Articles » cpusa

Video Presentation - NATO Summit & Counter-Summit: Two visions for the planet

Libero Della Piana — Thu, 10 May 2012 18:31:00 -0400

This month's live video presentation will be dedicated to the NATO Summit, Counter-Summit and the protests in Chicago.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is the main imperialist military force in the world today, being the vehicle for war and occupation in Afghanistan and Libya. Though it is an "alliance" it is an unequal one. The U.S. government has long used NATO as a tool of its military goals, originally to challenge the Soviet Union and the socialist countries and now to expand its geopolitical power and influence.

Despite being a Cold War relic and claiming to be a defensive alliance for Europe, NATO today continues its expansion in Eastern Europe, threatening Russia as well as pushing into Africa, Asia and elsewhere.

NATO is not a protector of peace, but an aggressive force that reinforces militarism, wars and military spending at a time when the U.S. and the world needs peace, real diplomacy and domestic spending for human needs more than ever.

Libero Della Piana, National Vice-Chair of the Communist Party USA will make a brief presentation about the history and role of NATO, the anti-NATO protests planned for Chicago and an alternative vision to NATO war and militarism. Questions can be submitted live during the event.

Live Video Broadcast

NATO Summit & Counter-Summit: Two Visions for the Planet
Thurs, May 17
7:00PM Eastern

To watch, simply return to this web page on the date and time of the event to watch live

For more information on the various protests during the NATO Summit and the Counter-Summit for Peace & Economic Justice, click here.

Protest NATO in Chicago

Communist Party USA — Thu, 10 May 2012 18:01:00 -0400

May 20-21 in Chicago, delegates from the 28 NATO countries will gather to make plans for the 63-year-old military alliance. Peace and justice activists from around the country and the globe will be there too.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is the main imperialist military force in the world today, being the vehicle for war and occupation in Afghanistan and Libya and beyond. Though it is an "alliance" it is an unequal one. The U.S. government has long used NATO as a tool of its military goals, originally to challenge the Soviet Union and the socialist countries and now to expand its geopolitical power and influence.

That is why the Communist Party is joining with other organizations and thousands of individuals to protest the NATO Summit and participate in the Counter-Summit for Peace & Economic Justice the same weekend. The Counter-Summit will pose an alternative to the continued war and militarism promised by NATO.

It is long past time for NATO to end and for the U.S. to change its foreign policy to one of peace, diplomacy and international friendship. No to NATO!

Below is a list of some of the activities next week that we will be participating in.

We hope to see you in Chicago.

Join us.

Counter-Summit for Peace & Economic Justice
May 18-19, 2012
People's Church, 941 W Lawrence, Chicago, Illinois

The NATO Counter-Summit is sponsored by the Network for a NATO-Free Future, a coalition of thirty U.S., Canadian and European peace, economic and social justice organizations.

There will be 28 workshops and panels at the Counter-Summit as well as an impressive list of prominent speakers. We encourage everyone to attend. Register today!

One great reason to attend is a very special workshop we are participating in:

A New Economy is Possible: Jobs & Economic Justice vs. Militarism
sponsored by People Before Profits Education Fund
Friday, May 18, 1:00-2:45pm

The current economic and jobs crisis and the structural inequality in the economy highlight more than ever the costs of militarism and war. In the NATO countries unions, community organizations, student groups and new social movements are responding in dynamic ways to the needs and demands of working people. From Occupy Wall Street, to the Republic Windows Take-over here in Chicago, to the anti-austerity struggles in Europe, the people are pushing back against the 1% and their policies that balance budgets on the backs of the 99% and prioritize military spending over human needs.

Moderator: Libero Della Piana

Panel: Vijay Prashad, author "Arab Spring, Libyan Winter"
Terrie Albano, People's World
Pierre Villard, Mouvement de la Paix (France)
Bamshad Mobasher, A New New Deal Project

Protests Against War, Militarism and Austerity

National Nurses United: March to Tax Wall Street & Heal the America
Friday, May 18, NOON, Daley Plaza or Petrillo Bandshell (see note below)

The Nurses United union and dozens of labor and justice organizations are gathering for a massive march to call on taxing Wall Street and building an economy for the 99%. The March to Heal America will demand a "Robin Hood Tax" to provide for essential services such as healthcare.NOTE: The city of Chicago unjustly cancelled this march's permit this week. They are negotiating for a possible new location. Watch their website for updates.

CANG8: Protest NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda
Sunday, May 20, NOON, Petrillo Bandshell

A mass protest rally and march organized by the Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda. Featuring musical performance by Tom Morello and many speakers. Join the Communist Party contingent. Look for our banner on the east side of Petrillo Bandshell near Lakeshore Blvd.

Iraq Veterans Against the War: Unity March for Justice & Reconciliation
Sunday, May 20, 3:00PM, Michigan Ave. & E. Cermak Rd. (following march above)

Supported by thousands, Afghanistan and Iraq veterans will march to NATO Summit to ceremoniously return their military service medals in solidarity with the people of Afghanistan. IVAW especially calls on military veterans from all conflicts to support and assist.

Live Video Broadcast
NATO Summit & Counter-Summit: Two Visions for the Planet

The CPUSA live video broadcast this month will be dedicated to the NATO Summit, Counter-Summit and the protests in Chicago.

Thurs, May 177:00PM Eastern
To watch, simply visit cpusa.org/live at that date and time

Sam Webb on May Day and Class Struggle Today

Sam Webb — Wed, 02 May 2012 12:18:00 -0400

May Day, International Workers Day, was born in the USA and is an official holiday in nearly 80 countries around the world. After years of being little recognized in the land of its birth, May Day is on the rise again in this country. First revitalized by the explosive immigrant rights demonstrations on May Day 2006 and then claimed by the burgeoning Occupy Wall Street movement, now May Day is being embraced by the U.S. labor movement in ways it has never been before.

Communist Party Chair Sam Webb is interviewed below on RT television on May Day 2012. He discusses the modern relevance of May Day, the Occupy movement and the class struggle in the U.S. today.

PHOTO: Some rights reserved by The Eyes Of New York // May Day New York, 2012

Happy May Day!

Communist Party USA — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:02:00 -0400

The Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA) greets working people in the United States and everywhere on May Day with our heartfelt wishes that unity in struggle may bring us a better world:

A world without war;

A world without exploitation;

A world in which the 99% rule, not the 1%;

A world without racism or sexism or discrimination by race, ethnicity, language, gender, sexual orientation or place of birth;

A world in which children are cherished and nurtured and seniors live in security and dignity;

A world in which the natural environment is protected and restored, and not devastated for private profit;

A world in which high-quality education, health care and housing are free for all as a right;

A world in which every nation and people can develop to its full potential, in cooperation and harmony with all others.

A world in which the best that human culture can create is available to everyone.

This is the world dreamed of by the Martyrs of Chicago, in whose honor May First was designated as International Workers Day. This is the socialist future they fought for, and we fight for today. It is a long struggle, with many setbacks and advances, but this May Day, the signs of a new beginning are seen all over our country.

The labor movement is back, speaking with a strong, progressive and independent voice in the fight for jobs, justice, and equality. The attack on workers rights and unions has woken a sleeping giant.

The Occupy Wall Street movement and its many offspring are challenging every abuse of the capitalist system. Anti-capitalist and socialist consciousness is on the rise.

The student, civil rights, women's, immigrant rights, and other key social movements are also on the move.

This May, there will be a tremendous outpouring in Chicago, birthplace of May Day, in opposition to NATO and for moving the money wasted on military spending to human needs. The peace movement is challenging militarism and fighting to transform U.S. foreign policy.

In November, the ultra-reactionary Republican Party which has threatened to roll back all working-class gains of the past seventy years can be defeated by the united mass movements.

This May Day, marches, parades, protests, teach-ins and other events have been embraced by unions, central labor councils, immigrant rights groups, community groups, and countless individuals. It is a new era for an old holiday.

In spite of wars, economic crises and other disasters, for communists this is a joyous May Day.

In that spirit of joy and struggle, we send our greetings to all working people in the U.S. and all over the world.

PHOTO: "May Day Immigrant Rights March, Los Angeles, 2006"
Attribution 2.5 Generic license // Wikimedia Commons

2012: A United People's Crusade for Truth, Workers' Rights, Human Rights and Justice

Joelle Fishman — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:30:00 -0400

I'm going to address the 2012 elections in the context of our long-term vision.

And why this election must become a united crusade for truth, for workers' rights, human rights and justice.

Why this campaign must become a crusade to raise class-consciousness, bring people into action, and build the structures of labor, the structures of community, and the structures of the Communist Party and YCL.

1. Life and Death Elections

The senseless murder of young Trayvon Martin, victim of racial profiling, tragically illuminates much of what this election is about. The deadliness of the racist extreme right-wing message carried to its logical horrible conclusion. And the power of the anti-racist, democratic minded majority to take collective action and intervene on the side of justice as civil rights and labor marched together.

We enter this election exhausted from three and a half years of poisonous hate speech, constant attacks on the integrity of the first African American president, obstructionism in Congress, and an orchestrated infiltration of state legislatures with anti-union, anti-worker, anti-democratic bills including Stand Your Ground.

This drumbeat of racist and anti-union stereotypes and fear tactics is the underpinning of the entire Republican agenda. It is life threatening for millions of people.

Newt Gingrich brazenly called Obama "the food stamp president." He was speaking in code to place blame on people of color and those who are poor and unemployed. He was taking the spotlight away from corporate greed and looking to create divisions within the 99%.

In a matter of weeks, Paul Ryan's budget, endorsed by Mitt Romney, practically ends food stamps (SNAP). Such lack of basic nutrition threatens the lives of 4 million seniors, 4 million adults who receive disability benefits, and 23 million children - including 10 million children in households with cash income below half the poverty line.

This election is not only about survival, not only about closing the wealth gap. It is also about coming out of the election even stronger to continue the fight. This election is not the end of the growing crusade for justice - it is the beginning.

We enter this election fresh from the mighty battles to protect public workers' right to collective bargain, and workers' right to organize. To outlaw racial profiling. To secure the right to vote. Battles to secure Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and the fundamental right of women to health care, and healthcare for everyone. Battles to invest in sustainable green energy. To fund public education, for LGBT rights. Battles to create sustainable jobs with a living wage for 23 million people in need of work including over 80% of Black and Latino youth. Battles to stop foreclosures, close the wealth gap and make the greedy 1% pay taxes.

The most reactionary sections of capital are lining up behind the Republicans, and so are some sections of finance capital that contributed to Obama in 2008.

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, speaks of this election in terms of values. The values espoused by President Obama upholding the contribution of work and those who do it, versus the values of individualism and corporate greed that Romney embodies.

This neck-in-neck election is a fight to uphold working class values that reject racism and division and represent the common good of all. Values based on hope not fear.

This election is not about a political party. This election is not about a candidate. This election is about our lives, our future, the heart and soul of our nation. It is about whether the 99% and the working class within that will be able to get onto higher ground. Will we will be left fighting for our lives? Or, will we be in position to further the struggle toward a transformation of our country to put people before profits.

2. We have to be outspoken on the economic issues

Denise and George Edwards could not travel to this conference. But Denise called to discuss the situation in Western Pennsylvania. She said the restart of General Motors in Detroit has put thousands of people to work in the Pittsburgh area, making car parts. Having a job has been the best argument to pull people away from supporting the Tea Party, she said.

Democracy Corps and Women's Voices / Women's Vote did a survey in 44 Congressional Districts that had been Republican, went for Obama in 2008, and then back to Republican in 2010. These districts are critical not only for the outcome of the Presidential race, but also for the House and Senate.

Like elsewhere, the top issue is jobs and the economy. When the facts of the Paul Ryan budget were explained to these voters, including the cuts to human needs and the Medicare voucher plan, they shifted to support Obama. They also disagreed with Republican policies to maintain the Bush tax cuts to the rich.

Many women shifted toward Obama in response to the harsh and cruel Republican policies, even opposing funding for contraception.

The poll shows there is a lot of work to be done, but with a strong platform for jobs and fair taxes, Obama and Democrats can win voters in swing districts including white voters who supported the Tea Party in 2010.

Many hoped Obama would advance a stronger jobs bill. Sen. Harkin's new Rebuild America Act is comprehensive and far reaching. Other bills target massive infrastructure repair. Organizing around a strong jobs and economic program can enlarge the debate and inspire more voters to get involved.

If the Tea Party-influenced Republicans win control, any progressive legislation will continue to be shelved. The vicious Ryan budget will prevail on behalf of Wall St. If the Democrats win a majority in the House and Senate, opportunities open for grass roots struggle on behalf of the Congressional Progressive Caucus "Budget for All," and legislation for jobs to meet people's needs.

Taking a page from our history of change through non-violent action, unions and community groups are holding 99% Spring actions to confront corporate greed. Women's groups are mobilizing on April 28. Immigrant rights and workers rights marches will take place on May Day. And on Juneteenth, the marches and actions for Youth Jobs initiated by the YCL will be a great contribution.

Visible support for demands to rebuild our nation's infrastructure, to create green, sustainable jobs, to shift military spending to human needs and tax the rich will help expand the debate.

3. Labor and the core forces for social change

This election is a life-and-death fight of the 99%, which includes the working class and goes beyond. As a working class party, we understand the working class, the real producers of wealth, will lead us into the next stage of struggle. We have a strategic commitment to build the labor movement, the organized sector of the working class.

Unions are a top target of the extreme right wing. The AFL-CIO grass roots crusade will engage 400,000 members to canvass their co-workers and neighbors with a unity message for Obama. SEIU will mobilize another 200,000 members with the same goal. This is political independence. The experience will create new leaders and new methods to confront capital beyond the elections.

