I have been considering the obvious organizations such as FRSO or PSL. However, an article really made some points that stood out to me:
https://cosmonautmag.com/2018/10/from-workers-party-to-workers-republic-2/
“What made the “Leninist party of a new type” different was not democratic centralism. Rather than simple centralism, Comintern parties had a form of ‘monolithism’ to use the phrase of Fernando Claudin.14 In other words, Comintern parties emphasized centralism over democracy or often just disregarded democratic norms entirely. While this wasn’t absent in the Second International, the Third was born as a sort of militarized civil war organization rather than a political party in the sense of a mass workers association as envisioned by Marx. While this may have been justified at a time when an actual global civil war against capitalism was on the table, this is not the case right now – we are not living in the same era of ‘Wars and Revolutions’ as the leaders of the Comintern were. When modern Leninists claim the secret of their parties’ road to success is ‘democratic centralism’, it tends to mean an overly bureaucratized group that puts heavy workloads on individual members to make them more ‘disciplined’, and a lack of actual democracy in favor of a more militarized party structure. Factions are forbidden, ideological centralism (rather than programmatic centralism) is imposed from above, and groups aim to build an ‘elite’ cadre that tails existing mass struggles, hoping to bank in on them to recruit members. The Comintern model is simply a recipe for failure in today’s conditions, just another guide to building yet another sect that will compete for the latest batch of recruits. How this actually works in practice is exemplified by the state of actually existing contemporary Leninism in the USA.
Take PSL, FRSO-FB and the ISO as case studies. Alongside schemes to take over union bureaucracy, these organizations essentially form front groups that hide affiliation to any kind of communist goals and aim to mobilize students around the latest liberal social justice issues and work in alliance with NGOs to throw rallies of mostly symbolic value. Through these activities, the cadre (or inner group) of the Leninist organization hopes to recruit parts of the liberal activist community in order to grow their base of support and garner more influence in these social movements. The organizations themselves proclaim democratic centralism, but in reality, there is no public debate about party positions allowed between congresses. At the congresses debate, takes place as little as possible and is usually led by an unelected central committee that composed of full-time staffer careerists. By using their “militant minority” tactics to act as the “spark that lights the prairie fire” in popular struggles, the modern Leninists (with some exceptions of course) tend to tail these struggles instead of fight for a class-conscious approach to issues of civil and democratic rights. One tactic often used is to hand out as many of their signs as possible to appear larger in number, when in reality this is often protesting street theater backed by NGOs connected to the Democrats who are simply using leftists as useful idiots for “direct actions” against the Republicans. Usually, the rationale for this activism is to raise consciousness among liberals. Theoretically, by ‘riding the wave’ of spontaneous activism, the militant minority group will build up enough influence to launch an insurrection. This is a delusional hope. It leads to chronic involvement in activism that takes up time and energy but doesn’t build working class institutions that can actually offer concrete gains for working people through collective action. One could describe this general strategy of tailing social movements as ‘movementism’.”
I have definitely observed this within FRSO’s seeding of cadre in “front” “mass” organizations such as New SDS, anti-war groups, or various NAARPR chapters to recruit other cadre.
There is also a strange divide and turf war between otherwise similar programmatic unity between PSL, FRSO, and WWP. Like, UNITE!
Open to feedback and thoughts, need to talk it out with other comrades.
I’m not saying they’re directly saying it (although they often do) I’m saying that it’s what they do in practice. If a communist organization prioritizes labor politics in a settler colonialist structure they end up with incorrect theory – “Israeli and Palestinian working class unite!”. CPUSA, PSL, FRSO doesn’t make distinctions between the white labor aristocracy and the black proletariat, or black labor aristocracy for that matter. A ghettoized black person works a permanent underclass, doing the dirty work at hyper-exploited wages, experiencing near apartheid in every sense in every institution to keep them there or in jail otherwise. A white working class person will be excused from much of this barbarity at their expense, allowed to work IT while black people clean the toilets. These interests are different and the distinction is vital and necessary to be made, or else we end up with incorrect and hell you could even call crypto-trotskyist theory. These orgs always end up becoming majority white as a result, continually trying to unite the oppressed with the oppressor (with the oppressed always being “at fault” for not participating).
For the second example I could bring up so much, I’ll start with this red nation article but what comes to mind is their Socialist Reconstruction book where they advocate for the liberation of native peoples under “working class leadership” of the whole of America. I could also mention the numerous times they’ve mentioned “honoring treaties” as a solution, a red flag we should be treating as if people advocated for a “two state solution”.
PSL doesn’t say this. The party position is that Israel as a state must cease to exist and full self-determination and decolonisation must happen from the river to the sea.
PSL is a fully black nationalist organization that supports the total self determination of the internally colonized Black nation in the geographic Black Belt, including independence. We have published multiple books on Black liberation and the unique, central revolutionary role of the Black nation, and we tactically and strategically prioritize building in Black communities above almost everything else. Ask any PSL member directly and they will tell you the party must be disproportionately Black in composition and leadership, because otherwise it cannot be part of any revolution in the US.
