Comrade nightcrowred recently put up a video on YouTube asking left-wing people what their objections to the CPUSA are – what keeps them from joining. There were plenty of comments. I'd like to address the different concerns.
The most popular one was some version of “too friendly towards Democrats” [6]. The Democrats are a bourgeois party, and as one poster added, associating with them “strengthens the misconception that Obama is in some way Communist/Socialist” - valid points.
The Party line right now is that the most important task for political progress is to defeat the ultra-right, and to that end, promoting and working with Democrats is a legitimate tactic.
I would say that this tactic was correct when capitalism was booming and the ultra-right was at the apex of political power. Those two factors meant the most important task was to prevent their complete victory in the bourgeois arena. But now is a different story, in my opinion, mainly because of the implosion of capitalism. The Party has not adjusted, and the tailing of Obama is in my opinion at current juncture a deadly mistake – but there is a National Convention that has been called where precisely this question should occupy center stage.
Related is the criticism “they aren't really revolutionary” [3] - “a great place to find some Comrades, but I don't think you can abolish the system by using it.” Indeed it is a fundamental of Marxism that one cannot simply capture the bourgeois state and turn it to socialism. But the Party makes the point that one can only act revolutionary when the objective conditions are revolutionary. Otherwise it's just silly - like calling for workers to take the state power when they don't even want to unionize. The question is of building up forces for the revolutionary moment, and moving circumstances towards a revolutionary configuration.
Of course, it may be that the Party “falls asleep” in a long un-revolutionary period and never wakes up. It stops even working for revolution, and if one came along it might even work against it. To counter this, we should always keep our revolutionary goal explicit. The Party does not do a good enough job of this in my opinion.
On this subject and on the Democrats, the solution isn't to simply dismiss the Party. The Party has an internal democratic process. Join Stars and Gears, and you can represent your views in this process. We value left unity, we're happy to have dedicated left-wing people with some views that are not in line with the Party, just as many of us have.
The second most common concern has to do with the Party's historical take – on the legacy of the so-called communist states [1] and on the Stalin-era thuggery against Trotsky [3]. “In my perfect world, the CP would forgive Trotsky and acknowledge Stalin's error,” says one. The Party line is vague about the crimes of so-called communists like Stalin. It condemns them, but only faintly, while stressing the positive aspects of the USSR. The USSR certainly did have positive aspects, but that doesn't excuse anti-socialist criminality. The condemnation is in my opinion inadequate. I too would like the Party to more decisively condemn Stalinism and admit its own errors in that period. The Party should not fear doing so, as there are good reasons why they made those errors – mainly to do with their lack of access to information about the conditions in the USSR.
My opinion is that if you're dedicated to the truth, you should have no moral fears, and admitting past mistakes is no a big deal. The culture of whitewash or of emphasizing one truth while downplaying another in order to create a desired effect is dangerous and destructive.
As for Trotsky, I myself am an admirer. He was a great Marxist, easily outstripping the criminal Stalin. I have clashed with several Party members on this point and generally over Stalinism. I think they're wrong and not only that, their views hold back the cause of world socialism.
To conclude on this point, the view of the Party on these points is right now is intentionally vague. Members have different opinions and it's not a subject the Party wants to highlight. I, like the critiquers, think we should be more open and aggressive about the anti-socialist crimes of Stalin, and that old dinosaurs that want to support Stalin should step aside and let people who don't make apologies for mass murdering dictators lead the way to socialism. As the Party hasn't yet kicked me out for expressing this, it shows the Party is not dictatorial on the issue and there is room for dissenting opinions. I'm confident that in the end, my viewpoint will win, but reinforcements are vital to do so. So don't let this decide you against joining Stars and Gears --- rather, think of it as a motivation to join.
Another cluster of answers is around “too centralized, too dictatorial” [2] and “I don't consider myself a 'Marxist-Leninist'” [2]. In my experience, this is false. The structure of the Party is loose and you won't be dictated to – especially in a club like Stars and Gears. As for the term “Marxist-Leninist,” there is some internal dissent on this issue – some consider it outdated. I myself don't like the Stalinist association, but I do strive to follow Marx and Lenin. I don't even think of whether or not I'm a “Marxist-Leninist.” The term isn't really relevant.
One person also mentioned that the Party needs to get out there for more events. I can only agree – we try to do this as best we can here. But more members would of course mean we could do this more.
I hope this addresses your concerns and encourages you to join Stars and Gears. Now's the time for action!
-David Bester
