Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Position of KKE on the Webb's platform and the developments in the CPUSA

This is what I wanted to see; a discussion.

I shall respond in due time.

Sam Webb
National Chair, CPUSA

http://inter.kke.gr/News/news2011/2011-04-13-kke-to-cpusa

Position of KKE on the Webb's platform and the developments in the CPUSA

Athens, 13 April 2011

To the members and cadre of the CPUSA,
To the workers that struggle in the USA
To the communist and workers parties

Dear comrades,

In February 2011 the chairperson of the CPUSA, Sam Webb, published an article in Political Affairs, the electronic publication of the CPUSA, entitled “A Party of Socialism in the 21st Century: What It Looks Like, What It Says, and What It Does”. Even if the specific article is accompanied by an editorial note which claims that “The following article represents the views of its author alone. It doesn't necessarily reflect the official views of any organization or collective.”, it is obvious to us that the public position of the head of a Communist Party concerning such an important issue requires special attention.

On the 16^th of February we received a letter from the editorial team of Political Affairs which invited us to send in our opinion.

Our party, after studying this article and the reactions it has provoked within the ranks of communists both in the USA and internationally, considers it necessary to take a public position through this letter, as is required by its responsibility as a part of the international communist movement.

Our assessment is that we are dealing with a comprehensive liquidationist platform of 29 theses which has been placed before the international communist movement and proposes the total revision of the principles and revolutionary traditions of the communist movement.

The KKE, as a section of the international communist movement, considers as its duty the refutation of this platform, which questions the need for the existence of a party of the working class in the USA, and in general is directed against the revolutionary and anti-imperialist movement internationally. The 18^th Congress of our party stressed that “The battle against social-democratisation tendencies in Communist Parties – through the intervention of imperialist mechanisms, anti-communism and the bourgeois media – must be fought firmly and consistently by defending the historic role of the working class and its organised vanguard, the principles of Marxism-Leninism and of socialism. This task takes on even greater significance in face of the growing anti-communist offensive in the EU and internationally.”

Dear comrades,

The platform that has been presented today, through the article of the chairperson of the CPUSA, constitutes the culmination of a course of “adjustment” in the last decade as the author himself points out. There have already been developments in this intervening period which communists in Greece, as well as in the USA and other countries have monitored with concern, such as:

The handing over of the Party’s archives to the imperialists, the bourgeois state of the USA in 2007.
The closure of the print publication of the newspaper (People’s Weekly World) and the journal Political Affairs, with the simultaneous alteration of its character.
The organizational shrinkage and dislocation of the party.
The political “tailing”, behind one of the two pillars of the bourgeois political system of the USA, that is to say behind the Democratic Party.
The stance in relation to the ambitions of US imperialism ( e.g. rejection of the demand for the immediate withdrawal from Iraq)
The blocking of the Joint Statement of the Emergency Meeting of the Communist and Workers’ Parties in Damascus, because in the final text there was the position for the withdrawal of the imperialist occupation forces from Iraq.
These elements intensified after the 29^th Congress of the CPUSA. It was not by chance that immediately after the congress, an article was published in Political Affairs which called into question not only the need to maintain the name of the party, but the possibility and even the necessity of a Communist Party’s existence in the USA today.

Today the Webb platform comes as the culmination of this course and openly propagandises the abandonment of the Marxist-Leninist worldview, the abolition of democratic centralism, and the undermining of the principles of the party of a new type.

We would like to draw your attention to the following basic aspects of this platform:

ON THE QUESTION OF THE THEORY OF THE PARTY

It proposes the replacement of our theory by an eclectic hotchpotch which does not go beyond the limits of liberal bourgeois ideology. It attacks Marxism-Leninism directly, which constitutes one of the central laws of the existence and activity of the party of the new type, as V.I.Lenin pointed out “Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement… role of vanguard fighter can be fulfilled only by a party that is guided by the most advanced theory.” In this specific platform various extremely old opportunist positions are promoted as new (e.g. Marxism-Leninism is foreign, anti-democratic, it is a distortion of Marxism by Stalin etc.), these are positions which disarm the labour movement and surrender it, without theoretical tools, to the claws of the exploitative system.

ON THE QUESTION OF THE POLITICAL PROPOSAL OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY:

It promotes the view that there can be solutions in favour of the working class within the framework of capitalism. In this way, it promotes as an alternative solution the line of the so-called “green” capitalist restructurings. In addition, the Webb platform considers the characterisation of the crisis as a capitalist crisis of overproduction insufficient. It distorts the essence of the over-accumulation of capital as it associates it with…. A lack of investment opportunities. It states characteristically: “Short of a new New Green Deal on a global level, it is hard to see where the dynamism for a sustained upswing, let alone a long boom, is going to come from.”

These views recycle social-democratic and opportunist theories on economic recession and development which whitewash capitalism and conceal its class essence, leading the Communist Party to give up on its strategic goal and support political proposals, which have as their goal the acquisition of new super-profits by the capitalists, in the name of “ecology”, at the same time when they are turning nature and natural wealth into commodities, and destroying the planet in various ways.

THE QUESTION OF THE SOCIALIST PERSPECTIVE:

It renounces the struggle for socialism. The notion of revolution is entirely absent. It proposes an endless process of successive stages, in which the alliances will be formed not on the basis of the criterion of the era and the class interests of the working class. Webb proposes working for “- the balance of forces is to shift in a progressive direction”. This view condemns the party to submit itself to the temporary circumstances and not to work with a strategy for the overthrow of capitalism through the concentration of forces.