Yes, which is why PSL makes that distinction as a fundamental part of their analysis and strategy
What about the part of the program that says full self determination, including the right to absolute independence? Or the part of Socialist Reconstruction where colonized nations that elect to remain within the revolutionary socialist state will receive representation in the Congress of Oppressed Nations, an upper legislative and executive body where those peoples have full approval/veto power on all laws? (Not to mention you can’t actually quote natives being “under” working class leadership from the book because it’s not in there)
Tell that to all the native nations whose immediate demand is treaty recognition because it would instantly be a practical, large scale land back program. And the follow up question to those nations from PSL is - what relationship do you want to have with the revolutionary state? And if the answer is “we are going to be fully independent and you should fuck off” then PSL’s positions is “yes sir”.
My issue with the online milieu your criticism is a part of is not that your positions on national liberation, settlers, and socialism are wrong - it’s that you completely misrepresent PSL on those issues. We are absolutely in agreement on everything you’re laying out.
But they do not agitate for this. They say they will “give” them autonomy, but they don’t fight for their autonomy. They use minimal language when talking about reperations, settling for the demand that native communities ask for because it shows the clear disregard colonizers have for anything including their own law as long as natives can be oppressed. In practice, they continually push out native ppl and native orgs like the red nation have cut ties with them over this systemic issue. Brian becker’s white ass doesn’t get to just say he supports native liberation and get off the hook, no settler does. It’s about the work and its about having native people write that theory.
And hey listen, I don’t know the work you do or your branch. I have a problem with systemic issues in the org and the settler family business style of leadership they have. That doesn’t mean you and your comrades arent doing good work in black communities, but that doesnt also mean that the many many people i know who left the org because of anti-blackness are just wrong, or misrepresenting the org. It doesn’t mean the sexual assault that does happen in PSL isn’t covered up, it doesn’t mean that Brian Becker isnt a millionaire that puts him and his white family in leadership positions. These are all legit problems and the fact it always gets dismissed as exclusively online criticism or fed jacketed doesn’t help PSL beat the cult allegations
You have laid out many extremely specific criticisms of PSL in this thread that are entirely false, like that the party doesn’t recognize a distinction between Black and White Americans, that it says native nations will be “under” the working class, or that it’s entire position on indigenous issues in the US starts and ends with treaties. All of these are easily disproven by a cursory engagement with party publication, publicly documented work, or a conversation with a member. I would think you’d start to seriously question your sources.
Now, I’m sure there are people who have racism or sexual assault within the party - it’s an organization of thousands of people that has existed for 20 years. I’m also sure, because I’ve seen it in action at multiple levels in the party, that such behavior is absolutely not tolerated and strong structures exist in the organization to combat these issues. And I’m skeptical of your specific claim that you know “many, many” people who left because the party’s anti-blackness, or that there was a “mass exodus” of Black or native party members. The party has many Black members today and has never declined in membership.
It’s true that the party does not have a large native membership or presence in native communities. That’s due to two reasons. First, it’s an urban party, and most organized maybe communities are far outside of cities (not all, of course!). Second, we specifically do not expect to tell native nations how to pursue their liberation, only to struggle alongside them and in support of them. That’s a difficult area of work to break into without an organic starting presence, and I have no first hand experience given my branch is in an area with an incredibly low native population. I certainly agree that in the long run it will be a necessity.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wF1Ti5GT2w5GZmwqvhvk6uH4zUss_a-B2GZ9NZEx74/edit?usp=drivesdk
I’m sorry for not posting sources sooner, but you need to understand this pops up continually and PSL doesn’t get a free pass from criticism even if I’m just talking about the personal experiences from my comrades. PSL started as and has never not been a marcyist, trotskyist party that runs elections and polices protests to control revolutionary energy. Richard Becker and his wife Gloria La Riva have always had oversized control of the party failing to adhere to any sense of democratic in democratic centralism. Ben Becker and his wife Karina Garcia are also on the central committee, clearly through nepotism and/or just clear as day fed shit. And you can’t say without being an SA apolgist that they have power structures in place to prevent it from taking place. They harbor and take the side of abusers time and time again and the only reason why Im so mad about it is because ppl rather deny it happens than acknowledge it and try and be better or hold leadership accountable
You’re conflating a lot of things here, so be specific. Who is saying things like “Israeli and Palestinian working class unite”? Who isn’t recognizing the unique character of the black working class compared with other nations and especially white Americans? Because you’re saying CPUSA, PSL, and FRSO but I guarantee it doesn’t apply to all of them.
Theyre all organizations headed by settlers that put our statements saying settler colonialism was not the principle contradiction of american society. They’re all organizations that have had liquidations of or mass resignation by native and black people that they say they represent. I’m saying the way they treat America is the same way Maki treats Israel re: palestinians and israeli working class unite. Even the ACP knows thats impossible politics, yet as if cut from the same cloth takes the same settler chauvinist line when it comes to america.