Racially and nationally oppressed people, women and youth - the core forces for social change - are also targets of the extreme right-wing. Polls show a high level of support for Obama from each of these sectors.

With some exceptions, there is recognition of the danger from the corporate controlled right-wing Republicans. Where there is disagreement with Obama on foreign policy, civil liberties, immigration reform, or other issues, a stronger movement on the ground is needed to shift these positions.

Strengthening and enlarging union, civil rights, community and youth organizations during this election will lay the groundwork for year round organizing, and for future elections in which candidates who come out of the movements, including the Communist Party, run for office.

4. The struggle for voting rights

The demographics of our country are rapidly changing. Texas is already a majority minority state. Our population is younger and more culturally diverse, especially with Latino growth. It is also becoming more progressive. Taxing the rich has overwhelming support, as does ending the wars.

The rise of hate groups, the Tea Party and the Republican right-wing are the modern day attack dogs and hoses attempting to shut down progress.

A dangerous, lavishly funded effort is underway to suppress the vote of African Americans, Latinos, women, and youth.

The battle for voting rights is front and center.

Protests have forced ALEC to shut down their "Public Safety and Elections Task Force," which pushed voter-suppression and Stand Your Ground laws through many state legislatures.

Unions, the NAACP, Planned Parenthood, La Raza, Youth Vote are fighting back with massive voter registration and protection campaigns. The Obama organization has outreach groups for each section of the population.

Citizens United [Supreme Court decision] permits multi-millions to flow into swing districts from secret super PACs. The airwaves, social media and postal boxes will be flooded with lies and hysteria to smear Obama and create provocations.

The Democratic Governor's Association says right-wing super PACS are " on an ideological crusade against workers and women." This includes Restore Our Future and Crossroads GPS (the Koch brothers). Karl Rove's American Crossroads is at the $200 million level with TV ads in the swing states of Wisconsin, North Carolina, Montana and West Virginia.

A people's crusade is essential to turn back the "attack dogs," show how racism hurts everyone and raise sights for what is possible.

The challenge is to start knocking on doors right away with the working class values message to set the framework for the debate. In southern states, the mid-west, coast to coast. In urban, suburban and rural areas — in red states, but also blue states. Nothing can be taken for granted. That was proven in the 2010 elections.

5. The Communist Party and YCL

The Communist Party USA and YCL are also a part of the core forces for social change. We bring our historical united front experience, our working class unity approach, our strategy and our vision of Bill of Rights socialism.

So it is no surprise that Tea Party Republican Congressman Allan West chose to wade into the swamp of anti-communist red-baiting by charging the entire Congressional Progressive Caucus are members of the Communist Party.

But it's not just Allan West. On Breitbart.com, Presidential candidate Mitt Romney said: "There will be an effort by the quote vast left wing conspiracy to work together to put out their message and to attack me."

To quote Rachel Maddow: whenever the Republicans are losing support, you can count on them to dredge up anti-communist red-baiting.

Like racism, anti-communism is a part of their playbook. They want to create fear and they want to undercut the contribution that we bring to the movement.

But there is a flip side. The attacks by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have gotten more people interested to find out what is socialism and what is the Communist Party.

In polls, more young people prefer socialism than capitalism. Why not? Their future in a caring, more equal society will be much richer than in the one they know now that is dog-eat-dog and lacking much hope or opportunity.

It is not self-serving to say that we have a responsibility to enlarge our ranks. That is the biggest contribution we can make to this election and to our country in the ongoing movement for social change and equality.

Instead of "waiting for later," the time is now, in the midst of this historic 2012 crusade.

As we knock on doors in our working class communities we are not only turning out the vote, we are giving people the opportunity to be part of the struggle to organize in their neighborhoods for a better life, starting with, but going beyond, the elections. In a few short months, people can become grass roots leaders and join the Communist Party and YCL. That has been our experience in Connecticut election campaigns.

The YCL Summer Youth Voter Project in Florida will be a wonderful contribution to uphold voter rights in one of the most restrictive key battleground states. And a state where Obama is slightly ahead in the polls. We can imagine all the youth who come from around the country going home with new experience, understanding and enthusiasm on how to challenge and overcome voter suppression and build the YCL.

The Political Action Commission has some materials in your packets and is issuing UNITY, a monthly electronic newsletter. Sharing People's World articles on FaceBook, by e-mail and any other way, is an important ideological tool.

This election is a matter of life-and-death. This election crusade has the potential to be a much larger victory than the election itself.

If the labor movement comes out stronger, the civil rights movement stronger, the women's movement, the youth movement stronger, the environmental movement, peace movement stronger, and if the Communist Party and YCL emerge stronger among the working class, larger, and with new respect we will be in position to move onto the offensive for worker's rights, human rights and justice.

One of the union organizing conventions has a great slogan to close with: Lead, Unite, Fight — Win for the 99%!

We Are the Real Uniters

Jarvis Tyner — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:07:00 -0400

I want to thank Sam for his fine report. His analysis, in both letter and spirit will be welcomed by our party and will help light the path to people's victory in this period and beyond.

The reports of Juan, Joelle, Lisa will do much to help guide our party through theses critical challenging times. And to Anna Maria thank you so much for your remarks yesterday. We want you to know that our party understands it's special international responsibilities. We understand what is at stake and we are fighting in solidarity with the world's peoples and against US imperialism and for peace and justice everywhere. Thank you so much. Our two parties are united in the struggle to bring about that better world that we both know is possible.

I am very glad Sam made reference to Georgi Dimitrov's phenomenal address to the 7^th World Congress of the Communist International in 1935. The impact of Dimitrov's brilliant report changed the world. It was set in a different period, but ideologically; theoretically and politically offered big lessons for us today.

Dimitrov was a international hero in our movement and beyond. He had to fight for his life in the fascist courts when he was falsely accused of setting fire to the Reichstag (German Parliament).

The fascist set that fire and used it to create an anti communist, anti Semitic, hysteria so that they could crush the Left and solidify their fascist dictatorship in German.

And that is what they did.

Among those falsely charged was Georgi Dimitrov, a Bulgarian Communist and a leader of The Communist International (CI).

The Nazis used the fire to launch an anti Communist rein of terror. Ten thousand members of the Communist Party were thrown in prison. Communist leaders were tortured and murdered.

Dimitrov was imprisoned for 7 months. For five of those 7 months he was held in chains. The Nazis wanted to dehumanize and demoralize this comrade so that when he walked into the courtroom, he would not be able to defend himself.

But they underestimated this worker, his courage, his great understanding. Dimitrov, who was not a lawyer (was a printer by trade); rejected the court appointed council and demanded his right to defend himself. At a time of anti communist terror, Comrade Dimitrov went into that fascist court, defended himself and against all odds he won his acquittal.

That was in 1933; in 1935 he gave that report to the 7^th world congress of the CI. Dimitrov remains a heroic figure in the world communist movement.

In Dimitrov's "United Front against Fascism", unity in struggle is the dominant theme, I would say. Dimitrov creatively applied our science to the complex objective situation, he countered right- and left-sectarian tendencies in our ranks and laid out effective tactics within the framework of a winning strategy.

Unity was based on the understanding that while they played a leading role, the Communists alone, as courageous and committed as they were, the Soviet people alone, as sacrificing and determined as the were, could not win this battle alone. The Left along, even the international working class alone, though decisive, could not defeat the Fascist drive for world domination. That struggle had to include all class strata and peoples world wide who opposed fascism.

Fascism is a form of capitalist rule. It is the worst form. It had to be defeated on the battlefield. But also it had to be defeated in the hearts and minds of masses.

The Popular Front was powerful enough to defeat the Rome/Tokyo/Berlin Axis. History is very clear about that.

Our party has a history on this question...

This discussion was part of the early formation of our party.

William Z. Foster in his history of our party was critical of the "Left Manifesto" that our comrades united around in their split from the Socialist. He said it was great in the fight against right opportunism but fell short in the fight against left-sectarianism.

Foster pointed out that the Manifesto "fairly reeked with this traditional sectarianism in practice" (He was taking about traditional in the American Marxist Movement). He wrote,

"It failed completely to develop a program of united front action with labor's natural allies, especially the Negro people and the farmers" And, he added, mistakenly considered the anti-capitalist struggle to be "one of the working class alone." He further pointed out that the left manifesto, " left partial demands completely out"..."and reduced it's parliamentary activity simply to one of agitation."

He then quotes Alexander Bittelman on the matter, who said, "The left wing did not seem to realize that revolutionary mass action grows [only] out of the real living issues of the class struggle, as it develops day by day."

(History of the Communist Party of the United States", Pg. 168, By Wm. Z. Foster, 1952, International Publishers )

The "Left Manifesto" was written in 1919 a year before Lenin's "Left wing Communism an Infantile Disorder" came out. "Left Wing Communism" greatly enhanced the discussion and led to an ideological turning-point for our movement which was the basis for the development of tactics that grew the party to its largest size, its greatest influence and biggest achievements.

The united Front and the popular front concept literally saved this world from decades of terroristic Fascist rule. Yesterday, Bea Lumpkin mention that 100 million lives were lost in the struggle against fascism. It is a rejection of left sectarian practice that is a barrier in the battle for democracy and therefore a barrier in the fight for Socialism.

Look at the Republican Campaign. It reeks with racism, it promotes violence against immigrants and people of color.

When I think of the senseless murder of Trayvon and the murders in Tulsa I think of the Sharon Engler's call for "2^nd Amendment solutions," and the GOP's promotion of violence as solutions to political problems.

I think their attacks on marriage equality and the violence against LGBT folks is connected.

This open promotion of violence against the life of the African American President seems to me to be almost tolerated in the media. Frankly, what I worry about the Secret Service is, are they protecting the President? Ted Nugent's, violent talk against the President, at of all places the NRA convention, is treated as acceptable in the right-wing media. In other periods if a peace leader would have said the things Nugent said, they would have been in handcuffs. It would not have been tolerated with other Presidents. Why is it ok now?

Their attacks on the size of government are really attacks of the working class, racial minorities, on women, on youth, on the hungry and homeless. They are attacks on pubic education, social security, pensions and the right to health care for all.

To connect creating jobs to concessions to the rich is outrageous. Since oppose government they saying to the jobless? They oppose government intervention so they are saying that the unemployed and their families have to wait until the rich get all the concessions they want before they get work. They want to reduce labor's strength to a point were they can't fight back so that they can maximize their profits to new heights.

And don't hold your breath on those jobs comrades. Poverty wages are not the answer and will bring new and deeper crisis. Remember, we had full employment under slavery.

These right-wing nut jobs need to understand, WE ARE NOT GOING BACK. If Obama is elected, of course there will be a struggle; a struggle that the democratic forces could win I would say. If he is defeated, the movement will suffer a big setback and the country will be pushed backwards.

That is why we fight to build real broad people's unity of the democratic (small-d) and progressive forces to push the struggle forward. What labor and allies are doing will build political independence and will bring great changes.

Is it revolutionary?

At a time when the survival of capitalism (as the Right Wing sees it) is sharply at odds with democratic rights, the fight for democracy as we understand it, is a radicalizing struggle that has and will transform this system. Comrade we are the real uniters and we fight with a clear conscience and an honest heart.

Comrades, seven years from this September will be our centennial year. We have much to celebrate. We have a proud history of struggle. Our party has weathered many storms. We are the most attacked party in U.S. history. Our almost 93 year history, we have been outlawed more than once by this capitalist government. Many U.S. political parties have come and gone. But our party survived. How did we survive? Our understanding of the united front and popular front and how to build broad unity has been a big part of how we've survived.

I believe what we are doing now goes beyond this election struggle. I believe we are helping to build a new foundation for great change.

I ask you, can we do it? And what should you answer?

Sí se puede!

Defeating the Rightwing on the Road to Socialism

Sam Webb — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 14:28:00 -0400

National Members Conference
Communist Party USA
April 21-22, 2012
New York City, NY

Introduction

I welcome you to our annual conference.

I also want to extend a special welcome to Comrade Ana Maria Prestes Rabelo of the Communist Party of Brazil (PcdoB). Comrade Ana, who is a member of the Central Committee and International Department, will be with us all weekend.

We look forward to her presentation later today, which I'm sure will give us a picture of a party that skillfully works in a very complex situation.

We thank the Communist Party of Brazil for making this possible.

Before I get into my report, which should be understood as a work in progress, I thought it would be useful to say a few words about the thinking behind this conference. One might assume that a conference in an election year would focus laser-like on the present political moment.

Such an assumption is both right and wrong. This conference will not ignore the elections to be sure, but it does at the same time have a grander design. It will connect the dots so to speak between our immediate and our longer-range political tasks.

Or to put it differently, we hope to connect the struggle at the ballot box today with the struggle for socialism tomorrow.

We have discussed this relationship before, but not enough and not to everyone's satisfaction.

Too many comrades ask: do we have a strategy beyond defeating right wing extremism that leads in the direction of socialism? Have we given up the fight for an independent political formation lead by labor and the racially oppressed? Is socialism still our goal? And, most importantly, how do we get to socialism from here?

Capitalism doesn't work

Before addressing these questions, I want to make a case against capitalism.

Since its earliest days, capitalism has inflicted incalculable harm on humanity. Primitive accumulation, genocide, wars, slavery, ruthless wage exploitation, territorial annexation, racist, gender, and other forms of inequality - all this and more occupy prominent places in the history of capitalism.

And yet as ghastly as this is, the future could be even worse for a simple reason: capitalism's destructive power, driven by its inner logic to pump profits out the labor of working people, has grown exponentially compared to a century ago. Unless restrained and eventually dismantled, this power is capable of doing irreversible damage to our planet.

Consider some of the new dangers that make socialism necessary.