Nevertheless, it is obvious to us, that the tactics of a Communist Party must serve its strategy, which is the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of a socialist-communist society. The position of Webb in practice abolishes the strategic goal of the Communist Party, and finally aims to shake the very character of the Communist Party. Socialism is in any case on the agenda, from the moment that we live in the era of imperialism, the highest and final stage of capitalism. The timeliness and necessity of socialism-communism is projected by the impasses of capitalism, the imperialist wars, the economic crises, the huge social, economic, environmental, ecological and other problems which capitalist society gives rise to. A Communist Party must form tactics and alliances which facilitate the concentration of forces, the class unity of the working class and the social alliance with the popular strata, with the aim of maturing the subjective factor for the acquisition of power by the working class, and not to be trapped in alliances and stages, which will lead it to struggle under a “foreign flag” in the logic of managing capitalism.

-ON THE QUESTION OF THE FORMATION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY

The Webb platform proposes moving beyond the Communist Parties. It says that “A party of socialism in the 21st century embraces Marxism, understood as a broad theoretical tradition that reaches beyond the communist movement.” A party that does not struggle for the interests of the working class but “fights for the interests of the entire nation.”

This position denies the necessity of the existence of the Communist Party in the USA and indeed in the entire world. The KKE successfully dealt with similar views, when they emerged in our party 20 years ago under the influence of “Gorbachevist” theories. The communists of Greece fought hard to repel these opportunist views, for the preservation of the KKE, for the preservation and strengthening of its revolutionary, class and internationalist character. Today, 20 years later, the communists not only in Greece but all over the world can judge the positive results that the outcome of this battle had for the KKE. The KKE was able to stand on its feet, to elaborate serious theoretical and political issues, without deviating from the principles of Marxism-Leninism. It approved its new programme and came to important conclusions concerning the causes of the overthrow of socialism, enriching its conception of socialism. It has taken significant initiatives for the unity of the communist movement at a regional and international level. It strengthened its bonds with the working class and the other popular strata. The influence of its positions and its prestige has been strengthened as it plays the leading role in the regrouping and development of the class-oriented labour-trade union movement and in the tough strike mobilizations of the workers in our country.

None of the above would have been achieved, if opportunism had prevailed 20 years ago in the KKE. The KKE would have gone down the road of dissolution and the labour-popular movement would have lost its basic pillar of support.

-ON IDEOLOGICAL STRUGGLE

The Webb platform renounces the struggle against bourgeois ideology and opportunism. The party which Webb describes surrenders from the ideological struggle. He writes “A party of socialism in the 21st century doesn’t turn – liberals, advocates of identity politics, single issue movements, centrist and progressive leaders of major social organizations, social democrats, community based non-profits, NGOs, unreliable allies, and the “people” (according to some, a classless category concealing class, racial, and gender oppression) – into enemies.”

But can a Communist Party enlighten the working class, the other popular strata, if it does not have an ideological front against views which present capitalism as the only way, which simply promote different types of management of the exploitative system? The answer of the KKE to this is that it is impossible for the struggle of the people to develop without a firm and consistent ideological front against unscientific bourgeois and opportunist theories. This is especially true in today’s conditions, when the role of the various NGOs has become obvious, which are connected financially and in other ways with the imperialist organizations. In conditions when social-democracy has been in government and has demonstrated in practice that is a pillar of support for the bourgeois political system. In these conditions the communists not only must not give up on ideological work and struggle, but they must intensify the struggle even further against these forces.

-ORGANIZATIONAL OPPORTUNISM

Webb rejects the Leninist organization, the organization of the vanguard of the working class which corresponds to the needs of the class struggle for the abolition of exploitation. He rejects the Leninist organization because he rejects the struggle for socialism and has taken sides with the bourgeois class for the perpetuation of capitalism.

And so, a state machine which is both experienced and powerful will be opposed by a “party”, according to him, based on the Internet, with an open door policy for new members as an organizational principle: “Joining should be no more difficult than joining other social organizations”.

Thus we can see that not only does he reject the tried and tested organizational principles of the Communist Party of a new type, which were established in the era of Lenin, but he promotes the idea of a party of an NGO type, which corresponds to the content which he himself proposes and is in the direction of a “Communist Party” assimilated into the bourgeois system, which will work for the salvation and “correction” of capitalism and not for its overthrow.

-A PARTY OF REVOLUTION OR REFORM?

Reform is the answer given by Webb to this fundamental question, which was posed a hundred years ago. His view denies that the party is the vanguard of the working class and subordinates its activity to the lowest level of class consciousness (“A party of socialism in the 21st century takes as its point of departure the issues that masses (relative term) are ready to fight for”). Of course a reformist line is proposed as well as the prioritization of the intervention in the institutions of the bourgeois state. The struggle for reforms within imperialism is acclaimed not only as a “means” buts an end for this “new” party.

In reality, when has the path of reforming the capitalist system ever led to the abolition of the exploitation of man by man and the vindication of the workers’ desires? The “recipe” of reforms has been tested by the peoples through various social-democratic and centre-left governments, which in practice have been proved to be the main vehicles for the imposition of anti-people and anti-worker measures, and as pillars of support for the imperialist organizations and wars.

