Or let me put it like this: one of the most powerful and reactionary ideas of America is the glorification of "the self". "It's all about me!"

But we need a movement that allows individuality, without being wracked with individualism.

So you write "free your mind" -- well, perhaps freeing our minds of the illusions, obsessions, and the arrogance of such all-American individualism.

You know what i mean. Why not "free your mind" of that? You may actually start to learn something about real revolution, real communist theory, and how we (seriously) can contribute to liberaitong humanity.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Originally posted by flyby@Jun 8 2005, 01:10 AM
this is another example of bullshit running around in circles.

In fact, rather obviously, the Revolution Bookstores are packed with all kinds of books.

And, rather obviously, the vast majority of the literature of the RCP is not written by the ir main man.

And everytime they sell their newspaper, they are selling literature by their party -- with his writings often at the center (literally) -- but with many other people contributing, wrangling, writing.

So on one level, people just flap their gums around bullshit. And, frankly, you should try to get serious about the issues being discussed -- about how to make revolution, how to prevent restoration, how to press ahead to to communism (and the abolition of classes, parties and states.)

And then on another level: it is important that the work of the RCP actually strain to embody and put in practice the MOST ADVANCED understandings possible about the communist project and communist road.

Let me give you an example:

I post on this message board. But frankly when i post i try to "represent" what the most advanced thinking is within the international communist movement. I don't just post whatever randomn thought or opinion wiggled across my wrinkled and fevered brain. Because, frankly, my personal little musings are not as deep, or as important, or as correct, or even as interesting, as what the ORGANIZED communist forces are struggling with, and what a leader like Avakian is articulating.

It is like you are building a bridge. Do you want to employ the random thoughts of the various construction workers.... a little cement here, a nail there, maybe try this gimmick out.... or do you, as an organized force, want to emply the principles of engineering, and some creative application based on deep study of the problems.

Would you want to drive onto a bridge that was built by the first method?

Would you want to join a revolution that didn't strive to apply the most advanced, scientific, serious and sweeping summations of reality, the revolution and the past?

Let's not bullshit each other.

Who's bullshitting who?

You belong to a petit bourgeois (in leadership and ideology) party which is chauvinistic ("if you wan't to change the world you've got to know Bob Avakian" or "[the RIM is the] emerging political center of the international communist movement" even though Mao himself rejected any 'center' of the international communist movement) and I belong to a movement which is wholey working class in character, ideology and membership.

The truth is, my comrades and I, belong to and devote the large portion of our time to work with the working class, not studying the line of a 'great leader', and 'upholding him' to other non-sympathetic leftists who view (correctly) the RCP as an authoritarian politicult with little no no basis in the working class or there struggles.

I have attempted to read a few of "the main man's" works which were thrown at me by RCP supporters, and frankly I find them boring, not ground breaking or "profound" (a Maoist favorite) -- I also find the RCP's use of token 60's "black" lingo to be extremely antagonizing to myself and the working class (especially minorities) in general (get down with the RCP, be down for the whole thing yo&#33.

"And, frankly, you should try to get serious about the issues being discussed -- about how to make revolution, how to prevent restoration, how to press ahead to to communism (and the abolition of classes, parties and states.)"

Clearly, this is the main reason for the existance of this and other message boards like it. The debate on this thread however has gone off in the direction of criticism of the RCP, so let's not try to act as if I was dodging some major theoretical debate in favor of RCP bashing.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Oh, and I forgot to mention, I find it very hard to take someone serious "as a person" who ran to France in self-exile, after attempting to throw red paint on Deng Xiaoping (I guess this would have sparked the revolution? lol).

When he gets back to the US and stops sponging off of Revolution Books profits I'll think of picking up another of his "works".

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by CompaneroDeLibertad
They seem to be blown away if you ask for materials that aren't written by the 'main man'. Though of course there are some, mostly articles, etc -- one that I know in particular is a long and thorough article on evolution.

That's my reaction too! It's the oddest phenomenon that I think I've every run into on the left.

There seem to be at least a dozen people in the RCP and maybe more who can write thoughtful and intelligent criticism of modern capitalism...stuff that is clearly superior to Bob's rambling and semi-coherent discourses.

And yet...they're seemingly "in awe" of "the main man".

I would not believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.

[flyby]

Originally posted by CompaneroDeLibertad@Jun 11 2005, 12:53 AM
I find it very hard to take someone serious "as a person" who ran to France in self-exile, after attempting to throw red paint on Deng Xiaoping (I guess this would have sparked the revolution? lol).