First is the prospect of unending war and mass annihilation. With the winding down of the Cold War, most people assumed that the war danger, conventional and nuclear, would ease. Subsequent events, however, have erased these modest hopes. The nuclear threat remains and imperialist driven conventional wars scar the landscape and brutally extinguish the lives of millions of people.

Another threat to humanity's future is environmental degradation. Almost daily we hear of species extinction, global warming, resource depletion, deforestation, desertification, and on and on to the point where we are nearly accustomed to this gathering catastrophe.

Our planet cannot indefinitely absorb the impact of profit-driven, growth-without-limits capitalism. Many scientists say that unless we radically change our methods of production and consumption patterns, we will reach the point where damage to the planet will become irreversible.

The earth is sending distress signals to its human inhabitants. And they will become louder still as long as the reproduction of capital dominates the reproduction of nature.

Democracy

Still another danger is the many-sided assault on democracy and democratic institutions in the recent period, resulting from the rise of the national security state, capitalist globalization, the political ascendancy of the extreme right, and the invasion of corporate money into the political process.

At the epicenter of the struggle for democracy (and socialism) is the struggle against racism and for full equality. More than anything else it is corrosive of class and democratic consciousness and practices. It is an ideological underpinning of U.S. aggression and the "War against Terrorism." And it is a dagger in the heart of working class and democratic unity.

If the right wing gains in popularity and power it will be on the back of racism in the first place. The intensification of racism in words and deeds (including a wave of murders) in the wake of the 2008 elections is not by chance. It is the calculated policy of right wing extremists (including the GOP presidential candidates) who are desperate to beat the president at the polls as well as fatally fracture a people's movement that is growing in understanding, strength and unity.

The racist surge as well as the other attacks on democratic rights and liberties are exceedingly dangerous to our nation's future. But the role of the democratic movement is not to lament them, nor to cry that fascism is imminent. Its role is to fight more energetically to preserve and expand democracy and democratic liberties.

Shift in power on global level

Still another danger is whether U.S. imperialism will peacefully accommodate to the rise of new competing powers and especially China. Or will it pursue a policy of maintaining global dominance by military means.

If history is any guide, there is ample reason to be concerned. The decline of dominant powers in the past (England for example) and the rise of new ones have brought in their wake war, instability, and even chaos in international relations.

No administration, including the present one, has shown any willingness to yield on U.S. primacy in world affairs. That doesn't auger well for the future.

It's the economy

Finally, the economic engine of capitalism is sputtering. On a global level capitalism never worked for the majority of the earth's inhabitants. At its very dawn capitalism was divided into a core and peripheral zone. In the former the productive forces underwent periodic renewal, the working class grew, and living standards increased, while the latter produced primary materials, provided a source of cheap slave, languished in poverty and underdevelopment, and became a sink for destructive environmental practices of the developed world.

While the relationship between the core and periphery has changed, for example new dynamic centers of accumulation have emerged such as China, India, and Brazil, the majority of the world's people on the periphery still live in poverty, disease and destitution.

These conditions of subordination, oppression, and exploitation are not by happenstance. They are structured into the economic and political relationships between the core and periphery, between imperialism and the countries of the South.

For a while it seemed as if capitalism in the first world was immune to its own worst excesses. Indeed, U.S. capitalism went through a phase of development in which employment, wages and benefits steadily climbed upward for substantial sections of the working class in tandem with economic growth rates and corporate profits.

It seemed as if capitalism's harsh features had permanently given way to steady growth, upward mobility, and broadly shared prosperity. The American Dream seemed to be within everybody's reach.

But to the surprise of many this "Golden Age" of capitalism didn't last. By the mid-1970s stagflation, rising unemployment and declining wages took hold. Over the next three decades the living conditions for working people deteriorated, thanks to neoliberal globalization, the takeover of the economy by nonproductive finance capital, and a right-wing-led ruling class offensive.

And with the Great Recession of 2008 the metamorphosis was complete. Working people in their vast majority found themselves on a fast moving treadmill. Some ran faster to stay in place, while many fell behind. Meanwhile, the 1 percent not only navigated their way through the Great Recession, but did so by enriching themselves many times over.

What is the upshot of all this?

Capitalism has morphed from a generator of jobs and rising income to a generator of unemployment, inequality, and insecurity. It is hard to imagine the restoration of a growth and employment dynamic and path that will provide plentiful jobs and rising income without a qualitative turn in the balance of class and social forces.

To make matters worse the extreme right is determined to pursue polices globally and domestically that will further impoverish working people - not to mention hasten the decline of U.S. capitalism.

I hope that the foregoing makes the case that socialism is not just a good idea, but an existential imperative - to preserve peace and our planet, to expand democracy, to eliminate gross racial, gender and other forms inequalities, and to provide a secure life for the billions living on this earth.

Thus, the overriding question is: how do we get to socialism? After all, there is no direct path. Socialism can't be hot-housed. It takes more than militant slogans.

If there were a straight and smooth path to socialism we would have taken it long ago.

Transitional periods

In its formative period, the world communist movement had a disdainful attitude towards transitional forms and stages. The struggle for socialism was direct and compressed in time. It was damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.

The operative slogans were "class against class," and "No Retreat, No Surrender."

But things didn't work out the way that those young militants believed. Revolution gave way to counterrevolution.

In the aftermath of this upheaval in the early 1920s, Lenin argued that the revolutionary process would stretch out over time and go through different stages, with distinct strategic tasks specific to each stage.

He further argued that the new communist parties must search for forms of transition to socialism, springing from a sober estimation of the level of class consciousness and the balance of class and social forces at a particular moment.

Unfortunately, Lenin died at a relatively young age and his advice was largely ignored. In fact, it wasn't until the 7th Congress of the Communist International in 1935 that this serious weakness of the communist movement was corrected. In his address to that gathering, Georgi Dimitrov , the famous Bulgarian Communist, said that the immediate strategic task was not socialism, but rather to build a broad working class led people's coalition to defeat the growing fascist threat.

Dimitrov ridiculed what he called "cut and dried" schemes that ignored the political situation and dynamics on the ground. He maintained that strategic and tactical concepts had to be fashioned to fit concrete reality, to fit a particular stage of struggle.

He argued that communists must shed simplistic understandings of the revolutionary process like class against class, skipping intermediate stages of struggle, and countering every demand of the social democrats with a demand that was twice as radical.

His report was at once an impassioned plea for a broad based alliance with the working class at its core and an insistent argument against "self-satisfied sectarianism," an attitude and practice that consisted of taking seemingly militant REVOLUTIONARY positions that were divorced from the concrete realities on the ground.

That was then. So where do we stand now? What is the path to socialism? What is our overall strategy?

Strategy and strategic policy

Before attempting to concretely answer that question, I want to make some general observations about strategy and strategic policy.

To begin with, a well thought out strategy can make the difference between victory and defeat. Our party in 1930s, for example, changed its strategic policy in the mid 1930s (from class against class to the building of a broad working class led people's coalition against the economic crisis and fascism). In doing so, we enhanced our status and prestige, grew rapidly in size, and advanced the broader movement in innumerable ways.

By the same token, a wrongly conceived strategy can isolate the party and weaken the working class and people's movement.

A strategic policy is not an exact roadmap to the future, but a broad outline of where we want to go. It delineates to millions a path from one stage of struggle to another stage in the context of a larger revolutionary process.

It pinpoints the main social forces hindering progressive development, while at the same time identifying the main class and social forces that have an objective interest in moving society to a higher stage of struggle.

A strategic policy doesn't provide neat boundaries that seal off one stage of struggle from another nor does it adhere to a set timetable. In fact, it can take an agonizingly long time to complete.

Strategic policies don't grow out of thin air or moral outrage or our desire for revolution. Instead, it is determined by two factors.

One is an objective assessment of the level of social and economic development of a society; an anti-corporate strategy, for example, would been of little help to the revolutionaries of 1776.

The other factor is a concrete estimate of the balance of forces of all the social classes and groups in society.

Finally, tactics (issues of struggle, forms of organization and unity, slogans, demands, etc.) flow from a strategic policy, not the other way around.

Road to socialism

With the foregoing in mind, let me outline the main stages of struggle as our new program envisions them.

The first is the struggle against right wing extremism. This is not a new policy; it goes back to the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. At that point and since then it became evident that the main obstacle to social progress remains rightwing extremism and its corporate backers. They cast a reactionary shadow over the whole political process then and now.

The election of Barack Obama was a blow to the right, but subsequent events have demonstrated that it wasn't a decisive blow.

The right still retains considerable power, and initiative to frame the debate and disrupt the legislative and political agenda.

Its overarching goal this year is to regain control of all three branches of the federal government. How dangerous is that? In my view it would set the stage for a period of extreme rightwing onslaught.

If you don't believe me take a glimpse at Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio where rightwing Republicans took control of the levers of power in 2010 and then ruthlessly rolled back rights, eliminated social programs and attacked the labor movement.

Those actions are a harbinger of what the Republican Party would do if in command of the federal government next year.

By contrast, the decisive defeat of the right would weaken Wall Street and the entire corporate class, give leverage and momentum to the people's movement and clear the ground for an era that puts people and nature before profits and "free markets."

But that will happen only if an electoral coalition is assembled that includes the left, progressives, independents and moderates.

Said differently and dialectically, the defeat of the right at the polls next year cannot be achieved on a pure anti-corporate basis, given the existing relationship of forces. The 99 per cent versus the 1 per cent is a good slogan and representation of economic reality, but it doesn't reflect the actual political balance of forces on the ground at this moment.

The political complexion of the country is more complicated, thus making a broader strategy that reaches out to moderates (Republican as well as Democrats) and independents necessary.

Moreover, such a strategy if successful becomes the basis on which tens of millions will encounter a new relationship of forces, which, in turn, is the ground on which to move to a higher level of understanding and struggle.

None of this is to suggest that the Democrats aren't now or won't be in the future an obstacle to progressive change; in too many instances they are, but they aren't the main obstacle for the moment.

This election, then, is not about choosing a lesser evil. It is about our nation's future: are we going to move in a progressive-democratic or rightwing anti-democratic-authoritarian direction (I distinguish this characterization from fascism which has a particular meaning - the open terroristic dictatorship of the most backward sections of the capitalist class - in the communist movement)

Thus, the labor-led people's coalition, and Communists as a current within that coalition, must make every phase of the election process a number one priority.

The people's coalition must be a major factor in the primaries. It must reach, register and educate new and stay-at-home voters. It must guarantee a maximum voter turnout on Election Day.

No less important, it must unrelentingly expose the reactionary positions of the Republican candidates and their racist and anti-democratic systematic campaign to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters.

Not everyone shares this view. Some think the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans. Others go further and say that the Democrats are worse because they create popular illusions that change is possible within the two-party system. Still others say the electoral process is so compromised by corporate money that participating in it is a fool's errand. And finally there are advocates of running a third-party presidential candidate in this election.

I can understand these sentiments, but only up to a point. Like it or not, millions go to the polls in spite of their misgivings. They are invested in the electoral process. Voting is a sacred duty. And the Democratic Party is the vehicle of reform for tens of millions, the majority of whom are working and oppressed people.

What is more, labor will throw itself into the campaign to elect Democrats, moderate as well as progressive, albeit from its own organizational base. Four hundred thousand campaign volunteers are going to walk neighborhoods this fall.

Much the same can be said about the racially oppressed. Ditto women and seniors. The majority of youth will also take part in the elections, and like four years ago on the side of President Obama and the Democrats.

A third-party presidential candidate would only help the extreme right as well as isolate the left from the broader movement.

The two parties of the capitalist class have similarities. That is undeniable. But differences also exist at the level of social composition and political policies - policies that can be widened under the impact of a powerful people's movement, as they were in earlier historical periods.

The past three years have been frustrating to be sure; much the same could be said about the past three decades. But frustration and impatience are a poor excuse for a strategic and tactical policy in relation to the coming elections and politics generally.

Only a very sober and objective analysis should guide our thinking and actions. It is easy to imagine any number of electoral strategies, but the question is: which one is rooted in objective realities and advances class and democratic struggles? Which one positions the popular forces to go on the offensive in the post-election period? Which outcome will clear the ground of neoliberal polices and debris? Which one will weaken the corporate class as a whole?

To skip over the current stage in the name of militant radicalism may feel revolutionary, but in the end it is self-defeating and strategically misguided.

Anti-corporate stage

The decisive defeat of the right in November will result in a different and far more favorable balance of forces. The fight for a people's agenda, the fight for an anti-crisis economic program will bring the labor led people's movement into loggerheads with corporate economic and political power.

Although the terrain of struggle will tilt in the direction of the broad democratic movement, no one should expect that the corporate class to retreat without a struggle.

Employing its considerable political, economic, and ideological power it will attempt to disrupt, divide, and divert the people's movement in the short term.

In the longer term it will seek to regain the initiative and unrivaled political dominance.

Needless to say, it will get help from the mass media as well as breathe new life into the extreme right wing. And expect racism in new as well as old, open as well as veiled forms to continue as the corporate class attempts to reverse the election outcome, poison class consciousness, and divide the people's movement.

Only a closer alliance of a surging labor movement and its strategic allies - the African American people, Latino people, and other peoples of color, women and youth - have the wherewithal to turn back this corporate counterattack, while at the same time enact progressive measures such as public works jobs, living wages, economic conversion to peace time and green production, affirmative action, immigrant rights, housing relief, shorter hours, infrastructure renewal, expand democratic rights, etc.

At the same time, new forms of independent political action will continue to grow outside of the Democratic Party apparatus.

Indeed, as the anti-corporate struggle intensifies the contradictions and tensions within the Democratic Party will continue to grow given the multiclass class character of the party.