-“MARXISM”…WITHOUT MARX

Webb calls the class nature of bourgeois democracy into question. As he writes: “What I’m challenging is the notion that everything is subordinate to class and class struggle no matter what the circumstances.” He questions the class nature of the bourgeois state, that is to say the dictatorship of the US monopolies and claims that “Thus the nature of the struggle isn’t simply the people against the state, but the people winning positions and influence in the state and then utilizing them to make changes (within and outside of the state)”.

This is an old opportunist position which Marx had already rejected in his era, and was revived by the bankrupt eurocommunist current. And this alone would be enough for us to come to the conclusion that the “Marxism”, which is mentioned as being the theoretical basis of the “party of the 21^st century”, has nothing to do with Marx and his theoretical contribution but aims at its vulgar distortion, the burying of revolutionary theory, and the deception of the workers.

ILLUSIONS CONCERNING THE ROLE OF THE US GOVERNMENT AND THE MONOPOLIES:

The Webb platform fosters illusions and works for the submission of the people to the government of the USA, that is to say the world’s leading imperialist power: “The point isn’t for the U.S. government to simply to crawl into a national shell, but to reinsert itself into world affairs on the basis of cooperation, peace, equality, and mutual benefits…”

At the same time he fosters illusions concerning a “ humanized” version of the monopolies: “big sections of the transnational corporate class have pulled the plug on the American people, economy, and state…the commitment of major sections of the transnational elite to a people-friendly public sector, a vibrant domestic economy and a modern society has waned…”

As the Chairperson of the CPUSA has given up on a class approach to society, the abovementioned positions are to be expected. These are positions which not only have nothing to do with the history and struggles of the party he represents, but they bear no relation to reality either. The continuing occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, the new imperialist war in Libya demonstrate what kind of activity the US government has developed outside its “national shell”. And it conducts similar anti-people activity for the defence of the interests of the monopolies inside its own country.

ESCALATING THE LINE OF “TAILING” CAPITAL AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

The strengthening of political reaction which is intrinsic to imperialism and is intensifying in the conditions of crisis is interpreted as “ultra-right extremism”. This leads to conclusions which violate the truth and reality, such as “we say too definitively that the independent forces stand no chance whatsoever of taking over the Democratic Party. That still may be the case, but it is a mistake to rule it out completely at this point.” The equation of the working class and its movement with the trade union bureaucracy of the AFL-CIO is consistent with the political line of alliance with sections of capital.

TURNING TO ANTICOMMUNISM

Webb’s article marks an overt siding with the class enemy and a complete alignment with contemporary state-level anticommunism. It calls for “an unequivocal break with Stalin” and lines up with the slanderous assault on socialist construction which offered so much to the Soviet peoples and played the decisive role in the anti-fascist victory of the peoples. In essence, these positions attempt to conceal the reality, the complex problems of the class struggle in the USSR and the tough confrontation of working class power with the bourgeois class in the countryside, the kulaks.

It adopts, in essence, every kind of slanderous simplification of complex problems, such as the sharpening of the class struggle in the USSR. The article goes a step further and joins up with Havel, Walesa and all the reactionary anticommunists of the EU who talk of “crimes against humanity”. It lines up with the tendency that attempts to criminalise the Communist Parties and the defence of socialism: “τo describe these atrocities as a mistake is a mistake – criminal”.

As is well known the opportunist current in Europe that forms the so called Party of the European Left (ELP) holds a similar anti-historical position.

Dear comrades of the CPUSA,

Members, friends and cadre of the CPUSA,

Conscious Workers of the US,

At this very critical moment for your party the KKE calls on you to take into account that the ideological attack against the Party of a New Type focusing on its identity, its character and its organisational principles was unleashed from the very first moment of its existence. The revisionists have always supported the dissolution of the party of the working class; they have always been a pillar of support for the bourgeoisie. The bourgeois class and its supporters understood from the very first moment the role of the party in the political emancipation of the working class and its movement. The ideological attack which was unleashed continues up to the present day as is demonstrated by Webb’s article.

We call on you to take into account the fact that the party can only fulfil the role of the proletarian vanguard on the condition that it is equipped with unity of will, unity of action, and unity of strict discipline. Its internationalist character stems from its nature; it constitutes an integral part of the world communist movement.

Experience confirms and practice which is the yardstick of truth proves that the revolutionary line of struggle not only does not restrict mass work but it reinforces it. It strengthens the expectations of the working people, it provides a way-out and a perspective, it contributes to the change of the correlation of forces. The independent action of the party is a prerequisite for the formation of a policy of alliances that will be subordinated to and serve the strategy for the overthrow of capitalism.

In addition, we consider it necessary to take into account that the necessity of the socialist revolution and the construction of the new communist socio-economic formation is not determined by the correlation of forces, which is shaped at the various historical junctures, but by the historical need to resolve the basic contradiction between capital and labour. The counterrevolutions in the USSR and the other socialist countries have not altered the character of our era which is an era of transition from capitalism to socialism which is timely and necessary as shown by the tragedy of the millions of workers and unemployed who suffer from exploitation and the intensification of the problems that the exploitative system causes.

