Thursday, January 20, 2011

Why Create New Communist ORG's if There Are Already Existing Ones?

I wanted to write this post to answer the simple question of: "Why are people creating new communist organizations instead of joining the existing ones?" This is a good question for people new to the movement here in the states to ask. When I first walked onto the socialist scene I had a problem understanding why there were so many different groups when every one believed in a general idea (socialism).

I soon was to be crushed when I found out what a fractured and broken socialist movement we had here in the US. I was further crushed when I later learned that most groups in the US are fakes and wish to do nothing more than use reformism to replace one ruler with another under a false banner of socialism or the false claim of "a party run by the working class". Then there are the parties who only seem to want to write polemics about other groups and do nothing else. Some parties exist only for opportunist reasons when they could easily join with other groups that share their same platform and politics but they do not merge because that would mean sharing money, resources, and membership.

There is actually a good reason why new ORGs emerge and if the sixties are any implication then we should see a growth in communist recruitment into the different parties. The creation of new parties is a sign that the existing parties are out dated and are being ineffective in doing mass work. This is the reason why we see groups such as the Kasama project, the LLCO and a few other groups emerging from the darkness. The founders of these groups don't see protesting and signing petitions as a way to build and carry through a revolution. They know that new and original theory's are needed to carry the communist movement forward. They are trying to fill a void by carrying communist slogans and moving the cause forward as a whole.

I think we should embrace this new outbreak of new groups here in the united states. It is obvious all the old parties and most of the "new" trot parties are set in their ways and are ineffective and outdated. Maybe the communist movement needs a revolution inside the communist movement itself?


  1. You make a good point here that, while recognizing the absolute necessity of polemics to the growth of the revolutionary movement overall, and certainly to that of the communist center of that movement, you mention that it is, at the same time, worthless to engage in POINTLESS polemics. I remember that ICC guy they had a dialogue with on RevLeft some time ago who explained that "We [the ICC] don't really do activism". Well then you don't really do communism! Communism is much more than just writing criticisms of people who actually ARE out there trying to make a difference in the world; it is about actually organizing for and leading the way to the overthrow of all existing conditions. As Marx said, "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." An armchair communist is a fake communist. So from their self-description "We don't really do activism", I'd have to say that the ICC is definitely as fake as they get.

    But anyhow, we shouldn't rely on "party shopping" in any event. I think it fairly obvious though that there actually does exist a new and genuine communist vanguard: the Leading Light Communist Organization. That means it is important for real communists to embrace that vanguard.

    I am not particularly impressed with the Kasama Project. It may be new and fashionable in some circles, but when the very leadership of this new organization itself proposes that (quote) "a whole generation" should be spent doing little more than theoretical musing, you clearly are coming from a historically exhausted theoretical framework and need to get with reality. Kasama is large for obvious reasons: they just let in pretty much anybody and have no direction. They let in the anarchists, the Trotskyists, and even some people who are openly reformist. How long can such an eclectic combination be sustained? More importantly, how can it possibly make any theoretical advances, given that there is precious little in common among the members to serve as ideological glue? Kasama may be fashionable for the time being, but even now, one is already beginning to see cracks in this allegedly brilliant new postmodernist approach to "regrouping". Namely, people who have been contributing to the Project itself are already starting to complain about how the organization isn't getting anywhere theoretically. Its present stature isn't going to last.

    While, even after some three years of existence, the Kasama Project hasn't one single genuinely new theoretical innovation, the Maoist Third Worldist movement has further developed and honed its distinctive theory by leaps and bounds and made steady advances on THAT basis. (2010 reportedly was the most successful year yet.) The former is the last desperate cry of the past. The latter is the future. We should embrace the future.

  2. Uh, we don't believe this:

    "when the very leadership of this new organization itself proposes that (quote) "a whole generation" should be spent doing little more than theoretical musing, you clearly are coming from a historically exhausted theoretical framework and need to get with reality."

    You say it is a quote -- but you don't provide the quote.

    Obviously we don't think that we can spend a generation doing nothing but theoretical musing.

    Kasama supporters are involved in practical revolutionary mass work -- and the organization (as an organization) has practice initiatives -- and intends to do theoretical reconception as it also develops practical work. And yet, it may take years to work out a new synthesis (how long did it take Lenin or Mao or whoever to develop their innovations to commuist theory?)

    You are just making this up.

  3. I was referring to this article... ...wherein you described the development of a new synthesis as a work in progress. You explained the work thus, quote:

    "Now the work comes

    Now the work comes of imagining and implementing these new conceptions. And this is frankly

    (a) the work of a whole generation which will be deeply marked the framework of future still-unforeseeable events, and

    (b) a work that will involve an innovative theoretical engagement over years, and

    (c) something that involves cross-fertilization internationally."

    In re-reading part b, it occurs to me that perhaps I misread your statement in part a. Nevertheless, my broader point in the above comment was that, while you have described what you view as the work ahead, I see no description of the "progress" being made in this "work in progress".

    Third Worldism did take years to synthesize as a theory. There is no question that a new synthesis can take considerable time to forge. But what today is the Maoist Third Worldist movement was nonetheless making real theoretical breakthroughs throughout the process of forging the said synthesis. (And, for that matter, it still is.) If Kasama is indeed actually forging a new synthesis, is there yet evidence of this? What theoretical progress has been made in the last three years?

  4. I am a student of Maoist polemics and found this blog interesting.Infact both the Kasama and the Leading Light Communist Oragnization are beset with deviations.The L.L.C.O.upholds Lin Biao's line as correct while the Kasama project hardly upholds the revolutionary contributions of Com.Stalin and hardly displays a firm grasp of Leninist polemics,particularly with the concept of dicatorship of the Proletariat.The L.L.C.O wrongly accuses Com Mao of errors he did not commit and attributes the succes of the G.P.C.R. as a result of of Lin Biao's leadership.This negates the contribution of Com Mao in the Great Debate and the G.P.C.R.Both the Kasama and the L.L.C.O are critical of Com.Mao's foreign policy unable to understand thata China offered full support to the Liberation struggles worldwide and established relations with U.S.A only as a tactical ploy of peaceful co-existence to recognize the American State.Remember the help Mao's China gave to Vietnam in the late 60;s and early 70's and the solidarity to the Black liberation Struggle.The 3 world's theory was never created by Com Mao and was a concept of Deng Xiaoping.Whilst forces like the R.C.P,U.S.A.,the R.I.M and the Ksama reprsent the right the L.L.C.O represnts the left deviatinsit trend.The concept of Global peoples War negating the first World Proletariat is polemically erronoues.Just as the REvolutionary Internationalsit Movement caused havoc to the International Communist Movement by prematurely calling for the formation of a Communsit International the calling of aglobal Peoples War can have similar reprecussions.One of the most important writings on upholding Com.Mao's International line was of Com. Harbhajan Singh Sohi in 1980 when he condemned the 3 worlds theory of Deng Xiaoping and upheld Mao Tse Tung Thought.

    I greatly admire the Kasama Projects attempts to defend the Maoist achievements,the Peoples Struggles and to create avenues of open debate and criticism but they are theoretically weak.L.L.CO makes sharp criticisms of Imperialism,defends com.Stalin strongly and defends the achievements of the Cultural Revolution.Howevever they fail to understand the erroneous line of Lin Biao whatever were his earlier contributions .Remember the 1974 mass movement led by the gang of 4 in the peak of the G.P.C.R. against Lin's line.