While pressures to break with the corporate elements in the Democratic Party and their program will surely surface, it is unlikely that any formal rupture will occur before this broad alliance exhausts every (or nearly every) opportunity to reform the Democratic Party, including converting it into a people's party.

Obviously we welcome the growing trends towards political independence. After all, it hard, if not impossible to imagine, any deep going anti-corporate reform unless the multi-racial working class, the racially oppressed, women, and youth (and their allies) have their own political formation.

Such a development in all likelihood would be combined with new forms of organization (Immigrant rights organizations and Occupy are examples of this phenomenon) and the growth and maturing of the left, not least the Communist Party.

This stage of struggle doesn't supplant capitalism, but brings the socialist stage closer as tens of millions become convinced in the course of struggle (experience is a great teacher; messaging, sloganeering, and agitation is not enough) that capitalism doesn't work for them.

Of course, objective conditions as well as unforeseen events will leave their mark on this bitter confrontation. Social change seldom follows a prescribed course. We envision a process of change, but not a process into which everything must fit; history is more multi-form than we can ever imagine.

Thus we have to anticipate novelty, that is, unforeseen turns and breaks in the political process.

The socialist stage

The struggle for socialism is a complex process with no fixed timetable. Periods of advance yield to periods of retreat and vice versa. Shifting alliances form and reform with each side struggling to turn provisional allies into stable ones. New political understandings that accent unity, equality, empowerment, and anti-capitalism compete with ruling class notions that frame how millions understand the world, and the state becomes a contested battleground.

The opening stage in this process will see a substantial and sustained shift to the left among the core forces of social change (the multi-racial working class, people of color, women, and youth plus various social movements), a deepening of anti-racist (including anti-immigrant) consciousness and practice, growing support for an anti-crisis program, the further congealing of an anti-corporate alliance of social groupings, and the growth of the Communist Party and other left organizations.

This stage will culminate in the election of a people's government, based on a left and progressive majority at the polls.

The election of a people's government will mark the transition of the revolutionary process to a second stage. It will be characterized by a combined struggle inside and outside of government to implement the key policies of an anti-crisis program.

Of special importance at this stage are steps to control the movement of capital, to redistribute income from the wealthy to working people, and to place under democratic control sectors of the economy, such as finance, that are a threat to the people's government and socialist revolution.

At the same time, legislative initiatives to counteract the grip of a small number of monopoly conglomerates on the capitalist mass media will be of critical importance. A more diverse pattern of ownership and control in the print, broadcasting, film, telecommunications and web-based media would mirror the wide range of interests and aspirations in a modern, democratic society.

So there is no misunderstanding, it should be said that a people's government does not mean that the entire capitalist state and its personnel are now on the side of a fundamental transformation of society.

Therefore, the state itself will become a focal point for sharp class and democratic struggles. In the early going, the people's government will have to introduce extensive changes in recruitment, staffing and management policies within the diplomatic services, government agencies, the judiciary, the police, the secret services and armed forces for the purpose of replacing key personnel with supporters of the government's goals.

It will be vital to secure the widest possible public support for these steps, including in mass referendums, while continuing to extend and deepen democratic rights, improve the living standards of working people and other non-corporate strata, and reduce racial, gender, and other inequalities.

New bodies of working class and popular power, if history is any guide, are likely to arise in the course of these struggles.

This thrust by the new government will almost certainly meet the most determined resistance from powerful sections of the capitalist class and its forces within and outside the state apparatus. (Unlike other countries we can worry less about outside interference militarily and economically because of our dominant position in world affairs and the likelihood that we will not be the first to make this transition.)

Thus, enormous confrontations will occur, signifying that the revolutionary process has entered its third and most crucial stage as tens of millions come to the realization that capitalism is the problem. In the course of these confrontations - not least in the electoral arena - the question of who controls the state will be decided - the corporate- finance capitalist class or the working class and its allies.

Much will depend not only on the balance of forces in the state and in society as a whole, but also on the sustained mobilization of tens of millions to uphold the people's democratic will and to respond in a timely way to any acts of sabotage.

In the course of this process, the constructive involvement of the labor movement in general and the public sector trade unions in particular will be essential.

For many reasons (the sanctity of life, the terrifically destructive weaponry that exists, the lasting wounds that are left in the aftermath of an armed engagement, etc.) the socialist movement seeks a peaceful path. The extent to which this is possible will depend the scope of the popular mobilization and the ability of the socialist movement to minimize the capacity for resistance of the capitalist class, including the utilization the slightest divisions in its ranks. As the working class and oppressed invariably bear the brunt of counter-revolutionary violence, it is the duty of the socialist forces to devise such a strategy, rather than propose simplistic notions of violent insurrection and armed struggle.

At one time, we envisioned a narrowing of the movement from the anti-corporate stage of struggle to the socialist stage. There was a grain of truth here, but only a grain; probably some social strata will peel away as the dawn breaks on socialism, but at the same time, the overall movement must be gaining in breadth and depth. It must be winning ever more millions of people to its banner, including those who were formerly politically passive or a part of the opposition bloc.

Therefore, any notion of the transition to socialism as a purely working-class affair or a project of just the left should be rejected. Only a movement of the great majority and in the interests of the great majority, only a movement whose mass character deepens again and again, is capable of winning socialism in our country.

Political rupture

Even when a political rupture occurs, it will be neither complete nor irreversible. On the day after the transfer of power, socio-economic life will probably look much like it did the day before and power will continue to be contested.

In such circumstances, as important as the battle of ideas is, it is also imperative to continue to enact measures to weaken the class adversary, while at the same time taking steps to expand the rights of tens of millions, and enact people driven economic measures.

It is also imperative to win bigger majorities in subsequent elections.

Thus, revolutions are not a single act, but rather a series of events and complex processes stretching over time.

Nationally specific path

Nor are revolutions imitative. While there are clearly some common features, this transformational process can happen in a variety of ways; one size doesn't fit all.

In considering forms of transition to socialism, we should be unabashed proponents of our own nationally specific path.

While we should study the experiences of other countries, those experiences should not imprison our political imagination.

If I were to write a book on our own country's path to socialism, I would make the particular features a main thread, not an addendum. For example, given the democratic sentiments of the American people and given the powerful impact of race and gender on the politics, economics, culture, consciousness, and historical trajectory of our nation, our vision of socialism must include an unyielding commitment to completing the unfinished democratic tasks that we will inherit and expanding democracy, beginning with the eradication of racism and male supremacy.

Even the slightest devaluing of democracy or the fight against racism and gender oppression will keep the socialist movement on the political periphery.

The Communists and the left

We also have to anticipate that multiple parties and movements will be a feature of the U.S. path to socialism.

That said, I would argue that our party has a unique role both now and in the future.

Our embrace of a theory of society and social change that is historical, ecological, dialectical, comprehensive and independently elaborated - without shortcuts, simplifications or official boundaries.

Our affinity to the American radical/democratic tradition.

Our use of class analysis and categories in a way that is broad and unifying.

Our focus on the real needs, struggles and interests of the working class and people.

Our commitment to equality and internationalism in their various forms.

Our determination to assist (and lead) in the building of a broad people's movement at the core of which is the multi-racial working class, people of color, women, and youth.

Our understanding of the special (central) place of the struggle against racism in the fight for social advance and socialism.

Our disposition for action, but not any kind of action, but united action along a specific strategic and tactical path.

Our accent on social processes and contradictions.

Our conviction that the multi-racial, male- female working class and its organized sector play a decisive role on the path to social progress and socialism.

Our refusal to confuse slogans and militancy for analysis.

Our insistence on making a concrete presentation of every question.

Our belief in the necessity of a broad strategic perspective.

Our use of flexible tactics that unite and move forward the labor led people's movement

Our appreciation of the interconnection between the struggle for democracy and the struggle for socialism.

Our ability to stay clear of false oppositions between partial and more advanced demands, between gradual and radical change, between electoral forms of action and direct action, between patriotism and anti-imperialism, between struggle against the state and struggle within the state, and between anti-capitalism and rifts in capital.

Our insistence that the electoral/legislative arena grows in importance as we move down the road to socialism.

Our belief that popular majorities make change.

Our vision of Bill of Rights socialism.

Our confidence in the democratic and revolutionary character of the American people.

I could go on, but I think my point that our party is unique and necessary to the revolutionary process at every stage.

What will it will look like

Socialism USA will not be drab. It will have a modern and dynamic feel, celebrate the best traditions of our nation, and give patriotism a new democratic content.

It will bring the social and democratic into the heart of our government, economy, media and culture.

It will complete the unfinished democratic tasks left to us by capitalism.

It will expand the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Our socialism will embrace people-centered values - in place of profit-centered values - as we overcome divisions of class, gender, race, ethnicity and sexual preference.

It will encourage new social arrangements to care for the very young and the very old.

U.S. socialism will insist on the separation of church and state, but it will also assume that people of faith and non-faith will be active participants in society.

It will also bring an end to exploitation of wage labor, not in one fell swoop, but over time.

A mixed economy operating in a regulated socialist market and combining different forms of state, cooperative and private property will define the economic landscape.

Such a mixture of ownership relations and market mechanisms does not preclude economic planning or a national investment strategy.

Finally, socialism will give priority to sustainability and sufficiency, not growth without limits.

A bigger Communist Party

I would be remiss if I ended this report without appealing to you to build the Communist Party and Young Communist League in size and influence. We are too small to be sure, but the good news is that we are growing.

Still we could grow faster if we went about it more deliberately and concretely. After all, people like what we do and say.

A good measure of this is the thousands of people who "like" us on Facebook. As of last week, 20,000 liked us on the People's World page and 18,000 liked us on the Communist Party page.

And in both instances, the number steadily grows week by week.

Here is a pool of possible new members if we work at it. Plus there are the hundreds of people in mass movements who appreciate our role and if approached right might well join the Party.

What a difference that would make in our ability to bring to life our strategic policy both now and in the future!

Can we do any less?

CPUSA builds online community

Blake Deppe — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:08:00 -0400

NEW YORK - As Communist Party chair Sam Webb noted in his opening speech for the 2nd annual CPUSA National Conference April 21, many of the delegates present were youth. With them came a modern medium for the journalistic and political environment: social media. That tool was one of the highlights of this important two-day event.

People’s World editor Joe Sims underlined its significance, remarking, “The Internet has changed politics; you can’t be a political party in America and not use social media as a major organizing tool.”

“This is particularly true for” the Communist Party, he added. “The Internet is an organizer’s dream. It’s cheap, it’s instantaneous, and it’s interactive. You can organize a social revolution with a device that you can hold in the palm of your hand.

“Our websites give us a platform to participate in the national debate, and we do so, of course, from a pro-working class standpoint, emphasizing the bread-and-butter issues.”

But even more important, Sims and others noted, is determining how best to build a community with others who are interested in fighting for democracy and a socialist future.

“Last year,” said Sims, People’s World “welcomed over one million visitors. Even better, 240,000 returned and visited the website on a regular basis.”

In a presentation on social networks, Libero Della Piana, a party vice chair, went into further detail: “While [CPUSA Facebook page] currently has 17,000 people who regularly subscribe to our information, many more can actually see it.” Thus, “the friends of all our ‘fans’ equal [approx.] 17.7 million. So potentially, all of them could end up seeing our stuff at any given time.”

But the task of interacting with others and building community, Sims pointed out, was so much more than simply acquiring large numbers.

We have to ask ourselves, he said, “What do these numbers mean? Who are these people? Are we interacting with them? Are we organizing them on a regular basis? These are some important questions made even more important because of the rise of the Internet.

“We need to be engaged in the Facebook community. Our membership is engaged in it, and so are our children. They are expressing themselves, letting us know what they see as important.

“For us, this should be a no-brainer. We have always seen the role of our press as a collective organizer. Our founders saw it as a means to reach out and bring people together. We are challenged to use this technology in our fight; it’s a big challenge.

“The people who ‘like’ us on Facebook are [often] engaging in a big political and ideological discussion. So a ‘like’ is like the prelude to a political first date.”

Kent Halliburton (29), a leader of the Young Communist League in Arlington, Texas, outlined a great example of how the youth are utilizing social media in a progressive fashion.

“We started the Red River Club” (the Texas chapter of the YCL), “and created a Facebook page for it,” said Halliburton, who is a graduate student of the University of Texas. “We also started a fitness club that in the last two years has changed my life - I lost 86 lbs. I felt that my local comrades and I had to try and start offering some help. And we’re also doing a Marxist reading group.

“The idea is to give people something to see online, and then go meet the comrades in person. You can talk and chat on Facebook all you want, but then you’ve got to go out and show them you have the right attitude, and that there is no distance too far to see a comrade.”

Della Piana acknowledged Facebook’s vital role among YCL’ers. “This technology facilitates unique and unexpected things. One thing we have to focus on, though, is to make sure members and leaders are checking the CPUSA website periodically. One of the difficult things about Facebook and the Internet is that it’s changing so rapidly. It’s really up to us to adapt to those changes and keep up.

“Social networks and our online work allows us access to millions of people we would otherwise never meet. And while we can plan and prepare, there are many times when unexpected things happen because of social networks.

“We cannot predict the thing that’s going to capture someone’s imagination, or a political moment, or what people are going to do with it. But what is needed,” he concluded, “is participation.”

Photo: Libero Della Piana gives a presentation on Facebook and social media at the 2nd annual CPUSA National Conference. PW/ Blake Deppe

CPUSA’s Fishman: Racism underpins entire GOP agenda

John Wojcik — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:42:00 -0400

NEW YORK - The Communist Party USA sees the 2012 elections as literally a matter of life and death.

At the party's annual conference here last weekend, Joelle Fishman, chair of the party's political action commission, said the "drumbeat of racist and anti-union stereotypes and fear tactics is the underpinning of the entire Republican agenda. It is life threatening for millions of people."