When he gets back to the US and stops sponging off of Revolution Books profits I'll think of picking up another of his "works".

hmmmm, unfortunately, answering lowlevel personal smears and deliberate lies is part of upholding revolutionary leaders. So let me use this as a chance to actually spread some of the real history of our revolutionary movement and of its main man:

When the capitalist coup happened in China in September 1976, and the Maoist revolutionaries there were arrested, tortured and killed -- it was a low point for the world revolution. Many formerly revolutoinary parties faltered -- some collapsed, others went over to revisionism and supported the Deng restoration of capitalism. And those who "went over" like that, rarely survived long, because those new Deng revisionists had no interest in world revolution, no solidarity, and no reason to pay attention to those toads who praised them.

In this moment of crisis, Bob Avakian stepped forward. Within his own party, he fought for a fearless and scientific evaluation of these events -- going up- against powerful forces in his own central committee that were increasingly and pragmatically arguing for alligning with the revisionists. He wrote a series of analyses (starting with "Revolutionaries are revolutoinaries and must be supported.") And he was determined that this set back (the extinguishing of this powerful socialist beacon in the world) would NOT be worstened by the smaller, but no less important setback -- the capitulation and destruction of the RCP. And he called for a deep and scientific defense of Mao's contributions (in the face of mounting attacks from Hoxhaism, which was putting forward old soviet-style rightism in a new way).

And in this struggle a third of the RCP and its leadership split off, and sank out of sight into rightism, revisionism and worse.

And meanwhile, Avakian took the responsibility to look at the whole world situation -- and to agonize, over and over, about how to regroup the communists on a world scale, on a correct and revolutoinary basis, to sum up together, to carry on, to rebuild the interntional communist movement.

A key point came when Deng Xiaoping was scheduled to come to the U.S. in 1979 to forge a tighter alliance with U.S. President Jimmy Carter. Avakian and his party saw a chance to step out, on the world stage, and make it clear (to everyone watching, wherever they were) that the Maoists of the world had not all simply folded to revisionism and imperialism.

A fierce streetbattle erupted in Washington DC in front of the White House. Hospitals filled with injured police and revolutionaries. Commmunists stood up in White House press conferences and held up the Red Book in Deng's face. When they tried to tour Deng through a factory in texas, a communist worker jumuped out to uphold the world revolution and denounce the murderous alliance with U.S. imperialism. And so on.

It was a disaster for Deng, and for the U.S. government. And not just because it was an "embarassment" that Maoists had gathered to fight through their capital against this alliance.... but because the word then did go out, all over the world, "Mao Tsetung Did Not Fail, Revolution will prevail." For years, the word came back, that revolutionaries in distant countries, in liberated zones and shantytowns, had heard of this, knew that they were not alone, knew that the regrouping of the world communist movement had begone.

It was a huge risk, and a great victory -- and not just as a "demo" but as a public manifesto of continuing in the face of a historic counterrevolutionary setback. The Maoists had called out the Deng counterrevolution -- ten years before the Tien An Men massacre revealed their nature crudely on a world scale.

And the enemy counterattacked fiercely. Not only were many revolutionaries badly beaten and arrested, but many were charged with serious felonies.

A particular, twisted and extremely dangerous move was aimed at Avakian himself -- the courts argued that he was responsible for each and every "act" that happened that night. And so they piled felony charges on him. By the time he came to trial, he was facing 241 years in prison -- a life term, for a demonstration.

And, at the very same time, it was also clear that the ruling class was on a "mopping up operation" against the revolutoinary forces that had emerged from the 1960s. Some figures of the revolution had capitulated or faded away. And as the RCP stepped forward, it was clear that more and more vicious attention was being paid to them, and to their chairman. There were over a thousand arrests of RCP members in 1980, often for simply selling their hot new newspaper the Revolutioanry Worker.
Freedom of information act has revealed that Avakian was under close surveillance in his home -- and as they had done before the murder of Fred Hampton, the agents had asked for a detailed "floor plan" of his house, including where he slept. Deaththreats against him mounted from organized fascists. (At that time FBI organized klansmen had just shot and killed members of the CWP in North Carolina.)

In the middle of all this, a major strategic decision was reached, to relocate the Chairman where he could not be eliminated. (This is described in detail by Avakian himself in his new memoirsFrom Ike to Mao and Beyond.