We believe that the replacement of the principles of Marxism Leninism by revisionist approaches in the name of national peculiarities caused a great deal of damage to the communist movement and continues to do so. No national peculiarity can negate the necessity for the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, the necessity for the conquest of political power by the working class, for the socialisation of production and central planning. The economic crisis that broke out in the capitalist world and the intensification of the inter-imperialist contradictions further highlight the timeliness of socialism. Under these conditions the driving back of the new wave of state anticommunism, the defence of the socialism we knew, of its great contribution to the world working class, of the identity and the revolutionary traditions of the communist movement acquire a special importance.

Dear comrades,

Historical experience, the developments themselves have refuted the views that spoke of “the end of history”, the “obsolescence of Marxism-Leninism” and the “end of the Communist Parties”. On the contrary, today there is a stronger need for the existence of Communist Parties that have roots in the working class and the workplaces, which believe in Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. The labour movement must consciously act and rise to the challenge to ensure the existence of a revolutionary party of the working class. This is a crucial duty and a challenge for the most advanced workers and for communists in all the countries of the world and of course above all in the USA.

The consistent confrontation with and rejection of this opportunist-liquidationist platform is a requirement which springs from the historical traditions the labour and communist movement in the USA, it is a condition for the revival of revolutionary communist ideals in the US labour movement and society.

The International Relations Section of the CC of KKE

No comments:

Bruce Bostick composing first rough draft...

...of our response to Alan Maki; the process will take only a couple days with talent like Bruce working at this important task. Then when completed off to the presses of the People's World it will go for final touches by our able and capable editorial staff headed up by Terrie Albanio. Bruce Bostick has recently been appointed to work with our theoretical department for the advancement of middle class ideology. He joins the capable staff of Danny Rubin, Erwin Marquit and the "Lonesome Hobo" himself, Johnny Case.

The scurrilous attack on Professor Norman Markowitz

Professor Norman Markowitz wrote on May Day 2009...

Rome, as the old truism goes, wasn’t built in a day. Or in 100 days. Neither was the New Deal government led by Franklin Roosevelt of the 1930s, which eventually accepted and implemented major reforms in the interest of labor and the whole American people.

Some people from Minnesota are saying that William Z. Foster, James Ford and Earl Browder did not talk about giving Roosevelt more time. They thought Roosevelt was dragging his feet and proceeding too slow in bringing about reforms.

This is what was wrong with their thinking.

They did not understand "stages" and the "incremental steps" within those stages.

Instead of praising Roosevelt they recruited Minnesota socialist Governor Floyd B. Olson to run against Roosevelt.

The lesson learned:

We need to learn to go along to get along.

Robert Borosage had to go and stir the darn pot as if making a witches brew:

But what Obama has been missing has been an independent, obstreperous citizens' movement demanding fundamental reform. Roosevelt had the labor movement, the Townsend Clubs, Huey Long, socialists and communists challenging him from the left. Johnson had the civil rights movement forcing his hand.

The word obstreperous should have been deleted from all dictionaries the year Floyd B. Olson died.

I can't even spell the word.

I can't pronounce it.

In less than three hundred years the American people should be able to "increment" their way to socialism if they learn to behave properly.

If they are going to act obstreperously like the French and the Greeks; well, then it will take longer because the capitalists are not going to appreciate any disruptions in the flow of profits.

Seeing Barack Obama standing in front of the American flag sends shivers down my spine and makes what little hair I have left on my head stand out... I just want to shout out:

Yes we can!

Sam Webb
National Chair, CPUSA

Marxism-Leninism Today recognizes my leadership

Everyone is quoting me. Even the most prestigious web site of Marxism-Leninism in the United States quotes me.

Yes! I am now the recognized leader!

I urge everyone to link to M-L Today. Read their web site; study everything they write.

Watch for more of my fine quotes to be selected for publication.

Sam Webb, National Chair, CPUSA

Out of the Crisis

Written by Sam Webb, CPUSA
Saturday, 21 March 2009
"Labor and its allies now have a friend, a people's advocate" in the White House. ... it is obvious that the Obama administration represents a qualitative break with rightwing extremism and free-market fundamentalism. Not to see this, not to acknowledge this, not to welcome this, no matter whether you live in or outside U.S. borders, is to act like the ostrich that sticks its head in the sand and misses what is happening on the ground. " Excerpts from "Out of the Crisis: Building a New Era of Justice & Peace" by Sam Webb, Chair, CPUSA, March 21, 2009

Annual Better World Awards Luncheon

New York, NY
May 17, Sun.--, 2 – 5 p.m.
Annual Better World Awards Luncheon. Keynote speaker, Sam Webb CPUSA National Chair. 2009 Better World Award Honorees: Councilwoman Letitia James, Social Service Employee Union Local 371, United For Peace and Justice NYC. Lifetime Achievement: Danny Rubin. At Winston Unity Hall, 235 W. 23rd St., 2nd floor, btwn 7th & 8th. $40, $20 for low income & youth. Info & reservations 646-437-5363, nyfriends@pww.org. Checks payable to: Long View Publishing, c/o NY Friends of PWW, 235 W. 23rd St., 8th floor, NY, NY 10011. Benefit People's Weekly World/Nuestro Mundo.

Notice: Call to National Convention of the CPUSA

Our next National Convention has been delayed for a year as we try to get this "Minnesota Problem" straightened out and to be held in celebration of the historic 75th Anniversary of the 1934 Teamster Strike.

We anticipate holding our National Convention at Dunn Brothers Coffee House in Minneapolis, Minnesota in celebration of the 75th Anniversary of the 1934 Teamster Strike and in honor of the leaders of this strike, the Dunn Brothers; all of them.