She described the "senseless murder" of Trayvon Martin as "the deadliness of the racist extreme right wing message carried to its logical horrible conclusion" and said that when Newt Gingrich called Barack Obama "the food stamp president" he was "speaking in code to place blame" for the economic crisis "on people of color and those who are poor or unemployed. He was taking the spotlight away from corporate greed and looking to create divisions within the 99%."

In a matter of weeks after Gingrich made those remarks Republican Congressman Paul Ryan released a budget, endorsed by Mitt Romney, which, for all practical purposes, ends the food stamp program.

"Such lack of basic nutrition threatens the lives of 4 million seniors, 4 million adults who receive disability benefits, and 23 million children, including 10 million children in households with cash income below half the poverty line," said Fishman.

While Communists see the defeat of right wing extremists, they maintain that the 2012 election is not about either a political party or a candidate.

"This election is about our lives, our future, the heart and soul of our nation," said Fishman. "It is about whether the 99% and the working class within it will be able to get onto higher ground. Will we be left fighting for our lives or will we be in a position to further the struggle toward a transformation of our country to put people before profits?"

Are Communists hopeful about the prospects for defeating the right wing in 2012?

As Fishman tells it, they are.

She told a story she had heard from activists in the Pittsburgh area where the restart of General Motors created thousands of jobs for people making auto parts.

"Having a job has been the best argument to pull people away from supporting the tea party," one of the activists told Fishman.

Democracy Corp and Women's Voices/Women's Vote did a survey in 44 congressional districts that had been Republican, went for Obama in 2008, and then back to Republican in 2010. These districts are key not only for the outcome of the Presidential race, but also for the makeup of the House and Senate.

Like everywhere else, jobs and the economy were identified as the top issues.

When the facts of the Ryan budget were explained to these voters, said Fishman, including the cuts to human needs and the Medicare voucher plan, they shifted support to Obama. They also disagreed with Republican policies, including GOP attempts to kill funding for contraception.

"Many women shifted toward Obama in response to the harsh and cruel Republican policies," said Fishman.

(PW/Ben Sears)

¿Por Qué Votar?

CPUSA Political Action Commission — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:17:00 -0400

Descarga una versión en inglés/español para imprimir y distrubir

“¿Qué diferencia hay?”
“¿Todos los políticos son iguales?”

El Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., y muchos otros, murieron por el más preciado derecho humano, el derecho a votar. Ahora, los mismos racistas que negaron a los votantes afroamericanos sus derechos electorales en la década de 1960 están tratando de prevenir que voten en el 2012.

En los viejos tiempos recurrieron a lo que se calificó como el "tributo para votar." Los racistas cabalgaban en la noche y llevaban sábanas blancas. Hoy en día, llevan trajes caros. Pero aún así ellos roban las elecciones, excluyendo el voto anticipado y mediante la imposición de una identificación con foto; requisitos que los votantes pobres no pueden permitirse. Esto se llama "supresión de votantes."

Se requerirá una lucha para derrotar estos trucos sucios. Las tácticas de supresión de votantes violan la letra y el espíritu de la Ley de Derechos al Voto de 1965. Todo, desde plantones a manifestaciones masivas en los edificios de las gobernaciones es requerido.

El truco sucio mayor es el de engañar a los votantes a pensar que no hay diferencia. El enorme aumento en la votación en el 2008 eligió a Barack Obama, el primer presidente afroamericano de los Estados Unidos. Enfrentando una permanente oposición , el logró conseguir:

Que la Ley del Accesible Cuidado de la Salud extienda su cobertura a 35 millones de personas sin seguro, proscribió la negación de la cobertura para condiciones pre-existentes y extiendió a 26 años la cobertura de hijos bajo los planes de seguro de los padres.
La Ley del Pago Justo por la igualdad salarial para las mujeres.
Estabilizó la economía con los $ 789 mil millones de la Leyde Recuperación y Reinversión que salvó o creó 3 millones de puestos de trabajo. Miles de millones invertidos en empleos de energía limpia. Salvó la industria automotriz.
Los beneficios de desempleo para millones de trabajadores, a pesar de las amenazas republicanas de que pararía al gobierno. Obama se vio obligado a ceder en los recortes de impuestos para los ricos , política de Bush, a pesar que quiso terminarlos.
Nombró a dos mujeres a la Corte Suprema de los EE.UU., incluyendo la primera mujer latina, quien apoya los derechos de los trabajadores.
Estableció la Oficina de Protección Financiera del Consumidor y utilizó un receso de nombramiento para nombrar al director sobre la oposición republicana.
Se creó una nueva agencia de seguridad alimentaria para proteger a las personas de enfermedades que se originan en los alimentos .
Finalizó con las políticas de lucro de los bancos privados con relación a préstamos estudiantiles , restableciendo el control federal sobre estos préstamos y usando los ahorros para otorgar nuevos créditos a mas estudiantes .
Se duplicó el financiamiento para las becas Pell a $ 32 mil millones, el incremento de las becas para estudiantes va de $818 hasta un máximo de $5,500.
Terminó la guerra en Irak y se dirigió a poner fin con la guerra en Afganistán.

Mucha gente quería más. En el 2010 no votaron Los republicanos del "Tea Party" barrieron . Obama — y todo el resto de nosotros — hemos estado luchando una batalla defensiva desde entonces.

Sin embargo, los votantes de Ohio aprendieron una amarga lección. El gobernador John Kasich del Tea Party arremetió con SB-5, un proyecto de ley antisindical a través de la mayoría republicana de la legislatura de Ohio. El movimiento de trabajadores de Ohio y sus aliados recogieron 1,3 millones de firmas para la petición de poner la derogación de la ley SB-5 en la boleta electoral. En noviembre pasado, la gente votó por abrumadora mayoría para derogar esta ley antisindical.

El movimiento obrero de Wisconsin recogieron más de un millón firmas para destituir al gobernador Scott Walker, un anti sindicalista comprado y pagado por los multi- millonarios hermanos Koch.

Los bancos y las corporaciones están gastando miles de millones de dólares, de forma anónima, bajo la escandalosa sentencia de la Corte Suprema de EE.UU. "Ciudadanos Unidos", .Otorga a las corporaciones el derecho a inundar las ondas con las mentiras corporativas y la desinformación. Su objetivo es despojar o de privatizar el Seguro Social, Medicare, Medicaid, educación pública, y una serie de otras agencias federales, estatales y locales, programas que sirven a todos nosotros. Miles de maestros y otros empleados públicos han sido despedidos debido a la equivocada políticas de austeridad que pone en peligro la frágil recuperación económica.

Esta es una pelea por "nosotros, el pueblo!" contra los secretos secuaces de la gran riqueza. Los 99% de nosotros estamos luchando en contra de los ricos que son el 1%. Apenas más del 50% de los que pueden votar ejercer su derecho al voto, la menor tasa de participación de votantes de cualquier nación en el mundo industrializado. Luchamos una batalla defensiva con una mano atada en la espalda.

¿Qué pasaría si el 100% de los votantes ejerciera su derecho al voto? Sería posible elegir a los funcionarios comprometidos a reconstruir la infraestructura física y social, crearían millones de buenos empleos en el área verde que también reducirían el déficit federal. Los ricos pagarían su parte justa de impuestos. Se generaría nuevos ingresos para pagar decentes beneficios de seguro social y se proveería "Cuidado Médico para todos."

Si no está registrado para votar, ¡hágalo ahora!

Si está registrado, ¡VOTE!

Recuerde, su vida puede depender de ello.

Why vote?

CPUSA Political Action Commission — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:09:00 -0400

Download an English/Spanish version to print and distribute

“What difference does it make?”
“All politicians are alike?”

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and many others, died for a most precious human right, the right to vote. Now, the same racists who denied Black voters ballot rights in the 1960s are trying to keep voters from the polls in 2012.

In the old days, they called it a "poll tax." They rode at night and wore white sheets. Today, they wear expensive suits. But they still steal elections by cutting off early voting, by imposing photo ID requirements that poor voters can't afford. It's called "voter suppression."

It will take a fight to defeat these dirty tricks. Voter suppression tactics violate the letter and spirit of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Everything from sit-ins to mass rallies on state capitol steps are called for.

The biggest dirty trick of all is fooling voters into thinking there is no difference. The huge voter surge in 2008 elected President Barack Obama, the first African American president. In the face of non-stop opposition, he pushed through:

Affordable Health Care Act extends coverage to 35 million uninsured people, outlaws denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions and extends until age 26 coverage of children under their parents plans.
Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act for equal pay for women.
Stabilized the economy with $789 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that saved or created 3 million jobs. Invested billions in clean energy jobs, saved the auto industry.
Unemployment benefits for millions of workers despite Republican threats to shut down the government. Obama was forced to yield on Bush-era tax cuts for the rich that he wanted to terminate.
Appointed two women to the U.S. Supreme Court, including the first Latina woman, who support the rights of working people.
Established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and used a recess-appointment to name the director over Republican opposition.
Created a new food safety agency to protect people from food-borne illness.
Ended profit-grab by private banks on students loans, reestablishing Federal control on these loans and used the savings to extend loans to more students.
Doubled the funding for Pell Grants to $32 billion, increasing size of the grant $819 to a maximum of $5,500.
Ended the war in Iraq and moved toward ending the war in Afghanistan.

Many people wanted more. In 2010 they failed to turn out to vote. Tea Party Republicans won a sweep. President Obama — and all the rest of us — have been fighting a defensive battle ever since.

Yet Ohio voters learned a bitter lesson. Tea Party Governor John Kasich rammed SB-5, a union-busting bill through the Republican majority Ohio House. The Ohio labor movement and its allies collected 1.3 million petition signatures to put repeal of SB-5 on the ballot. Last November, the people went to the polls and voted overwhelmingly to repeal this union-busting law.

Similarly, the Wisconsin labor movement and its friends collected over one million signatures to recall Gov. Scott Walker, a union-buster bought and paid for by the billionaire Koch Brothers.

The banks and corporations are spending billions of dollars, anonymously, under the U.S. Supreme Court's outrageous "Citizens United" ruling. It grants corporations the right to flood the airwaves with corporate lies and misinformation. Their aim is to strip away or privatize Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public education, and other federal, state, and local programs that serve all of us. Thousands of classroom teachers and other public employees have been laid off because of misguided austerity policies that threaten the fragile economic recovery.

This is a fight by "We, the people!" against the secret minions of great wealth. The 99% of us are fighting back against the wealthy 1%. Barely over 50% of those eligible actually exercise their right to vote, the lowest rate of voter participation of any nation in the industrialized world. We fight a defensive battle with one hand tied behind our backs.

What if 100% of eligible voters exercised their right to vote? It would be possible to elect officials committed to rebuild the social and physical infrastructure, create millions of good, green jobs that will also reduce federal deficits. The wealthy would have to pay their fair share of taxes. It would generate new revenues to pay liveable Social Security benefits and provide "Medicare for all."

If you are not registered to vote, do it NOW!

If you are registered, VOTE!

Remember, your life may depend on it.

PHOTO: Some rights reserved by nshepard

VIDEO: Was Jesus a communist?

Communist Party USA — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:31:00 -0400

Watch live streaming video from cpusa at livestream.com

NEW EXCITING OPPORTUNITY:

The makers of the independent film "Jesus Was a Commie" have given all of us an exclusive chance to view their award-winning 15-minute movie. Just visit their webpage (www.jesuswasacommiefilm.com) and enter the password jwac2012

The password will work only for the next few days so check it out now. We encourage everyone to watch the film before Tuesday night's video presentation and discussion. We hope it adds to the growing debate about religion and social and economic justice in the U.S. today.

Was Jesus a communist? A priest discusses the message at the heart of the gospel

This event has passed. See the video player above to watch the presentation.

A new short film by Matthew Modine is making the rounds at film festivals and is receiving positive reviews. 'Jesus Was A Commie' is sparking a new wave of discussion about religion and economics.

Tim Yeager, a dedicated trade union organizer and Episcopal priest, will speak about the economic and social justice message in Christianity in a video presentation March 27.

Today many Christian conservatives have attempted to interpret the message of the Bible to justify a right-wing agenda of division, exploitation, capitalism and inequality. But what if the values at the heart of the gospel were really about equality, justice, environmentalism and collectivity?

What is liberation theology? Aren't Marxists against religion? Is the U.S. a Christian nation? Was Jesus a communist? What's the significance of the Christian right? Should religion influence politics at all? Do common teachings of progressive values (peace, love, equality, justice, the golden rule, etc) provide a basis for broader unity among religious and secular people?

From Anti-Slavery to the Anti-Monopoly Strategy

Henry Winston — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:35:00 -0500

2012 is the 101st year since the birth of the former National Chair of the Communist Party, Henry Winston. The article below is taken from Winston's 1973 book, Strategy for a Black Agenda. It is a critique of the strategy and tactics necessary to advance the revolutionary process in the face of right-wing extremism and white supremacy from the time of slavery to the upsurge of the 1960s and early 1970s.

Although the world has changed since the book was first published, it continues to offer many lessons for fighting right-wing extremism today and moving forward along the road to socialism.

Henry Winston, born in Mississippi, became active in the unemployed struggles of the 1930s and soon became a leader in the Young Communist League. He worked with William L Patterson and others to help free the Scottsboro defendants, displaying extraordinary political and organizational skills.

In the 1950s he served eight years in prison under the Smith Act, during which time he lost his sight because of medical neglect. A campaign to win his release was waged in the U.S. and abroad. Writer Richard Wright headed a French/American committee to free him and his sentence was finally commuted by President John F Kennedy.

On learning of Winston's death in 1986, African National Congress leader Alfred Nzo remarked, "We had come to regard Winston as one of our own."