And, he disappeared from view.

Now enemies of his party and the revolution talk about this in ugly and false ways.

But let's just be clear: This was not a "fleeing" from danger in any way. This was a "going into exile" as revolutionaries have been forced to do, historically (including marx to london, and Lenin to Zurich). And it was not a leaving behind of responsibilities -- in fact, as anyone can see, he stepped up his revolutionary work, and his leadership of the RCP and the international communist movement, in those years.

A part of that is understanding what (exactly) "communist leadership" consists of. Since he was not (obviously) serving as main agitator on the spot, or micro-manager of campaigns and projects. Avakian was leading through line -- grappling with and fighting to solve key theoretical, practical and ideological problems facing the whole revolutonary process. And at the same time, if you study his work from that period you can see his keen sense of the practical movement too, in his orientation of his party, and his discussion of events.

If he had not gone into exile, we would not be talking about these events. There would be no Bob Avakian, no RCP, and not an international communist movement on the level it has fought to rebuilt itself.

These are serious matters. Serious events. Difficult choices. Real life attacks. And understanding this -- including the importance of defending BA, and taking OUR responsibility in making sure he is not murdered or "neutralized" -- is an important part of the revolutoinary work today, and not a small part.

[redstar2000]

I would feel...uncomfortable I guess is the right word...in going into exile while leaving my comrades to "face the music".

That's not to say that I couldn't be talked into it...but it does "leave a bad taste" behind.

I wonder how many of the RCPers who did go to prison then are still in the RCP today.

Or possibly, all the other RCPers plea-bargained their way down to misdemeanors and suffered little if any jail time...while the feds were really determined to lock up Avakian for good. In that circumstance, exile would have made sense.

It was a bit of a different situation for Marx and Engels; they were joined by hundreds of German exiles after 1848-49 and, in fact, many thousands of Germans emigrated to the United States after the failure of those revolutions -- to this day, there is a neighborhood in Cincinnati called "Germantown".

I have read that there was some resentment by Bolsheviks working inside Russian towards the party leadership in exile...particularly with regard to the political struggles within that leadership. The view was expressed "on the ground" that the exiles in western Europe had the "luxury" of political squabbling that Bolsheviks inside Russia did not have.

Exile has a lot of implications.

[Clarksist]

Originally posted by flyby@Jun 8 2005, 08:08 PM
You go for surgury. And ask the doctor what the plan and his approach is.... and he says "I don't let others tell me what to think, I have my own theories on how the body works, so lets not dig into the ideas or discoveries of others in some cultish way, lets just go with my own ideas on all this. You want MY opinion, right, not the approach of leaders and researchers in medicine!"

What? That is comparing apples to oranges. This is a political discussion forum! You clearly stated that you didn't say what you think, but what others have told you to think (i.e. Bob Avakian).

What if Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Kropotkin, Lenin, or (gasp) Bob Avakian just said what others told them to say?

Based on your cultish actions, you may not be the next Marx, but you will never know if you just act as a faceless ***** to the "movement". If the "movement" and the "revolution" are asking all of us to lose our identity and chant what someone else thinks instead of what we think, then fuck the revolution. If communism means forfeiting your personnel ideals for the ideals of the masses (starting to sound like Religion) then fuck communism.

Luckily, for people like me (communists) we believe in a system of individuality. Of freedom. Freedom is not repeating after the leader.

[Organic Revolution]

have you ever met bob avakian.... has he ever given you a place to crash... what i know of him he is just a figure head of the rcp who lets is minoins do everything for him.


EDIT: if the US wanted to lock avakian up so bad, hes back in the us why didnt they do it.

[Clarksist]

Originally posted by rise up@Jun 12 2005, 09:18 PM
have you ever met bob avakian.... has he ever given you a place to crash... what i know of him he is just a figure head of the rcp who lets is minoins do everything for him.


EDIT: if the US wanted to lock avakian up so bad, hes back in the us why didnt they do it.

Mostly, Avakian just did the political asylum thing to try and act as if he is so influential. It makes me sick that he tried to connect to people who actually have had their lives in danger for their radical views, and he is just trying to tap into that.

[Organic Revolution]

avakian is like stalin. he has wonderful things written about him that he never did, or that other people did.

[redwinter]

"avakian is like stalin. he has wonderful things written about him that he never did, or that other people did."
What are you talking about? You need to give some backup for your baseless accusations.