We should be celebrating Socialism USA at our National Convention. Victory is in sight. We might even have a very special guest with us.

CPUSA National Board Members & responsibilities

Sam Webb

Jarvis Tyner

Elena Mora

Judith LeBlanc

Libera de la Piana

Bobby Wood

John Bachtell

Dee Miles

Joe Sims

Terry Albano

Joelle Fishman

Jen/Rookie Perna

Scott Marshall

Marc Brodine

Juan Lopez

Rosalio Munoz

Terry Albano is responsible for work with the Obama administration

Joelle Fishman is responsible for work with the Campaign for America's Future

Scott Marshall is responsible for work with the AFL-CIO & CtW

Rosalio Munoz is responsible for work with Progressives for Obama

Joe Simms compiles the ten worst and ten best of everything

Erwin Marquit while not a member of the National Board is responsible for Party Downsizing and Ideological Development. Daniel Rubin is his Executive Assistant and special liaison with the CoC.

Erica Smiley appointed special liaison with the John Birch Society and is responsible for Constitutional work.

To contact National Board members:

The Communist Party USA National Office: 235 W. 23rd Street 8th floor; New York, NY 10011; Phone: 212 989-4994; Fax: 212 229-1713; E-mail: cpusa@cpusa.org

We are proud to announce the $1,000,000.00 renovations to our National Office are now complete.

Official Business February Meeting

Erwin Marquit, the distinguished Chair of the James P. Cannon Club of the CPUSA, brought before the National Board a "Petition Seeking the Rehabilitation of Sam Webb" and a request for immediate reinstatement as National Party Chair. The "Petition" outlined Webb's long service in Party building and took note of the historic negative Party growth under Webb's leadership.

In other business Joel Wendland was presented the "Louis Budenz Award for Meritorious Middle Class Journalism" and was presented with an autographed Barack Obama coffee mug.

By unanimous consent it was agreed to drop the annual "Victor Perlo Award for Distinguished and Innovative Contributions to Working Class Economics and Journalism." The reason for dropping this award were many fold with the primary reason being the need to concentrate Party work fully on middle class issues.

With only eight objections, the National Board agreed to issue new membership cards for all 284 members of the CPUSA. Each card shall carry a different historic moment from the Barack Obama campaign. No decision was made on issuing the new Party membership cards to members in Minnesota other than to members of the James P. Cannon Club; the reasons to be discussed in a closed door meeting could not be devulged at this time due to the sensitive nature of the issue.

The National Board decided to wait for a more opportune time to invite Comrade Obama on a tour of the Party's newly renovated glass offices because several seals in the glass walls are broke. In a major decision the National Board decided springtime would present more possibilities with media not as likely to notice drafts of cold air.

A motion was made by Scott Marshall to put off further discussion of "The Minnesota Problem" because further information was required concerning its spread to Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Washington D.C., Arizona, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York and Washington State. Daniel Rubin was assigned the laborious task of looking into these concerns. This is in keeping with the National Board Policy of promototing non-conflict resolution to all class issues.

The National Board concluded its bi-monthly meeting with a toast to success for Comrade Barack Obama and continued economic recovery.

Second Twin Cities Club established

The Dunn Brothers Minus One Club has been organized in Minnesota to carry on work in the Teamsters' Union to provide leadership in celebrating the 1934 Teamster Strike.

Please contact Peter.

More information to follow.

Free coffee and doughnuts every Monday at any Dunn Brothers Coffee Shops in the Twin Cities area. Just request the charges be put on our Club's tab.

John Case, the world renown intellectualite, will be speaking at our next Club meeting on:

John Maynard Keynes the Great Socialist Economist

At Dunn Brothers Coffee at the third table to the left of the entrance door.

8 p.m.

The next meeting will feature a lecture by China and pedophile expert and University of Minnesota Professor Erwin Marquit:

Youthful Chinese Capitalism Gets a Double Dose of Viagra as Capitalism Goes Down.

Same time; same place.

On The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party: Time for reassessment?

A special message from the Party Chair:

My name is Samuel Webb, some people call me Sam. It is my responsibility to inform you of a very serious problem gripping our Party. I want to assure all concerned that I will fight, fight, fight to my last breath to resolve the "Minnesota Problem." I am not a dictator. I want an open Party. But I want to run a tight ship. I will not, I won't, tolerate what you are about to read below. There is a way to disagree without being disagreeable. What you will read below steps far beyond that line. If people feel I have over-stepped my authority, so be it. They may think what they want. The Communist Party, USA has been around for a long time. All good things must come to an end. I have said this many times, the term "Marxism-Leninism" does not appeal to me. Even to me as a Communist this term sends shivers down my spine. We are living in a new era, the era of Obama. This is an era where we must seek among our coalition partners sections of the bourgeoisie. True, these are imperialists, but they are a far more understanding group aligned around our friend Barack Obama who means no harm to any of us; he is motivated by the highest of human ideals, just as I am. I ask you; as you read what has been published below which sends shivers down my spine and brings to memory individuals of the 20th Century best forgotten, such talk will send shivers down the spines of bankers and industrialists who Obama and we must work with. Please understand, what you read below is the embodiment of the "Minnesota Problem" now traversing state lines from the east coast to the west and from the Gulf states to the Canadian Border. We are a small Party. A good manageable size. We would not be able to cope with greater numbers; not at this time. I appreciate your patience and understanding. Now, read for yourself what I am up against. I ask for your help. Several Districts have suggested the best thing to do is give this "Minnesota Problem" the widest circulation possible because most people will come to agree with my decision to fight and struggle against this "Minnesota Problem."