Download this article to print and distribute

Now, over a hundred years after the Emancipation Proclamation of January 1863, racism and oppression are more than ever essential to the ruling class, as U.S. state monopoly capitalism enters a new and more acute phase of the crisis and decline of capitalism. U.S. imperialism, facing a world in which the forces of socialism and class and national liberation are on the ascendancy, and in which foreign imperialist powers are challenging its domination, certainly can't do today what the slave power was unable to do over 100 years ago - solve its problems through aggression and expansion.

The monopolists are equally unable to solve their problems at home, where they are not only imposing a wage freeze, but are also attempting to impose a far more repressive racist freeze on Black liberation struggles than that of the McCarthy period.

By perpetuating and intensifying racism, monopoly aims to stop the advance of the Black liberation movement, to destroy organized labor and suppress every struggle of the oppressed and exploited.

Monopoly's New Assault

Monopoly capital, within today's context, aims to repeat the kind of assault on the people's rights that led to the betrayal of Reconstruction. Reaction of that period, through racism and violence, prepared the way for the Supreme Court to void the Civil Rights Act of 1875, whose passage had been won by the supporters of Reconstruction to solidify the gains they had made. Reaction's aim then was to push the country into a long era of segregation and semislavery.

Today state monopoly capitalism seeks to wipe out every trace of the struggles of the recent Civil Rights Decade. The increasing political repression, the attempted frameup of Angela Davis and other political prisoners, Nixon's racist nominations to the Supreme Court, are all part of monopoly's attempt to obliterate every advance made through Black and white struggle since Reconstruction was destroyed.

The betrayal of Reconstruction, it should be remembered, was the signal for a three-sided attack against the masses. The Old Slave Codes were replaced by the new Black Codes, and the former chattel slaves were forced into semi-slavery, segregation and racist oppression. At the same time, the escalation of the military plunder and massacre of the Indians was entering a climactic stage. And simultaneously, the courts that upheld the betrayal of Emancipation were declaring that workers, Black and white, did not have the right to organize. In other words, the courts had not only revived Chief Justice Roger B. Taney's pre-Civil War doctrine that the Black man "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." They had also extended this into another phase of repression — that labor, whatever its color, had no rights that capital was bound to respect.

In 1875, when the robber barons were joining with the former slave owners to prepare for the 1877 betrayal of Reconstruction, Judge Holden Owen, presiding over the trial of striking Pennsylvania miners, declared: "Any agreement, combination or confederation to increase the price of any vendible commodity, merchandise or anything else is a conspiracy under the laws of the U.S." Of course, this doctrine — like Nixon's wage-"price" freeze — was applied only to labor, never to the capitalists' profits.

Because of the perpetuation of racism and the resulting division between the triply-oppressed Black workers and the exploited white workers, it took more than 60 years of struggle against the bosses' government-supported violence to win the right to organize. Today, the rights of labor are once again under grave attack, and labor's fate, as in the past, is inseparably bound up with that of the Black liberation movement.

Dimensions of the Crisis

The crisis of poverty and unemployment Black Americans now face is, save for the almost total genocidal elimination of American Indians, without precedent for any segment of this country's population.

"The unemployment rate among Black workers in the ghetto now exceeds the general rate of unemployment of the entire nation during the depression of the 1930's," reported Herbert Hill, NAACP Labor Secretary, at the organization's 1971 National Convention.

"The rate of unemployment of Black workers in 25 major centers of urban non-white population concentration is now between 25 per cent and 40 per cent," stated Hill, "and the unemployment rate for Black youth will be in excess of 50 per cent by the middle of this summer. In 1933, the national unemployment rate was 24.9 per cent, the highest officially recorded unemployment in the history of the United States." Hill also pointed out that tens of thousands of Black workers are classified as employed but never have an income that could lift them above the poverty level.

Yet, stark as this statistical report is, it cannot possibly convey the disaster of racism, poverty and oppression affecting every aspect of the lives of Black Americans today. The end of the decade of civil rights struggles left the Black masses with a feeling of vast frustration; not only had their condition failed to improve, it had worsened.

This frustration was simultaneously experienced by many militant young fighters, Black and white, whose despair turned to disillusion with the preceding years of struggle. They were unable to differentiate the gains of the Civil Rights Decade - in terms of unity, militant mass action and consciousness - from the deepening crisis. They did not realize that under capitalism the most important fruit of struggle is the people's advance in unity and consciousness. In their frustration, they attacked the Civil Rights struggle itself, instead of seeing that it had created a bridge to the period ahead.

Two-Sided Pressure on King

Thus, even before the hunger and frustration of Black masses led to the spontaneous outbursts in Watts, Detroit and Newark, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. encountered attacks not only from reaction but from segments of militant youth under the influence of sectarianism and pseudo-revolutionism.

While the open attacks from the latter were a relatively new development, King had long experienced pressure from the establishment liberals, the NAACP, the Urban League and others to limit mass struggle and to rely on the courts and "friends" within the two major parties. In this period as the war in Vietnam continued and domestic conditions worsened — this pressure from the Right increased, and was particularly aimed at preventing King from linking the Black liberation movement with the anti-war struggle.

At the same time, the frustrations of radical youth were intensified by the escalation of the Vietnam war in 1965 — immediately after the new Civil Rights Act was passed. Many Black and white radicals, including Carmichael, Cleaver, Newton, Forman and Hayden, began to step up their attacks on the Civil Rights struggle. They placed themselves in opposition to King, who was determined not to abandon, but to strengthen, the forces of the Civil Rights Decade, to deepen and broaden them into a realignment that could carry the struggle against poverty and racist oppression to a new level.

If King was not without error in coping with pressure from the Right, and later with that of the pseudo-radicals, his overall record was one of firm adherence to militant non-violent mass struggle. The maturing of his leadership, his recognition of the decisive role of the working class, his evolvement toward an anti-imperialist position, all of his steady and remarkable growth reflected his rejection of both the opportunist pressures to limit mass struggle and the super-revolutionary pressures to substitute the rhetoric of violence for the power of mass struggle.

King has been dead more than five years, but the attacks on his strategy and objectives continue from the Right and the pseudo-left. In fact, while Nixon is bent on destroying the advances of the Civil Rights Decade, it is ironic that the new "revolutionists" are so certain there is nothing worth saving from it! But Nixon recognizes — and fears — what the super-militants refuse to see — the Civil Rights Decade created the pre-conditions for the much higher level of struggle needed in the period ahead.

Pressing for a New Beginning

When King was assassinated in the spring of 1968, he was leading the strike of the predominantly Black sanitation workers of Memphis. His commitment to this courageous working-class struggle was a vibrant indication that, in pressing for a new beginning in the strategy against racist oppression, poverty and war, he had come to a full realization of the meaning of his first major struggle, the Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott. This landmark battle was sparked by Mrs. Rosa Lee Parks, a Black working-class woman, and carried on with courage and tenacity by, primarily, Black working class men and women. In the course of a decade of leadership of the liberation struggle, King came to understand that it was workers, more than any other stratum, who possess these qualities.

King recognized that since these special qualities of workers had brought about the historic turning point in Montgomery, leading to the nationwide involvement of many other sections of the population, including Black and white youth in the struggle for equal rights, the new stage — the struggle for jobs, for an end to poverty, racism and war — demanded a new strategy based on the working class, Black and white.

Although King's views were not identical with the Marxist conception of the role of the working class — which sees this class not only as the main social force but as the leader in the anti-monopoly struggle — he had come steadily closer to this outlook. Moreover, it is especially meaningful that King moved in this direction at the time when Marcuse and others, with the assistance of the mass media, were making their greatest headway in promoting the idea among radical youth that the Marxist concept of the working class was outdated.

Democracy, Liberation and Socialism

Another ironic contradiction in the role of many of the new radicals emerged at the end of the Civil Rights Decade: As they lost sight of the historic significance of that period, and more and more heaped abuse on it and its preeminent leader, they became the inadvertent helpmates of the ruling class, whose conscious aim it was and is to distort the meaning of that period to the masses.

It should not be forgotten that for many long decades the ruling class hid the true history of Reconstruction from the people of this country. Now, at a time when the Black liberation movement has forced at least the beginnings of attention to the Reconstruction era, it would indeed be strange if the rhetoric of the pseudo-revolutionaries helped the monopolists conceal the true meaning, the heroism and achievements of the Civil Rights Decade. This must not be allowed to happen.

It is important to understand the meaning of this period, and the vital leadership role in it of Martin Luther King, who came to an awareness of the revolutionary relationship between the fight for rights, for security, for peace and the liberation struggle. Despite their "revolutionary" rhetoric, this is something the pseudo-radicals have failed to comprehend. In rejecting this central meaning of the civil rights struggle, these radicals caricatured the Marxist principles they so often proclaimed.

As Lenin persistently emphasized, the fight for democracy is at the heart of the class struggle. He continually warned against the ideas of those who ignored the connection between the struggle for democracy, national liberation and socialism. In "A Caricature of Marxism," he wrote:

All democracy consists in the proclamation and realization of rights which under capitalism are realizable only to a very small degree and only relatively. But without the proclamation of these rights, without a struggle to introduce them now, immediately, without training the masses in the spirit of this struggle, socialism is impossible. (Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 74.)

Lenin also emphasized that Marxists must:

. . . know that democracy does not abolish class oppression. It only makes the class struggle more direct, wider, more open and pronounced, and that is what we need. . . . The more democratic the system of government, the clearer will the workers see that the root evil is capitalism, not lack of rights. (Ibid., p. 73.)

Martin Luther King and Frederick Douglass

Martin Luther King's sectarian opponents proclaimed their Marxism, but their policies and practice were contrary to its principles. On the other hand, King's philosophy was that of moral suasion, but in practice he came to rely more and more on the liberating force of mass struggle as the foundation for Black freedom and social advance for all the oppressed and exploited.

Though not a Marxist, King was steadily moving toward a strategy that tended to coincide with the Marxist-Leninist concept of an anti-monopoly policy, one involving the Black and white sectors of the working class, the Black liberation movement, the Puerto Rican and Chicano masses, and all others opposed to war and poverty. This strategy continues in today's terms - when the working-class is the leading force - the strategy developed by Frederick Douglass during the Abolitionist period, when he struggled to form a broad coalition of Abolitionists and other strata to break the slave owners' control of Congress and the Federal Government.

Just as it is impossible to understand the Civil Rights Decade without understanding the role of Martin Luther King, it is impossible to grasp the meaning of the antislavery struggle without understanding the role of Frederick Douglass, the great genius and architect of the anti-slavery strategy.

Like King, Douglass matured in struggle against sectarian, separatist and accommodationist tendencies within the movement of his time. As one example, his writings show that throughout the crucial decade of the 1850s, he resisted the separatist alternative of emigrationism which would have weakened the anti-slavery front. Douglass saw that emigrationism, a forerunner of Pan Africanism, objectively meant accommodation to the slave power.

And, as early as 1848, Douglass began to oppose the sectarianism of William Lloyd Garrison and other anti-slavery forces who were against both electoral action and any coalition with those whose objectives stopped short of abolition.

In this connection, Douglass himself had at first feared that the Free Soil movement, which opposed the extension of slavery but did not demand its abolition, might divert from the anti-slavery struggle. However, he came to under stand the objective role of this movement within the anti slavery strategy and called upon the Abolitionists to support it:

We may stand off ... and in this way play into the hands of our enemies . . . [or] remain silent and speechless, and let things take their course. . . . In neither of these ways can we go. (The North Star, August 18, 1848.)

While calling for a common front of the Abolitionists with the Free Soilers and others opposed to the extension of slavery, Douglass at the same time relentlessly advanced the Abolitionists' independent goal of an end to slavery. He wrote:

Free Soilism is lame, halt and blind, while it battles against the spread of slavery, and admits its right to exist anywhere. If it has the right to exist it has the right to grow and spread . . . The only way to put an end to the aggressions of slavery is to put an end to slavery itself. (Frederick Douglass' Paper, August 24, 1855.)

Douglass never relaxed in his drive for the development of the strategy which eventually led to a political realignment, one from which the Republican Party headed by Lincoln emerged to challenge the two major parties of the period. At the time this realignment was in the process of formation, he wrote:

We rejoice in this demonstration . . . to bury party affinities and predilections, and also the political leaders who have hitherto controlled them; to unite in one grand phalanx and go forth, and whip the enemy. (Ibid., July 27, 1855.)

Frederick Douglass and Karl Marx

In 1846, two years before writing the Communist Manifesto, the young Karl Marx had already revealed his deep understanding of the struggle against slavery in the U.S. His thinking closely paralleled the direction Frederick Douglass was taking, and this remarkable parallelism in the liberation strategy of these two giants of world history continued throughout every phase of the anti-slavery struggle.

Marx, too, saw the Free Soil movement as an objective force against slavery, and opposed the sectarianism of those who resisted coalition with it. At the same time, he warned against the utopian views of some of the Free Soilers. For example, writing of Herman Kriege, editor of the Volkstribun in New York, Marx said:

. . . he continues to chant his paean: And so the old dreams of the Europeans would at last come true. A place would be prepared for them on this side of the ocean which they would only have to take and to fructify with the labour of their hands, so as to be able proudly to declare to all the tyrants of the world, "this is my cabin, which you have not built; this is my hearth whose glow fills your hearts with envy."

He might have added, This is my dunghill, which I, my wife, my children, my manservant, and my cattle have produced. And who are the Europeans whose "dreams" would thus come true? Not the communist workers, but bankrupt shopkeepers and handicraftsmen, or ruined cottars, who yearn for the good for tune of once again becoming petty bourgeois and peasants in America. And what is the "dream" that is to be fulfilled by means of these 1,400,000 acres? No other than that all men be converted into private owners, a dream which is unrealizable and as communistic as the dream to convert all men into emperors, kings and popes. (Quoted in: Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 8, p. 327.)