"Mostly, Avakian just did the political asylum thing to try and act as if he is so influential. It makes me sick that he tried to connect to people who actually have had their lives in danger for their radical views, and he is just trying to tap into that. "
As flyby mentioned earlier in this thread, the feds had maps of Avakian's house and were conducting 24 hour surveillance on him (just like the feds did to the Panthers before they massacred them in their homes). When he was on his speaking tour, in North Carolina, organized neonazis and fascists (who had recently killed 5 communist workers party members at an anti-klan rally only a few months before) gave warnings that they'd kill Avakian if he came to the state. Damian Garcia, an RCP member from LA, had recently been assassinated by police agents (and another comrade was stabbed) while doing political work in the projects, in part due to his raising the red flag over the Alamo at a demonstration a few weeks before. Remember in the course of all this that Avakian still had the 241 years of charges hanging over his head for the demonstration and that the government was going after him the hardest for being such a bold revolutionary leader. With all of this weight on both Avakian and the party as a whole (and more than I've gotten into here which is detailed in his memoirs), there were basically two choices: let Avakian stay in the country and risk getting killed or imprisoned for life, or try to get him out of the immediate reach of the US government so he could still lead the revolutionary movement through his line.

"If the "movement" and the "revolution" are asking all of us to lose our identity and chant what someone else thinks instead of what we think, then fuck the revolution. If communism means forfeiting your personnel ideals for the ideals of the masses (starting to sound like Religion) then fuck communism.

Luckily, for people like me (communists) we believe in a system of individuality. Of freedom. Freedom is not repeating after the leader. "
Good to see you showing your true feelings- "fuck the revolution and fuck communism unless it means whatever I want it to mean." Sorry dude, an objective reality exists and communism is objectively the abolition of classes. Revolutionaries in the vanguard will have to sacrifice some things to help get there, so will everyone else, especially in the imperialist countries. Nobody's asking you to lose your identity, just to grapple with the ideas and problems that are ahead of us and try to deal with them and make revolution. Communists all believe in communism, if that makes sense to you: if you don't believe in communism, you don't have the "freedom" to be a communist. You don't have the "freedom" to believe in sexism or racism or imperialism. Those aren't freedoms communists believe in.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by repeater138+Jun 13 2005, 02:43 AM--> (repeater138 @ Jun 13 2005, 02:43 AM)The Communist League believes that they're going to bring about the Third Workers Republic (a continuation of the First and Second i.e. the second is the bourgeois state after the Civil War) by latching onto half baked illusions of democracy in this country and by applying a mechanical understanding of class. Neither of these parties can lead a revoution in this country.[/b]

And the RCP's alternative is to toss out democracy (proletarian, socialist or otherwise), toss out class analysis and latch on to the ramblings of a millionaire's son who has never worked a day in his life. Par for the course for the American Left, I suppose.

repeater138

@Jun 13 2005, 02:43 AM
The CL approach in contrast is to create line by committee, which only takes it down to the lowest common denominator of political understaning and interest. The RCP approach seeks to elevate everyone involved to the highest possible plain of revolutionary discourse, including all you people here on this board.

All you're elevating here is your own ... ego. I'm sorry, comrade, I have to echo the sentiments expressed by others on this board and also say that Avakian's writings, while thought provoking, offer nothing in terms of insight. They have no real educational value. And, I must add, it is the height of arrogance to suggest that Avakian is the only person to have pondered the issues he talks about in his articles and discussions.

Given a choice, I would rather be a part of an organization that creates "line by committee" (i.e., collectively educates and develops its members to understand and apply communist theory and dialectical method to the world around them) than one that relies on a god-leader to create "line by commandment".

That method may work for the Catholic Church, but it has no place in a movement for liberation.

Miles

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by repeater138@Jun 13 2005, 02:43 AM

The fact is, that it is very safe to say that most people who have had significat encounters with the RCP view them as an authoritarian cult around Bob Avakian.

Is that a fact Son of Rage? This is where you show your amazing hypocrisy. While it may very well be arrogant to claim that Avakian and an understanding of his work is necessary for revolution it is just as arrogant to run around inventing empirical data and calling it fact in order to make broad generalizations.

Yes, it is a fact. I've spoken to many people, in several cities, and whenever RCP comes up the word "cult" comes up almost right away. I don't need to take a poll to prove it, but if you insist I may just try make the time for such an endeaver.

