This article is part of the discussion leading up to the Communist Party USA’s 29th National Convention May 21-23, 2010. CPUSA.org takes no responsibility for the opinions expressed in this article or other articles in the pre-convention discussion. All contributions must meet the guidelines for discussion. To read other contributions to this discussion, visit the site of the Pre-Convention Discussion period.

All contributions to the discussion should be sent to discussion2010@cpusa.org for selection not to the individual venues.For more information on the convention or the pre-convention discussion period, you can email convention2010@cpusa.org.

It was my honor to present the International Issues and U.S. Foreign Policy document for our Brooklyn, New York club’s preconvention discussion. I thought of past activists summarizing international reports to their clubs, discussing the Russian revolution, the struggle against fascism in Europe in the 1930s , the Cuban revolution, and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. I felt proud to be a link in the chain.

Our Brooklyn club has distinguished itself through electoral work on behalf of progressive candidates for local office, and involvement in an anti-(capitalist) development coalition. I responded to a comment made previously that the preconvention discussion does not reflect the Party’s actual work. This may be partly true, but the discussion is important nevertheless.

The preconvention discussion is a chance for us to evaluate our work in the light of our Marxist theory, program, strategy and tactics. Full discussion of issues and airing of disagreements can only strengthen us. Old decisions and previous assumptions can be affirmed, or changed in the light of new evidence. After the convention we carry out the priorities we have decided upon, based on the Leninist principle of democratic centralism.

I started out by saying the report focuses on the global realignment of capitalist forces that has taken place since our last convention. This is connected to the changing political dynamics in the US, reflected in the election of Barack Obama as president.

Particularly striking since our last convention is the discrediting of the neoliberal model championed by Wall Street-Washington over the past 40 years (stock market collapse) and US foreign policy leadership (the Bush administration’s Iraq fiasco).

The document argues new challenges to U.S. finance capital have spurred various responses from sections of the U.S. ruling class. The Bush administration represented the most right wing sections after 9/11. The Obama government represents sections that seek to restrain the more aggressive forms of militarism and move towards a greater or lesser degree of diplomacy and cooperation.   

The election of Obama creates an opening to mobilize and push for stronger reversal of old policies and for deeper changes in a progressive direction. This opening can manifest itself internationally, giving new momentum to movements for peace, nuclear disarmament, political and economic justice and the environment.

I summarized the document’s list of various hot spots and challenges facing Obama and the movement that elected him. These include Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Latin America, global warming, and the tasks of the peace movement.

One theme is the need to ” demilitarize the US global footprint” i.e. prevent a return to the old militarism, and withdraw troops from Afghanistan. But there is a new emphasis in the report on the need for the peace movement to struggle for a “positive pro-active role for the U.S, government in the world arena.” For instance, in Afghanistan, we don’t just call for troops out, but for a “sustainable withdrawal” plan”, a massive international development plan funded by the US through the UN and NGOs.  

The role of communists, the report states, is to ” support the Obama administration’s positive steps, defeat the far right and militarism that still maintains enormous power, build a counterweight to any tendencies to capitulate to the right, move to end cold war policies and build multilateral cooperation to meet the needs of the workers and ordinary people of the world. “

The document says that although the direction of Obama is away from Bush’s aggressive militarism, the outcome is not predetermined. “In some instances like the Afghanistan surge or phases of the Honduras crisis, more conservative forces within the administration have wielded greater influence. In others (disarmament, Korea, engagement with UN) more progressive forces have wielded the greater influence. “

The discussion was occasioned by the recent public rift between the Obama and Netanyahu administrations over the expansion of settlements in the West Bank, and the emergence of J Street, an organization of progressive Jews, as a counterweight to the right wing AIPAC. We discussed Sue Webb’s call for a “C Street”, which could serve as a counterweight to right-wing Cuban organizations regarding the issue of ending the economic blockade with Cuba. We also discussed the importance of mobilizing for the big peace demonstration at the UN in May.  

I closed by saying the report in many ways is a useful map of the realignment of global capitalist forces since our last convention. However, I did have some major disagreements with the report, especially if this report is the basis for our international work in the coming period.

There is such emphasis on divisions within the US capitalist class, and advocacy of a “multilateral” U.S. foreign policy, that one asks oneself where the working class is in the equation. The document does speak of AFL-CIO solidarity with Latin American trade unionists. However, it does not speak of the general strikes in Europe, seizures of land by the landless in Latin America, showing the way forward for U.S. workers fighting the very same neoliberal policies.

Our strategy seems to be a one-sided building of coalitions around demands we deem able to be granted by one wing or another of the U.S. capitalist class. Our strategy involves few advanced demands that shift the terms of the debate towards working class solutions, even if those demands cannot be won today.

In a midst of a document that speaks of the global realignment of capitalist forces, also striking is that fact there is no accompanying world movement report.

With all the talk of the need for multilateralism among the imperialist powers, what are the prospects for joint collaboration and solidarity among Communist Parties in the Middle East? In Latin America? The forces gathering around the Social Forums? Surely, a hot spot for the international communist movement remains the need for theoretical clarity on the reasons for the fall of the Soviet Union, without which we cannot regain the full confidence of workers, whether in Russia or here in the U.S.  

I could well have added that internationalism, in addition to our Leninist understanding of the capitalist state, was not mentioned in a list of what distinguishes our party from others (U.S. Politics at a Transition Point). If this is meant as a definitive statement, it marks a departure from our traditional understanding of the differences between our party and the social democrats.

I ended by saying only the international working class, in alliance with the oppressed of the world, can bring an end to war, economic crises, global warming, and unemployment. It is commendable the leadership is seeking to reexamine old ways of doing things. Yet, in an attempt to break out of isolation, we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Let us rededicate ourselves to organizing coalitions for jobs, housing and justice. In this ” transitional time” let us set our sights on the ultraright, but also raise anti-monopoly and anti-capitalist demands. And let us rededicate ourselves to the struggle to rid the world of the main source of hunger, mass unemployment, environmental degradation and war today , i.e. imperialism, led by our own U.S. capitalist class.

Comments