A request has come from several Districts of the CPUSA suggesting the National Board review "The Nature, Role and Work of the Communist Party USA" in light of this criticism in 2007, much of which life has demonstrated to be valid.

With that in mind, the National Board of the CPUSA wants to hear comments from all comrades and our coalition partners.

Below is what we are up against with the "Minnesota Problem."

We are with holding the name of the individual who wrote this because we do not want to provide him a forum beyond what he already has. This individual uses every means available to spread this Marxist-Leninist message of class struggle; he knows no limits nor restraints; he will speak these ideas to any group or organization; he will go into the homes of workers and present these ideas; he will walk into any union hall spouting these ideas. He is not alone; as unbelievable as it may be, there are others of a like mind across this country. If it were left to them we would be embroiled in revolution. We must be careful. We have to work quietly in stages; in unnoticeable increments so as not to alarm our coalition partners or the bourgeoisie who would pounce on us, chew us up and spit us out. We must step lightly and quietly so no one takes offense. What you read below is beyond "bold;" this is why we call it: The Minnesota Problem.

Sam Webb, for the National Board, Communist Party USA

03/02/2007 04:20

Text:

In this essay--- The Nature, Role and Work of the Communist Party USA written by Sam Webb, the National Chair of our Party--- there is not one single specific analysis provided relating to Communist Party work in any of the mass movements... ending the war in Iraq; single-payer, universal health care; the minimum wage, full employment and rights of working people; social security; plant closings; environmental questions and global warming, or the struggle against racism. Add to this, the predatory lending industry with hundreds of thousands of working people now losing their homes.

No mention of the coming economic collapse... like the socialist revolution which is certain even though the date isn't predictable, the capitalist economy is going to collapse in a major depression at some point; we just don't know when... and Webb doesn't even mention this. This is not a matter of "fear-mongering," but another one of those things one can not avoid when discussing the nature of capitalism because it is where capitalist exploitation of man by man inevitably leads. One role of the Communist Party is to constantly remind working people of this aspect of capitalism... even if the adjuncts of the American Enterprise Institute and Marxist revisionists make light of this; and mock the suggestion that the capitalist economy is going to collapse.

Webb makes very vague assertions insinuating Party involvement in unnamed coalitions, but how do we assess anything and its effectiveness, if this involvement is in fact taking place, or if there is any Party initiative on any of these issues at all--- if specifics are not discussed from which we all can learn?

Is there something to keep a secret? Should we know the true Communist Party membership figures so we know where we really stand; or do we have to read between the lines? Are we somehow "protecting" our "coalition partners?" Protecting them from what, anti-communist attacks? Hey, what's the deal anyways, listening to right-wing talk radio both Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton are our "coalition partners" as they dance to the beat of the Beatles' "Revolution" and "Imagine." Both have been called "Marxists" "socialists" and "communists" repeatedly by the right-wing talk radio hosts and the pundits... building on the anti-communist legacy of McCarthyism. Does Webb not listen to talk radio?

The pending closure of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant is one such issue we could be discussing in every minute detail to get a handle on the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party."

Perhaps it would be helpful if the struggle to save this plant was discussed as it is becoming a focus for so many people.

What has the Party done on this issue, what should it be doing, what is the "nature, role, and work of the Communist Party" in this struggle? Has the Party leadership taken the time to assess what resources are needed locally and in the state as well as regionally, nationally, and internationally? has the Party leadership assessed if it is possible to mount a successful struggle for the public ownership of this plant--- thereby raising the "ownership" question to a new level... which are are for doing, right?

I think a key to understanding "revisionism" is understanding that revisionists speak in generalities and refuse to speak to specifics.

What has been the "nature, role, and work of the Communist Party" in working with those involved in the Democratic Party and what has been the "nature, role, and work of the Communist Party" inside of the Democratic Party? Has the Communist Party analyzed the so-called increase in the minimum wage being proposed? Has the Communist Party, its leaders and members, sought to clarify the difference between "single-payer, universal health care" and "affordable universal health care" in an attempt to point working people and the labor movement in the right direction on this question? Has there been any discussion as to "which" Democrats are entitled to Communist Party support? Let's talk about United States Congressman Collin Peterson as a concrete example; after all, he was nominated by a communist; and a communist helped to head off criticism of his role in supporting the war; is Minnesota's United States Congressman Collin Peterson one of the "coalition partners" described by Webb?

And, what initiatives are being pondered with Communists in Canada in conjunction with the Big Three automakers? Is the Canadian organization "The Socialist Project" a non-sectarian organization we should be working with... what about the ideas of Sam Gindin and others in the labour movement in Canada who think socialism is on today's agenda--- in both Canada and the united States BECAUSE of the problems working people are now experiencing... are they wrong?

What exactly is the role of the PWW in helping to build local struggles around issues like the closure of the Ford twin Cities Assembly Plant in a way that educates working people nationally? A specific issue that needs to be addressed as we discuss the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party."

William Z. Foster made a very concrete suggestion as to exactly what kind of education American workers require: an education in understanding capitalism and imperialism and the need for socialism.