First off your assertion simply isn't true. I've met many people from Earth First! to a wide array of local anarchists and people from all kinds of political backgrounds and ideologies who have a good relationship with RCP supporters. Shit, Howard Zinn wrote a blurb for Avakian's memoir. But I guess the "brainwashing" must have set in with him, huh?

So what? I have a "good relationship" with some RCP supporters too. It doesn't mean I don't think they are severely mistaken and following a cult leader.

And let's get very particular with your problems with the RCP. You have never taken it seriously because the RCP seeks to take state power. That was the end of any discussion or understanding for you. Any further reading of Avakian or anything else from the RCP which you may have done is almost irrelevant as you simply refused to understand it on its own and have continually forced RCP line into your simple minded constructs of what it means to be a Leninist.

When did I ever say that? There are other statist groups I take seriously, it's not that simple. My opinion of RCP is based on what I've read of your "main man" and the what "RCP Supports" have said to me both in person and online. Your party openly wants a dictatorship. Your "main man" openly states that your party would be "an enlightened despot" after the revolution. There are other statist groups who at least think that a "democratic state" based on workers councils is what we should be fighting for (which is the ISO's line), you guys want a dictaroship with Avakian as the dictator and are open about that. Where am I wrong here?

Here is the way it works. Without state power you cannot defeat capitalism worldwide. Without state power you cannot organize highlevels of healthcare. Without state power you cannot redistribute wealth and fundamentally change the relations of production. The minute an anarchist shows me exactly how you're going to do this by simply "creating culture" or striking instead of seeking to seize state power and actually shows an ability to build off that and sustain it against counter-revolution is the minute I will drop the vanguard.

This is of course impossible and that is why they and the whole liberal "third way" movement is trying to trick people into believing you can have liberation without seizing the state.

And the reality of seizing state power is that you need a vanguard to do it. There are other roads to power, but each road defines what you can do with that power. If you take power like has happened in Venezuela, or Chiapas the limits of that power become very clear. If you want to expropriate big capitalists and end capitalism you have to be ready and willing to fight and you have to have an ability to engage politics on a theoretical line level which can organize and give rise to millions of people at a time. Only a vanguard can do this. Of course not everyone who claims to be a vanguard is. [/quote]

I don't think I've ever uttered the phrase "creating culture" and I'm not sure what that even means. Every "vanguard" which has taken state power has done nothing but create a State Capitalist dicatorship. They've conducted bourgeois revolutions wrapped in a red flag. That's not what I'm fighting for.

The Communist League and MIM are two examples. And this is not an arrogant claim. This is based on their political lines. MIM, by declaring that the vast majority of people in the U.S. are parasites and reactionaries has essentially declared the impossibility of revolution in the U.S. The Communist League believes that they're going to bring about the Third Workers Republic (a continuation of the First and Second i.e. the second is the bourgeois state after the Civil War) by latching onto half baked illusions of democracy in this country and by applying a mechanical understanding of class. Neither of these parties can lead a revoution in this country.

I'm not a member or supporter of either of these groups, so I won't comment on them. I leave that to others.

On the question of Avakian's leadership it is important to actually think of social change and revolution as a process that one can actually understand. That there are truths to it that we can find in history and in the interplay between theory and practice. Avakian has done what no one else in the "communist" movment in this country has done. He has synthesized the last thirty years of communist practice. The trots are still back in the 30's most other "communist" organizations have fallen away to social democracy or just disapeared in the last 30 yrs.

And your "synthesis" seems to mean being cheerleaders for third world nationalism. Awesome.

His synthesis has been on the level of line. As flyby discussed earlier the question of what happened in China and how Avakian led the RCP through that was one crucial example. I think one of the problems with driving this home is that most of us including myself have been politically conscious only since the end of the Soviet Union. We've never known the International Communist Movement the way it was. We have seen Andropov, Castro and Gorbachev as the representatives of communism. So we don't fully grasp what a huge change occurred when Deng Xiaping took over China. Avakian grasped this almost immediately. And with that understanding has made a great contribution to the possibilities of revolution in this country as well as in Iran, Nepal, Afghanistan and the world in general. This is not hype this is the truth and it is expressed in the advanced nature of the RIM and the parties struggling in these countries.

China was State Capitalist under Mao, and all that has happened is that China has moved more to regular capitalism (for example, the reintrocution of private property).

Avakian has brought forward many more crucial aspects to what is needed to build and sustain a revolutionary movement. And one of the most important has to do with what it means to actually practice Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This is where these ideas of being brainwashed or of the RCP being commandist are shown to be bullshit.