Thus Marx's aim, like Douglass', was to develop a strategy that would bring together a coalition to stop the spread of slavery as the precondition for its abolition.

At the same time, Marx s polemic against Kriege has profound significance to the struggle against white chauvinism: it demonstrated his irreconcilable opposition to every form of accommodation to the influence of racism. Marx was battling against the seepage of racist poison into the Abolitionist movement, in this case in the form of the illusion that Western land could be won for the white masses — while the Indians were driven off this same land and the Blacks remained enslaved.

While the Free Soil movement aimed at keeping the Western land from the slave power, Marx saw that it could not halt the eventual takeover of this land and economy by the rising capitalist class. He attacked the petty-bourgeois illusions of the Free Soilers because they carried the seed of the racist division which would weaken the strategy for the most democratic outcome in the struggle against the slave power. And any weakening of this strategy would jeopardize the fight for Black liberation, further the plunder and genocide of the Indians, and profoundly disfigure the struggle for unity of the Black and white working class, whose mission it would be to lead in the battle for the abolition of wage slavery after the abolition of chattel slavery

Racist "Disfigurement" of Class Struggle

In addition, Marx saw that the greater the democratic gains of the masses, the less would the future struggles of labor with a black skin and labor with a white skin be distorted by the divisive ideology of racism. And later, applying Marxism to the imperialist stage of capitalism, Lenin placed the struggle for democracy, in the way Marx viewed it, at the center of the struggle for the socialist revolution. Racism, on the other hand, results in what Marx many times described as the "disfigurement" of the class struggle — diverting it away from the class enemy into division and fragmentation of the exploited and oppressed.

That is why Lenin tirelessly emphasized that the struggle for democracy is indivisibly bound up with the struggle against racism, and class and national oppression. Lenin saw this struggle as the key to advancing the unity of the workers of the oppressor nation with the workers and the people of any oppressed nation or nationality.

In an article that appeared in the New York Daily Tribune in 1861, Marx forewarned that the United States would continue to suffer from racist disfigurement if the abolition of slavery was in any way compromised:

The progressive abuse of the Union by the slave power, working through its alliance with the Northern Democratic Party is, so to say, the general formula of United States history since the beginning of this century. The successive compromise measures mark the successive degrees of encroachment by which the Union became more and more transformed into the slave of the slaveowner. (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, The Civil War in the United States, International Publishers, New York, 1971, p.6.)

The confirmation of Marx's analysis can be found in the "successive compromises" which led to the betrayal of Reconstruction and, finally, the transformation of the Union into the slave of state monopoly capitalism.

The history of this country has been warped and distorted, first by slavery, then the survivals of slavery and the ceaseless propagation of racist ideology. And from this history it can be clearly seen that the class interests of white workers, as in the struggle against the super-monopolies today, can only be advanced in unity with Black workers and as an integral part of the fight to end the oppression of Black people.

In writing of Marx' simultaneous support of the land reform movement and opposition to those who saw that movement as a means of realizing their petty-bourgeois dreams instead of a way to struggle against class and racist oppression and exploitation, Lenin said:

While mercilessly ridiculing the absurd ideological trappings of the movement, Marx strives in a sober, materialist manner to determine its real historical content, the consequences that must inevitably flow from it because of objective conditions, regard less of the will and the consciousness, the dreams and theories, of the various individuals. Marx, therefore, does not condemn, but fully approves communist support of the movement. (Collected Works, Vol. 8, p. 328.)

At the same time, Marx saw that even an uncompromising struggle against all vestiges of slavery, against the plunder and murder of the Indians, and to gain land for Black and white toilers, could not change the nature of commodity production which would inevitably lead to the take-over of the land and the economy by the rising capitalist class. Lenin wrote:

With remarkable penetration, Marx, who was then only the future economist, points to the role of exchange and commodity production. The peasants, he says, will exchange the produce of the land, if not the land itself, and that says everything! The question is dealt with in a way that is largely applicable to the Russian peasant movement and its petty-bourgeois ideologists. . . . Marx, however, does not simply repudiate this petty-bourgeois movement, he does not dogmatically ignore it, he does not fear to soil his hands by contact with the movement of the revolutionary petty-bourgeois democrats - a fear that is characteristic of many of the doctrinaires. (Collected Works, Vol. 8, pp. 327, 328.)

Douglass and Black Power

While Douglass was the champion of Black and white unity within the Abolitionist movement, as well as the architect of the strategy to bring about a national political realignment, he also advocated the self-organization of Black people.

By 1849, Douglass was already calling for such a group, to be named the National League of Colored People. He had even suggested a constitution for it, with a preamble that stated:

. . . we have long deplored the distracted and divided state of the oppressed, and the manifold evils resulting there from, and desiring as we do to see an union formed which shall enable us better to grapple with the various systems of injustice and wrong by which we are environed, and to regain our plundered rights, we do solemnly agree to unite in accordance with the following. (The North Star, August 10, 1849.)

Douglass was certain that in their struggle for liberation, and as part of the struggles of all oppressed and exploited, Black people would achieve self-union. "We shall never despair of our people, and union will yet be affected — our ranks cannot always be divided," he wrote in The North Star (November 19, 1849).

It is clear that Douglass was the original advocate of "Black power" and that his concept had nothing in common with the disruptive sloganizing of Stokely Carmichael. Douglass rejected all tendencies that viewed Black power in a separatist way. "It is evident," wrote Douglass, "that white and black must fall or flourish together." (The North Star, November 16, 1849.)

Douglass not only opposed separatist concepts of Black power, he also polemicized against those who feared that the press would falsely portray Black self-union as anti-white. This group included a prominent Black friend who wrote to The North Star, saying, "I believe that the motto, 'Union of the oppressed for the sake of freedom,' will be interpreted by the pro-slavery press, to mean an union of the black against the white." Douglass, continuing in his insistence that there was no contradiction between the self-union of the oppressed Blacks and unity with white opponents of the slave owners, responded by stating that "it seems worse than timidity for us to hesitate to adopt measures for our improvement and elevation, from fear of misinterpretation." For Douglass, self-union of the oppressed Black people — as the starting point of Black power — was fully consistent with unity with white Abolitionists and coalition with other white strata in order to advance liberation. He saw that Abolition could not be achieved if Blacks pursued a separatist policy.

Douglass saw that all struggle, including that for self organization, was a process. It would be self-defeating, he realized, for Black people to reject the strategy of coalition until some vague future date when they had achieved complete internal organization.

Douglass did not waver in his conviction despite bitter attacks by Garrison and other sectarians in the Abolitionist movement who opposed a coalition strategy against the slave power. The passive acceptance of their views, he was convinced, would lead to the perpetuation of slavery for an indeterminate length of time.

Douglass also realized that refusal to enter into coalition with forces that did not, at that stage of the struggle, accept the goal of abolition would contradict and undermine an anti-slavery strategy. Had Douglass advocated the anti coalition concept of Black power advanced today by Carmichael, Forman, Boggs and others, the coalition of forces that led to the defeat of the slave power would not have been achieved.

In today's struggle against the genocidal economic and social aggressions of state monopoly capitalism, those socalled radicals advocate the type of "Black power" strategy that Douglass so relentlessly opposed — a separatist concept that would dissipate instead of strengthen Black power, and would result in the perpetuation of unequal power of the oppressed and exploited in the battle against the racist ruling class.

According to Stokely Carmichael, "The major mistake made by the exponents of the coalition theory is that they advocate alliances with groups which have never had as their central goal the necessity for the total revamping of society. At bottom, these groups accept the American system and want only - if at all - to make peripheral, marginal reforms in it. Such reforms are inadequate to rid society of racism." (Stokely Carmichael and Charles Hamilton, Black Power, the Politics of Liberation in America, Random House, New York, 1967, pp. 60-61.)

Carmichael is vague about what he means by the "total revamping of society." The only way that can be accomplished is by establishing socialism, which he opposes. Carmichael also states that "reforms are inadequate to rid society of racism." Of course this is true, since only the abolition of capitalism and its replacement by socialism can totally abolish racism. The majority of Black as well as white masses, however, are not ready to wait for socialism as the solution to their exploitation and oppression today. They continue to search for answers to the problems imposed by their common exploiter and oppressor, state monopoly capitalism.

Despite this fact, Carmichael calls upon Black people to reject the struggle for reforms in favor of the "total revamping" of society. In the same breath, he advocates interracial disunity pending the achievement of complete Black selfunity.

But this self-unity will come about only as a part of the revolutionary process in which the struggle for the racial and class unity of the oppressed and exploited is an aim and result of every battle against the racist oppressor. Those who do not understand the role of coalition in the people's fight to improve their condition fail to see the relationship between reforms and revolution.

Long ago, Douglass answered those who persist in the illusion that the destiny of oppressed Black people is separate and unrelated to the destiny of exploited whites. "We deem it a settled point," wrote Douglass, that the destiny of the colored man is bound up with the white people of this country . . . and the question ought to be . . . what principle should dictate policy . . ." (The North Star, November 16, 1849.)

Frederick Douglass and Paul Robeson

In our time, the towering figure of Paul Robeson has personified the link between two significant periods - from the betrayal of Reconstruction to the era of Black liberation begun with Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Decade.

Frederick Douglass had himself been a slave and Robeson is the son of a slave. Like Douglass in his time, Robeson has devoted his life to the cause of Black liberation. And, like Douglass, he recognizes that Black liberation cannot be achieved via a separatist path, but through Black power in alliance with the oppressed and exploited of all colors. Robeson has always seen Black independence and Black white alliance as related, indispensable components of the liberation struggle.

The principles that should dictate policy," Robeson has declared, are the following: "Dedication to the Negro people's welfare is one side of the coin; the other side is in dependence. Effective Negro leadership must rely upon and be responsive to no other control than the will of the people. We have allies - important allies - among our white fellow citizens, and we must seek to draw them close to us and to gain many more. But the Negro people's movement must be led by Negroes, not only in terms of title and Position but in reality." (Paul Robeson, Here I Stand, Othello Associates, New York, 1958, p. 111.)

Robeson struggled for self-union of his people at home, and for solidarity with the oppressed and their allies at home and abroad. Whereas Douglass travelled widely in Europe to win support for the anti-slavery cause, Robeson travelled even more extensively, rallying support for Black liberation and championing liberation from imperialism everywhere.

That Robeson's travels were more extensive than Douglass' was of course made possible by the October Revolution, which replaced the czar and serfdom with socialism, opening the way for the end of racism and oppression in a major part of the globe, and becoming the most decisive support for the oppressed and exploited throughout the world.

Wherever he went, Robeson earned the hatred of the U.S. imperialists — and never more than in Paris in 1949, when he declared: "It is unthinkable that American Negroes could go to war on behalf of those who have oppressed them for generations against the Soviet Union which in one generation has raised our people to full human dignity."

When Robeson asserted that Black men would never fight against the country of socialism — the Soviet Union, the chief supporter and champion of liberation from imperialism, oppression and racism — he was expressing what is at the heart of today's Black resistance to fighting a war to oppress others.

For a Strategic Breakthrough

In Douglass' time, the strategy to break the slave power's control of Congress and the Federal Government was the precondition for the abolition of slavery. Today, the precondition for opening the path to the abolition of wage slavery and racist oppression through socialism is the strategy to defeat the threat of fascism and to break the monopolists' domination of Congress and the Federal Government.

"Whoever does not fight the reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie and the growth of fascism [in its] preparatory stages," stated Georgi Dimitrov, "is not in a position to prevent the growth of fascism, but on the contrary, facilitates that victory." (United Front Against Fascism, New Century Publishers, New York, 1950, p. 9.)

The anti-coalition views of Carmichael, Forman, Boggs and others are nothing less than opposition to a united front against the "reactionary measures" with which monopoly prepares for its imposition of fascism.

However, regardless of the disruptive nature of the views of such Black radicals, it must be recognized that the main obstacle to Black and white unity against the common enemy is the influence of racism on white workers. And it is the primary responsibility of white revolutionaries to lead the fight against racist ideology and to mobilize white workers in the struggle against racism and in support of Black liberation as indispensable to the advance of their class interests.

The aim of monopoly is to force a reversal of every aspect of bourgeois democracy, limited as it is, in order to open the way for fascism. The aim of the anti-monopoly program, as advocated by the Communist Party, is to bring about a strategic breakthrough to a deeper and wider degree of democracy, one that would powerfully accelerate the revolutionary process, opening the way to Black liberation and socialism.

Once this anti-monopoly strategy succeeds in breaking the control of state monopoly capital over Congress and the government, the forces exist, internally and internationally — in contrast to the anti-slavery period — that can prevent the betrayal of the struggle. There is such a perspective, and this is so, first of all, because the forces of class and national liberation, headed by the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, have changed the world balance of power.

Reprinted with permission. Originally published in Strategy for a Black Agenda: A Critique of New Theories of Liberation in the United States and Africa, International Publishers, 1973.

PHOTO: Henry Winston, 1972. Daily Worker/People's World collection at Tamiment Library.

Communist Party says "Hands Off Syria"

CPUSA International Department — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 13:58:00 -0500

The Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA) calls for peaceful negotiations to end the current standoff in Syria, and emphasizes that the future government of that country is a matter to be decided by the Syrian people only, without outside interference.