Any worker with an interest should be able to pick up an essay on "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" and understand the importance of the Communist Party to working people and the working class... this is not the case with this essay. Certainly any "coalition partners" have a right and need to know from Communists themselves what communists are trying to accomplish.

At some point this important discussion of "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" has to focus on the concrete because otherwise working people will look around and wonder where the Communist Party is and they will confuse other left organizations with it.

Is part of the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" one of informing working people of the real history of this country? If so, this essay falls far short in this area also as the article relegates the Communist Party to being a supporter of FDR when in fact the Party was considering supporting Minnesota's socialist governor in a run against FDR. So, there was much more to the Communist Party's involvement in the 1930's... unfortunately Olson died an untimely death or the United States may have had a party similar to the socialist oriented New Democratic Party in Canada.

Just as this essay ambiguously mentions "revisionism," so too does it ambiguously mention the "non-sectarian" left... when in fact sectarianism is a part and parcel to revisionism.

The working class, rank and file communists, and all those involved in the many ongoing mass struggles around a variety of issues some of which have been mentioned, are entitled to have it spelled out very clearly just how the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" relates to each of these important struggles now underway. The least this essay could have done is addressed one of these areas in detail with specifics cited so that working people would have a better understanding about what the Communist Party stands for and how it strives to accomplish its goals and objectives.

If anti-communism was as close to dead as the author suggests laying all of this out should be no problem, after all, if we are the "partners" in all these coalitions as suggested there is nothing to hide.

Let us use the example of the Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant for a concrete discussion of the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party;" then we will all have a better idea of just what is involved in discussing this topic. Perhaps a good place to start would be for Sam Webb to tighten up his essay with some specifics as he is very knowledgeable about auto related issues with a series of articles for the PWW and PA to kick off a real discussion centering on the planned closing of the Frd Twin Cities Assembly Plant? I am sure that communists across this country and all over the world would be most interested in how the Communist Party responds to such specific attacks on the working class and their communities.

The Wall Street Journal carried an article, "Socialism Burdens a Chinese Car Venture--- Welfare Tasks Absorb 80% Of Giant Auto Plant's Work Force." A couple months ago "Science and Society" had an excellent article on how the Italian Communist Party fought sectarianism and how it paid off big time as it built powerful community and industrial clubs. It would seem to me that both articles provide a frame of reference for discussion of the topic "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party."

The implication of the ambiguities in this essay, "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" is that working people will see through the lies of the capitalist media on their own... that communists do not have to understand when it is the right time to raise questions of private versus public ownership, etc. I would like to know if the writer of this essay believes that now is the appropriate time to raise the question of public ownership concerning the closing of the Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant? I would also like to know if the leadership of the Communist Party did not have some responsibility to broach the possibility of a joint Minnesota Government-Twin Cities-China joint venture to keep this plant open under public ownership during their trip to China? Do working people in all these coalitions of which Communists are partners have the right to expect that their Communist partners will respond in this way?

As anyone can readily see, the closing of the Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant provides us with all of the the issues I cited in my opening paragraph. If the Communist Party was involved in so many similar issues one could argue that maybe another example could be chosen to discuss the specifics of the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party." But, I think in reading between the lines of this essay we all know there are far too few initiatives on such issues otherwise specifics would have been used and cited very liberally.

In fact, revisionism has led to a very sectarian understanding of "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" over many years here in the United States.

I would never suggest that those who write such feeble revisionism as this essay is should be expelled from the Communist Party, but even those who support basing Communist Party policy on such ambiguities must see that the sorry state of affairs is closely related to a "sectarianism" which the writer claims to be against.

I could provide a quote from the "Foundation of Leninism" in response to the quote used from Thompson, but that would probably serve no purpose to creating a healthy discussion and dialogue on the topic of, "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party;" all the same, people might want to read this great little book.

On the other hand... if "sectarianism" and "revisionism" is going to be discussed, perhaps we should all have the opportunity to read Earl Browder's booklet, "Victory;" and William Z. Foster's response, "The Twilight of World Capitalism." I am not one who believes that Browder should have been expelled from the Party for stating his views; he should have been required to defend his views... in fact, Browder did apparently draw some conclusions that his views were wrong as evidenced from his debate with Max Schactman... now Sam Webb should explain why he has avoided discussing specifics and particulars which would have been so easy to do rather than writing so ambiguously to leave everyone speculating as to where he really wants to see the Communist Party go. Why would Webb even want to leave himself open to any speculation and charges of "revisionism."

It is just so easy to explain all of this by using a specific example or two... we already have a lengthy essay, a few more pages detailing specifics won't hurt.

On the issue of democratic centralism, perhaps specific problems in Minnesota could be used as examples... how at a District meeting everyone unanimously agreed to do a few very simple and basic things, and then there was no means of checking up on what was being done and the District Organizer got upset because the minutes from the meeting were used to highlight what we had agreed to do. Or how Party leaders laughed, yes, very literally laughed, at a comrade who suggested that we would see the price we pay for gas at the pumps rise to over $2.00 a gallon and suggested the Party should begin to consider taking on an educational campaign at the gas stations... something that everyone could do very easily. A perfect opportunity to educate working people about the nature of imperialism... just as William Z. Foster suggested be done.

Let us have a discussion about how "democratic centralism" is given lip-service and then used, or more properly abused, in a very cultist and sectarian manner in order to avoid open dialogue and debate on these and other issues.