How so? You all parrot his line and don't even deny that. If you're not brainwashed into thinking your main man is always right, how about someone talking about where they disagree? The only time I've seen anything close to this is when an RCP supporter has admitted to "needing to better understand what Avakian means on this issue."

Avakian has said flat out that we don't want and don't need dogmatists, robots and typical communists.

Well talk is cheap then isn't it?

He has presented many of these line questions without clear answers so that everyone who has them brought to them can be a part of finding that answer. This is a general principle which is crucial to when we have seized state power because if the Vanguard remains a small dedicated group of people practicing revolutionary science then it will turn into what we've seen in the past in the USSR and other socialist states. The key is to move towards a reality where every human being can take up these issues and be a part of creating solutions. Where they actually have the theoretical and practical background to do this. Revolution is a science and Avakian is teaching a science by guiding us as to what questions need to be investigated and solved.

<snip>

Of course this wasn&#39;t all directed at you Son of Rage. I figure you&#39;ll stop reading as soon as the word Avakian appears on the screen in a positive light. I just started with you because your pettyness can get under my skin (I admit it).

I read it, I just shake my head a lot at the screen.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by repeater138
And this is why the discussion in this thread is so infuriating.

I feel your pain.

How many times have I said to myself, "Why can&#39;t these people grasp the profound correctness of my ideas???"

It is infuriating, dammit&#33;

Nevertheless, press on we must.

The minute an anarchist shows me exactly how you&#39;re going to do this by simply "creating culture" or striking instead of seeking to seize state power and actually shows an ability to build off that and sustain it against counter-revolution is the minute I will drop the vanguard.

You practically issue an engraved invitation for the response...so here it is.

When I see a Leninist party not simply overthrow a capitalist regime but establish a social order where the working class has the power and exercises it, I will embrace the vanguard as a valid revolutionary paradigm.

There is little reason for optimism about the RCP in this regard. Avakian has flatly said that he intends a post-revolutionary "enlightened despotism" and, in so many words, that there will be a state apparatus even under communism.

The vanguard is "immortal" even if the "Leader" is not.

Nor is the hype -- "we can lead the revolution" -- very convincing. What happened, for example, with the "campaign" against Christian fascism? I thought you had a pretty good idea there...but apparently, it&#39;s been dropped or put on the back burner or what???

And the reality of seizing state power is that you need a vanguard to do it...If you want to expropriate big capitalists and end capitalism you have to be ready and willing to fight and you have to have an ability to engage politics on a theoretical line level which can organize and give rise to millions of people at a time. Only a vanguard can do this.

No one is doing that or anything even remotely approaching that in the U.S.

Your argument really reduces itself to: someday the RCP will do that and no one else will ever do it at all.

You can hardly be shocked, much less infuriated, that such a claim is greeted with massive skepticism. Even if the Leninist paradigm itself were, in principle, valid, there&#39;s no significant evidence to show that the RCP "measures up" to the Leninist standard that you outlined. There are a whole flock of "Leninist vanguards" in the U.S. today and all of them put together wouldn&#39;t fill a minor league ballpark. None of them show significantly greater achievements than any of the others...they&#39;re all "in the pack".

Of course, you "have" Avakian...and none of your rivals have such a "leading personality".

But it&#39;s difficult for me to see what advantage you have gained by that. His thinking is usually pedestrian at best and sometimes suffers from incoherence. He rambles at dreadful length and one searches, sometimes in vain, for the kernel of what he wants to convey.

As an "inspiring figure", he is notably lacking in "charisma"...the response to him as a person that I&#39;ve seen on the internet is almost universally dismissive, often with marked hostility. I myself have probably attempted to engage Avakian&#39;s ideas more than any other person outside of your circle...with little to show for my efforts thus far.

The CL approach in contrast is to create line by committee, which only takes it down to the lowest common denominator of political understanding and interest.

I find this to be a particularly revealing "criticism" -- revealing about the RCP, that is.

Why should it be a "fault" if a group&#39;s political line is determined collectively? And why should it be a "virtue" if its line is set by a single "leader"?

Is correct line a product of "genius"? Or of someone who claims "genius"?

How would we "do" science with that approach? The "leader" sets out the "line of march" for, say, particle physics, and all particle physicists adjust their research priorities accordingly?

No dissent, no criticism, no struggle???

Do people in the RCP ever struggle with Bob Avakian?

Do bears shit in outhouses?