The situation in Syria is becoming increasingly violent and dangerous. Not only have armed clashes between the government and opposition factions escalated sharply, but there are increasing signs, attested to by many sources, that the conflict is in danger of developing into a proxy war, in which religious sectarianism is beginning to play a part. Particularly, we are aware of recruiting in other Arab countries of fighters to go to Syria to participate in Syria against the Assad regime, of the presence of Al Qaeda elements among those recruits, and of increased violent conflict among different religious and political factions in neighboring Lebanon and Iraq over the Syria issue, which is now added to existing grievances and frictions in those countries. The whole region could be set ablaze, and very shortly.

We hear of concern among religious and other minorities in Syria (not only Alawites but also Syrian Christians and Jews) who fear that a regime could come to power that would be intolerant of the variety of belief and custom that exists in this ancient country. Recent terrorist acts, including assassinations of a general and a religious leader and bombing in Damascus, Aleppo and other cities, bear the markings of Al Qaeda terrorism.

Though the current government has used harsh methods to maintain its rule and to repress peaceful dissent, corporate controlled media here and in other Western countries do a disservice when they gloss over, or fail to mention that as well as legitimate peaceful protests, the panorama in Syria includes notable levels of violence by people whose agendas are far from those of democracy and personal liberty, and whose methods are very distant from those of the brave protesters who brought down the governments of Egypt and Tunisia. Which of the different factions in the Syrian opposition would come out on top of a “regime change” is far from clear.

For the United States and other NATO powers to become embroiled in this situation can only make it worse, increasing the violence and the suffering of the Syrian people. Yet we hear talk of “no fly zones” and “humanitarian corridors” which, by their very nature, would require armed outside intervention.

The Communist Party USA supports striving for democracy and civil liberties everywhere, but we also support economic justice and the rights of ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities. Armed Syrian opposition forces supported by Western powers, or dominated by narrow minded religious factions, are likely to produce neither democracy nor freedom, and certainly are unlikely to produce economic justice and minority rights.

The Assad government has now proposed sweeping constitutional changes, which, if implemented, would be a great step forward for the Syrian people. These changes have been dismissed out of hand as cosmetic by the corporate press and by the Western governments. Instead, “regime change” is now the slogan of the day. We see this as a bad development and a step toward a civil war which could embroil the whole region. Nor are we impressed by the fact that the slogan “regime change” and a proposal to arm the Syrian opposition have been promoted in the UN by Saudi Arabia and other backward monarchies in the region. Although Syria is not one of the largest oil producers, it is so strategically located that we can not dismiss the possibility that the geopolitics of oil are, at least in part, driving the desire for outside intervention.

You might think that the United States and its allies would have learned from Iraq that intervening, under a “humanitarian” guise, in another country’s internal struggles is a recipe for disaster. The nature and leadership of the Syrian government should, rather, are matters to be decided by the Syrian people exclusively, without outside interference. Rather than channeling support to Syrian factions, the United States should be calling for a “hands off” policy while the Syrian conflict is settled by peaceful negotiations.

We call upon members and friends of our party to tell the Obama administration as well as their representatives in Congress: “Hands off Syria!”

PHOTO: Some rights reserved by Paul Henman

Halt the War Provocations Against Iran

CPUSA International Department — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 13:34:00 -0500

The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) deplores the rapid escalation of tensions between Iran on the one hand, and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom on the other. This escalation represents a threat to world peace; as various irresponsible parties, such as Republican politicians in the United States and various persons in the Israeli government, talk more and more openly of acts like strikes on Iranian facilities, which would certainly be acts of war. Assassinations of Iranian scientists on the streets of their own country are further provocations.

The current Iranian regime has repressed the working class and the left, including our fraternal party, the Tudeh, and has increasingly turned to the same neo-liberal economic policies which have caused suffering to people around the world. However, we note that external intervention and provocations by Israeli, U.S., British and other governments in no way help the mass of the Iranian people. Indeed, progressives in Iran, while criticizing their own government, have explicitly opposed such outside intervention, including the kind of sanctions that are now being pushed by the United States and its allies, as hurting the Iranian people while playing into the hands of the regime.

Further, an accident or irresponsible move by either side could set off a military confrontation which would have a strong impact on the world economy and especially on the poorer countries that rely highly on Iranian oil for their own survival. Iran is much larger than Iraq and much more developed than Afghanistan, and for the United States to get into a war with Iran could have disastrous consequences for all of us. To allow this to happen would be outrageous.

There are all sorts of games and intrigues going on which shape the current crisis. Iranian President Ahmadinejad is under attack by other reactionary elements in his own country, as legislative elections approach. The Israeli government is under sharp criticism from many of its citizens because of failed economic policies that have widened the gap between rich and poor. There is a bitter feud going on between Iran and Saudi Arabia. And of course we have our own election campaigns in this country, with the usual push by the Republicans to portray the Obama administration as "soft" on the country's enemies. All of these dynamics heighten the danger of a drift toward war.

The Communist Party USA calls for an end to the intrigues and provocations coming out of the Israeli, British and US governments and political factions. We denounce the push for armed strikes against Iran by Israel, which is the only nuclear-armed state in the region. We denounce the killings of Iranian scientists as criminal acts of terrorism. We reiterate that only the Iranian people have the right to decide what sort of government their country will have, and we oppose activities by outside parties aimed at “regime change”. Iran, as a sovereign independent country, has every right to develop its own nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. As for the elimination of the danger of nuclear weapons, we demand work toward nuclear disarmament across the board, including by the United States. Finally, the CPUSA calls for continued negotiations as the only viable way to relieve tensions in the Gulf region.

PHOTO: Some rights reserved by h20series

Take action to defend affirmative action

Communist Party USA — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:56:00 -0500

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could mean the death knell for racial and ethnic diversity on college campuses. It could threaten gender-based affirmative action as well.

But, despite the notion that the High Court is "protected" from public opinion and politics, the American people do have the ability to influence the case's outcome.

Ever since the modern-day civil rights movement and its victories, the extreme right wing in the United States has been gunning for any and all democratic gains from those struggles. This includes remedies for past and present discrimination, such as affirmative action.

Affirmative action has already been hobbled by the Bakke decision, and state laws driven by Ward Connerly and crew. This is the logical outcome of a campaign to destroy government mediation in cases of past and present discrimination.

Today the Supreme Court is packed with legal representatives of this extreme right-wing worldview.

In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that universities could take into account racial and ethnic diversity in their admissions process, although they could not use "quotas." Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the author of the majority opinion in that 5-4 ruling.

Public universities could use race in their complex admission point system, as they use children of alumni as a factor, because the goal of racially diverse campuses was good for the country, democratic, and constitutional, the court said.

And indeed studies show that while class-based considerations can increase the numbers of black and Latino college students, race-based considerations result in slightly higher percentages, more reflective of the population at large.

In 2004, one study of 146 selective colleges and universities found that Blacks and Latinos would account for 4 percent of the student body without any affirmative action considerations. Affirmative action based on race/ethnicity increased that number to 12 percent, the study found. With socio-economic affirmative action the number of black and Latino students would have been 10 percent. In the U.S. population as a whole, African Americans and Latinos make up 13 and 16 percent, respectively.

O'Connor retired in 2005 and in her stead President George W. Bush appointed Samuel Alito, who vehemently opposes any attempts to remedy racial, gender or other types of discrimination.

The four dissenting justices in 2003 were Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and William Rehnquist. Chief Justice John Roberts, who has written opinions hostile to remedies for racist discrimination, replaced Rehnquist. In short, the court is even further to the right and hostile to civil rights than it was in 2003.

To make matters worse, on the more liberal side of the court, Justice Elena Kagan is recusing herself from the case. She was the Obama administration's solicitor general and worked on the case before being appointed to the Supreme Court.

It looks grim indeed. The court will hear arguments this fall on the case, which is based on a white student's suit against the University of Texas claiming she was denied admission because of her race. It is sure to be an issue in the 2012 elections.

The far right will try to throw sand in the electorate's eyes with claims of "reverse discrimination," that men and whites will have rights taken away.

These are divide-and-conquer tactics. Affirmative action is a remedy for past and present discrimination. Equal protection under the Constitution is there exactly for that reason - to remedy the ongoing damage from the racist institution of slavery. Racism and other forms of discrimination still exist. Therefore remedies need to exist. These remedies have benefited all Americans, including women, people with disabilities and others.

That's where the American people come in. Electing a president and Congress that will stand squarely with civil rights and diversity sends a message to the court, a message they will hear loud and clear. Just think of how much more further right the court could go with a President Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich or Ron Paul.

Defeating the enemies of affirmative action in the elections is not the only way to fight. Students, families, unions, schools - the 99% - have to send other messages through petitions, demonstrations, letters to the editor, online campaigns, that racial diversity and affirmative action are valued and necessary for a 21st century democratic America.

Photo: PW/Ben Sears

Join us in conversation: "Contemporary Black Women in Popular Culture"

Sam Webb — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:39:00 -0500

Please join us for tonight's CPUSA teleconference celebrating African American History Month. The topic is "Contemporary Black Women in Popular Culture, 'Real' Culture, and Everything in Between" with teacher/film maker Tokumbo Bodunde.

Date: Tuesday, February 21, Time: 8 pm EST, 7 pm CST, 5 pm PST

Call 605-475-4850 access code 1053538# at the prompt.

Join us for a conversation with Tokumbo Bodunde, who will talk about recent images and stories about black women in the mainstream media in relation to black women's lived realities and material conditions. Check out PeoplesWorld.org and Political Affairs for continued coverage throughout African American History Month. Please pass the word and invite friends to join us on the call.

Photo: From Jobs Not Cuts march in Washington D.C., October 15, 2011 (PW/Margeret Baldridge)

zZ test

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:51:00 -0500

Making change by looking at the world as it is: Marxist methodology 101

Rossana Cambron — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:34:00 -0500

In this 33-minute video, CPUSA Chair Sam Webb presents foundations of Marxist methodology: How to make change and win millions to socialism in the American political, social and economic framework.

Recorded during a 2011 seminar in Los Angeles on Marxism, this video is an excellent tool for CPUSA and YCL members, friends and collectives to discuss and deepen understanding of Marxist methodology.

Photo: Chicago labor and community groups join together to celebrate the 125^th anniversary of May Day. (PW/John Bachtell)

Celebrating the life of Henry Winston

Special to cpusa.org — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:06:00 -0500

February is African American History Month. It is also the 100^th anniversary of the birth of Henry Winston, former national chairman of the Communist Party USA. On Sunday, February 19, 2p.m., the Communist Party will hold a celebration and tribute on Winston's legacy in New York City. The event, "The Legacy of Henry Winston: Fight against Racism and the Far Right in 2012" will be livestreamed. Speakers will include professor and political activist Angela Davis, CPUSA Exec. Vice Chair Jarvis Tyner and Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism founder Charlene Mitchell.

People Before Profits Education Fund, New York State Communist Party, Young Communist League and Longview Publishing are sponsors. Tickets are $10 in advance and $15 at the door with a special discounted price of $5 for low-income attendees. Make checks payable to People Before Profits Education Fund. Checks can be sent to 235 W 23^rd St. 7^th floor New York, NY 10011. For more information call 646 556-7409. Click here for the event invitation.

Henry Winston lived a heroic life. Born in Hattiesburg, Miss., into a poor working-class family in 1912, Winston at a young age became active in the unemployed movement during the early years of the Great Depression. It was then that he joined the Young Communist League and was soon elected as a national leader. Winston helped in the building of the 3-million-member American Youth Congress, the Southern Negro Youth Congress and the Abraham Lincoln Brigade whose members fought fascism in Spain.

Winston served in the armed forces, which were segregated, during World War II. Upon his honorable discharge, he became national organization secretary of the Communist Party. In 1948, despite his service to his country, he was among the first 12 leaders of the CPUSA who were indicted for their political beliefs under the unconstitutional Smith Act. Winston spent seven years in jail under this infamous thought control act, and became blind due to the racist negligence of his jailers and the Jim Crow prison system. In 1966 he was elected national chairman of the CPUSA, a position he held until his death in 1986.

Winston made profound theoretical contributions to the class and democratic struggles of the United States. His book, Strategy for a Black Agenda, which first came out in 1973 "remains a fundamental contribution to the struggle," says Tyner. Winston focused on the unity of the class and "national questions," stressing the need for the "Black liberation movement to come to grips with the long-term economic crisis faced by our community, and to direct the struggle against racism toward a broader struggle against the power of monopoly capitalism and imperialism," Tyner says.

In addition, Winston was active in the struggles for Black liberation, black-white and working class unity, and among the American pioneers in building solidarity with peoples of Africa, in particular the struggles against apartheid in southern Africa.

Tyner says the celebration of Winston's life is relevant for 2012 and the elections, especially the struggle against racism. "I think Winston's legacy is still very powerful for today. Much has changed since Winston's time, and today holds its own complexities, but we are still confronting racism, economic injustice and reactionary political forces."

Photo: Henry Winston (PoliticalAffairs.net)

Speakers:

Angela Y. Davis, professor, activist, former political prisoner

Jarvis Tyner, Executive Vice-Chair, Communist Party USA

Charlene Mitchell, labor and political activist, a founder of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism

Danny Rubin, National Board, Communist Party USA

Special Tributes:

Vinie Burrows, veteran actor and activist

Harmonic Insurgence, a cappella choral group

MC:

Judith Le Blanc, National Field Director, Peace Action

Sunday Feb 19, 2012
2:00 PM
Henry Winston Unity Hall
235 W. 23rd Street, 2nd floor
New York, NY

Fruit, Wine And Cheese Reception to Follow

Space is limited, purchase your ticket today!
Donation: $10 in advance • $15 at the door • $5.00 low income
Purchase tickets online

Watch here online on Feb 19 at 2:00pm Eastern!

Call for more information: 646-556-7409

Make checks payable to: People Before Profits Education Fund

Sponsors: People Before Profits Education Fund • Communist Party USA • Young Communist League • People's World