Just lying!
Give me an example, ignoring the fact that the Becker’s being the largest funding source of the party means they have defacto full control of it.
You are just making things up. And you are also erasing all of the BIPOC leaders within the party’s leadership. Just come out and say you don’t have a clue how things actually work, you just like to accept whatever anonymously written stuff you read online and you like to make up even more ridiculous stuff to make yourself feel good
[citation needed]
Be specific, what “settler leadership” is saying that? Because that’s news to me, and flies in the face of the actual direct experience I have with these people.
Is what you’re saying that any party containing “settlers” is counter revolutionary? Who are settlers, by your definition? Is it just white people, or are you including anyone who is not indigenous? And in either case, are you saying that any “settler” has no place in revolutionary politics? Please, explain your vision for what a real revolutionary organization in the United States should be doing.
By settlers I mean those with an explotative relationship with the land, receiving those goodies from imperialism and the other tendrils of white supremacist America, their existence legal and protected within our law. It’s a spectrum, but importantly not ghettoized black people, not non-citizens, not natives. I’m talking about Brian Becker, his kid who he put on the top committee, Im talking about that TERF anti-masker claudia de la cruz.
The EFF is a great example of what we could have here, an organization advocating for and making active steps towards decolonization and land back in a socialist framework. Yes, settlers can join, and no, they are not the majority of the organization nor in great leadership positions.
First of all, I have no idea who Gloria de la Cruz is.
Secondly, I can say from my firsthand experience, neither Gloria la Riva nor Claudia de la Cruz are transphobic anti-maskers.
But you’re clearly not engaging seriously or in good faith, so this is pretty unproductive.
Lmao, the dude does not even know who the top ticket candidate of the PSL is.
Sorry I confused the transphobe with the other transphobe.
You can’t say PSL didn’t post a “masking is a personal choice” video during the campaign that was so unpopular they took it down. You can’t say claudia wears a mask at events. You can’t say PSL isn’t an unsafe space for disabled people for this exact reason, I’m sick of the constant “nuh uh” reasoning to excuse this shit. Own up to it, say it’s a problem or say that you care more about PSL than disabled people. Condemn transphobic comments and work to make it a better org. It’s just constant denial
Your source is two completely unsourced Twitter screenshots? And a random quote just attached to an image with no source?
Are you serious?
You would have gotten thrown out of university with this level of research integrity.
The present internal situation of the United States is not comparable to the present state of the Israel-Palestine conflict. This is indisputable material fact. The United States is not levelling downtown Chicago to make room for dogshit white eurobeat clubs.
I spent this last Saturday degreasing an industrial molding machine alongside my Burmese co-workers, one of whom is my boss now. You have an insane, and materially incorrect politics.
The conditions are different, but not entirely dissimilar. The thing is now citizenship is a measure of whiteness aside from the ghettoized, so we have an iraqi, burmese, euro-american, etc etc labor aristocracy that do jobs handling the resources gained overseas at a fraction of what we’re paid. The united states is constantly displacing ghettoized and homeless people to build gentrified areas and will violently displace natives if their concentration camp happens to be on top of some uranium. Like sure Israelis are less lazy fascists with healthcare and more domestically deployed bombs but americans are still fascists doing the same god damned shit
Let me ask you a very basic question. Do you think that it is necessary to mobilize a majority coalition; that is to say a coalition that represents the interests of the numerical majority of the population, in order to actually materialize a revolution from the lower classes?
If not, I think I see where our points of disagreement come from.
No. I am not a populist or a tailist, I recognize communism is extremely unpopular in america and will not be in the nations popular interest unless the vast majority of lazy white america one day feels like working the fields for the rest of their lives is a good idea as to give their grandchildren a life worth living. Until we smash imperialism these revolutionary circumstances will not arise, and as such I am a revolutionary defeatist in our context. We need to create the conditions.
Ah, so you’re an Ultra then? I suspected as much.
I agree with the diagnosis, but not the precise treatment plan. A Socialist revolution has to be a democratic one as well. It has to be democratic, and it has to be majoritarian, because it has to actually provide a material benefit to the majority of workers which it will have to rely on for it to actually survive & triumph against the forces of reaction. If it can’t do this, it will be consumed utterly, as happened to the Afghan Socialist government, and the Spaniards before them.
Decolonial theory is not a good practical fit for the United States because it is not a majority black/indigenous country, nor is it one which is surrounded by hostile indigenous nations which could potentially collapse it were they to work in concert to do so.
The difference between Israel & America is that America actually achieved what it intended to do, and we all have to work in the aftermath of that. You can’t rewind the historical record, you can only keep going forward as new events & opportunities make themselves apparent.
The best solution to my mind, is to build a multiracial coalition of the working class at home who understand & are committed to Marxist-Leninist principles & who can make a move for power when revolutionary opportunities arise; and simultaneously support national-liberation movements & anti-imperialism abroad in order to create those revolutionary conditions.
The part we seem to disagree on is the middle section.