Submitted by Carole Marks, New Jersey

I have been a member of the Communist Party,USA most of my adult life. I can only recall two moments in all my experience when I feared for the very existence of the Party – as the Communist Party. I believe this is one of those moments. We overcame and preserved our essence in tact during that first moment. Today, I believe we are in danger again of losing our essence, our identity, through some of the same propositions and proposals that we resisted and defeated before. I want to take up the ones I think are critical to our survival as a Communist Party. Our core concepts are still valid. Of course we need changes, but NOT in our core concepts.

MARXISM-LENINISM

The proposal to drop Leninism is not just about appearance or a symbol. It is part of the essence of our Party. Leninism is an organic, intrinsic part of our fundamental theory and practice. It is not okay to say that we can study Lenin because he made contributions. Lenin explained, expanded, updated and advanced Marxism. He provided the necessary organizational and structural principles of a Communist Party and guided the revolutionary struggles of the times How can we understand and struggle against US and world imperialism without Leninism?

Lenin provided the theory of strategy and tactics and methodology for working out sound strategies.

It is an integral, organic part of our science. It cannot be separated or detached from Marxism, without crippling our science. We cannot be a revolutionary party without Leninism.

How would non-party people see such a drastic change? The international parties would see it (if they have not already done so)as opportunistic and hypocritical, going off track and a concession to the ruling class. It would be seen as a betrayal of all we have stood for since our founding. The ruling class and the reactionary right would see it as a triumph over “communism.”

The left and our allies would also see it as opportunism. They would see it as an attempt to “fit in” the broad movement better; as an attempt to rid ourselves of the stigma and burden of the past, of Lenin and Stalin and the Soviet UnIon, etc. We would lose credibility and trust,even among those who agree we should drop Leninism. We worked hard to win the confidence and trust of masses, while steadfastly defending our principles. Discarding an integral part of our science would surely raise many varied questions among class and people.

How would our membership see it? Many would be justifiably upset and angry, as some discussion pieces have expressed. Newer and younger members would be confused and misdirected.

There are lots of Marxist social democratic organizations in our country. Dropping Leninism makes us essentially the same as all the other Marxist groups. What makes us unique, if we drop “Leninism?” Marxism-Leninism makes us unique. It makes us organizationally and structurally revolutionary.

I also do not agree that we must keep reviewing and revising our analysis of the history of the Russian Revolution and existing socialism, as well as our Party.

The weaknesses in socialism are not inherent in the socialist system. The science of socialism is just as valid today as it was when Lenin led the Russian Revolution. It is a body of thought that is constantly growing and changing with experience and new ideas. But the basic underpinnings, the vast body of thought, the basic tenets and general principles of Marxism-Leninism, of historical and dialectical materialism have not changed. The basic foundations of scientific socialism, of the science of building a socialist society, remain. They are added to and enriched.

DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM

Yes, we should always look for ways to broaden and deepen our democratic practice. And we have been doing that through the years.

But at a certain point – we are a party of unity in action – we must agree to abide by the decision arrived at by this process. It is a practice and principle the trade unions cannot do without. Neither can a party of revolution. Ir seems to be just plain common sense that in order to have unanimity of will and action we must adhere to a system that allows for rich discussion and decisions and every Communist carrying out the decision to the best of their ability. Without this we have anarchy and participatory democracy.

VANGUARD PARTY

Call it what you will, our Communist Party is the most advanced force in the forefront of struggle. Not because we are better or superior, but because we have the rich history and experience of class struggle and the science that enables us to lead. It is our greatest responsibility to our class and people. Only a Communist Party can lead the working class and people through the long revolutionary process to socialism. This doesn’t mean we should publicly proclaim that we are the “vanguard.” It means simply that we have to understand what our position is in the class struggle and our responsibilities. And they are many and varied.

NAME CHANGE

If we move in the direction of social democracy, which some of the proposals would do if implemented, we SHOULD change our name because we would have lost our right to the legacy,to our great history and to Marxism-Leninism.

ABOUT OUR WORK

Yes, our class and people are searching for alternatives to this deteriorating system. And, yes, they are open to discussion about socialism. I have been working with members of my Democratic Club here where I live. They are progressive people. And increasingly they are interested in ideas about socialism and Marxism-Leninism. No, we don’t have to use Marxism-Leninism at all times, but we must keep Leninism as an integral and essential part of our science, of our education, etc.

A note on organization and printed material. I think we have lost much of our structure, our departments and working commissions. We very infrequently get pamphlets and leaflets useable in our work. Many, many folks we must reach do not use computers, do not have them. A printed newspaper for a CP is critical. We should reconsider. This is not to say that the newspaper and PA online are not also necessary. I need them for my understanding and work.

CPUSA CONSTITUTION

I believe the Draft is an attempt to codify the changes being proposed by some. I especially think the preamble is weak and inadequate compared to the original.

I have great confidence in the majority of our Party membership. I am confident that the outcome of our 30th Convention will find us landing on our feet, standing upright and proud of who we are and where we are going.

The views and opinions expressed in the Convention Discussion are those of the author alone. The Communist Party is publishing these views as a service to encourage discussion and debate. Those views do not necessarily reflect the views of the Communist Party, its leading bodies or staff members. The CPUSA Constitution, Program, and all its existing policies remain in effect during the Convention discussion period and during the Convention.

For details about the convention, visit the Convention homepage
To contribute to the discussion, visit the Convention Discussion webpage

CONVENTION DISCUSSION 
30th National Convention, Communist Party USA
Chicago | June 13-15, 2014

Comments