Why has there been a fear to discuss George McGovern's "Blueprint" for ending the war in Iraq? Because it may offend our "coalition partners" in the labor movement and the Democratic Party who refuse to forgive him for standing side by side with Henry Wallace and Frances Perkins, who were also a part of the FDR New Deal coalition government that included many socialist and communist politicians at local, county, and state levels for whom Floyd B. Olson was the spokesperson... something the present "coalition" referred to by Webb doesn't have; and no doubt Webb, if we are to believe he still adheres to his previous thinking that "socialism" is not yet on the agenda--- like it can just be taken off and placed back on when some leader deems it appropriate... yes Browder tried to do this, too.

It is amazing that these leaders can proclaim socialism off the agenda on the one hand while on the other hand they can't participate in any kind of specifics to advance the struggles in progress at the moment.

Does anyone really believe the non-sense that Nancy Pelosi represents an alternative to neo-liberalism, or even to the Bush agenda? Or that she reflects the needs of working people and stands with working people struggling to achieve better lives? One thing that Webb fails to mention is that voters went to the polls, not believing that the Democratic Party was going to deliver on ending the war or on single-payer, universal health care... because voters had no such illusions as Webb does... in fact, talking with voters as they went to the polls on election day in three communities I found near unanimous disgust for both the Republicans and Democrats... people were just so pissed off they decided to vote for Democrats just to send Bush the message they are fed up with him.

Even when it comes to the minimum wage, everyone understands that the proposed increase is just another Democratic Party cheap trick to get votes... this would be a perfect opportunity to open up a far ranging discussion on just why the minimum wage should be a real living wage, and how to calculate what it should be... but, even on this question Webb lets the Democratic Party shysters off the hook... it is almost like Webb is acquiescing towards the Democratic Party in the very same way the Democratic Party has acquiesced towards Bush's war and his big-business agenda. Working people expect the Communist Party to make the case for what workers need to live better lives in a world at peace... working people will not be offended by the Communist Party clearly stating what is wrong with the phony legislative agenda of the Democrats and a few well-heeled labor leaders that have nothing in common with working people other than they live, much like capitalists off of their labor.

I think we need to clearly define just who these "coalition partners" are that have been described in this essay... perhaps because of lack of activity and the withdrawal from struggle on the part of so many leaders and clubs the wrong "coalition partners" have been chosen to work with? I am kind of wondering if thee "coalition partners" even know they have such "partners." If a "coalition partner" in the peace movement can not even be convinced to discuss McGovern's "Blueprint" to end the war in Iraq because of such deep-seated anti-communist animosities, is anti-communism really as latent as Webb suggests? Of course, the Democratic Party leadership has always been willing to have communists work with them--- as long as they call all the shots, make all the decisions as communists do their grassroots work as they specify without raising any questions. Whenever communists have voiced their opinions, trouble has arisen. It has been this way since Roosevelt dropped Henry Wallace and took on Truman. Webb ignores this bit of history because to acknowledge this places him at odds with his "coalition partners;" partners he can't define and partners who do not know who they have for partners.

Yes, let us have a real discussion of the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party;" a real open and democratic discussion just might go a long ways towards "growing the Communist Party" among the working class.

In conclusion, Webb's ambiguities and evasion of specific issues makes it easy to make the claim that we have "coalition partners" and always taking a partial credit for working class advances. But any communist discussion about the "The Nature, Role, and Work of the Communist Party" requires specific details as a prerequisite to any such discussion.

The day I rejected Marxism-Leninism and became a pragmatist in the Obama fold

I can remember the first time telling anyone I disliked the term "Marxism-Leninism"

It was a warm summer afternoon in the backyard of our friend Erwin Marquit and his adorable wife Doris.

The Wal-mart burgers were on the dirty grill caked in burned fat dripping their fat into the flames as the smell of this good food cooking floated through the warm summer air.

The hamburger buns were on a plate; the moldy spots had been removed. Big black flies would land in the relish.

My mouth was watering as my aging, agile mind was at work wanting to share my most personal thoughts.

It was at this time among friends who I thought I could communicate with a degree of of trust, my inner-most feelings from my heart by sharing my rejection of "Marxism-Leninism."

I know how Gorby and Raisa must have felt the first time they came clean.

For years I lay sleepless at night fearing that if I were to tell anyone of my most inner thoughts, Stalin or Beria would rise from their graves and strike me down. When I did manage to fall asleep images of Stalin would haunt me until I awoke.

On my way to the Twin Cities I kept hoping to be spared any association with Minnesota's number one Stalinist.

I was thrilled and relieved to learn upon arrival in the Twin Cities that this Stalinist would not be present.

As I stood sipping a beer I explained in a whisper to those who would listen my most precious inner thoughts that I never really liked the term "Marxism-Leninism."

I am looking forward to the barbecue and picnic in Erwin's backyard again this year where I have a number of thoughts I need to get off my chest.

I shudder to think that Marxist-Leninist clubs will come to populate Midwest communities like dandelions after warm spring showers... every damn spring, up pop these nasty little yellow flowers.

My prayer for America:

May God save us all from the scourge of Stalinism and spare us the evils of Marxism-Leninism so markets may once again flourish in the service of mankind.

Sam Webb
National Chair, CPUSA

Official Site of the National Board of the Communist Party, USA

Wednesday, April 13, 2011