We urge all principled Communists to form a primary organization or take their existing primary organization out of the dead “parties” and begin the work of unification. Please contact us if you have questions.

To: CPUSA National Committee & District Leadership

From: “Disco Ambition”

Re: Formal Resignation

Date: 09/07/2025 (effective immediately)

After due consideration of the facts and my experiences within this organization, I hereby resign from any role in the Communist Party United States of America (CPUSA). Currently that role is chair of the Sedgwick County Club.

I am a Revolutionary Communist, in that while I recognize the usefulness of acting within the political field for delivering the message of Communism and reaching the masses, I do not hold to the idea that our liberation can be achieved via democratic or political means. I have no respect for the opinion that we can achieve anything by voting in a nation that has never had a real democracy, and I hold a commiserate level of respect for those who hold that view.

I came into the party, as many do, because of its legacy within the world communist movement. A legacy I see now is capitalized on by those in charge to serve their own ends. I was also foolishly unaware of the party’s entanglement with liberal politics and deviation from Communist principles until much later. I wanted to fight fascism. But fascism is here.¹ People are dying in the streets while the party that is supposed to be fighting it commits itself to singalongs and holds hands with the kinder face of the capitalist class in their vile support for the Democrat Party.

A Communist party is supposed to be the vanguard of the workers revolution. It must therefore be capable of meeting the needs of any moment in time by adapting to current material conditions. It is also supposed to maintain its independence from bourgeoisie movements and political parties. The current CPUSA is structurally incapable of meeting any of those requirements. This is because the leadership is an inbred structure composed entirely of liberal democratic apologists put in place through non-democratic means based on loyalty to leadership rather than competence² or Marxist-Leninist views. More unfortunate is the fact that the general bulk of the party is made up of passionate and committed Communists, which creates a revolving door of members as they come to realize the limitations the party has imposed on them and the movement as a whole. All this has resulted in an organization that takes up space in the cause for Communism while being at its heart distinctly anti-Communist in its refusal to conduct open dialog (material dialectics) and rejection of democratic methods of decision making (while decrying itself as conducting “democratic centralism”). These good members are left blindly organizing their communities while party leadership continues its uselessness.

Due to the time and effort I had invested in this organization³ and my belief in the need to change it from the inside, I too long ignored the lack of democratic decision making and stagnant leadership in the hopes that I could help build the party to the revolutionary Communist organization that it purports to be, problems which result in the party being impossible to change, even if there were enough people attempting to do so. In order to allow that new trajectory for the party, I saw as important two main goals. Those were the eventual reunification of the many Communist organizations in the U.S. and the reorganizing of the current party under a more democratic and flexible system, built to develop leadership and facilitate advancing Communist theory. My attempts at initiating formal procedures to those ends were met with years of neglect due to the incompetent and indifferent leadership of this organization at all levels.⁴

At the local level, I tried initiating a system similar to that which I outlined in a Reorganizing Proposal,⁵ hoping to demonstrate its benefits to national leadership. However, it has become more apparent that leadership is made up of people not interested in developing the party or advancing the cause past writing articles for a newspaper nobody reads or giving lectures on topics they are not qualified to give  in a desperate bid to remain relevant.⁶ Using the methods I outlined there, we had taken our club from two people holding infrequent meetings at a bar, to within three years a group that is playing a leading role in local activism composed of dozens of people across the state of Kansas. We did this while our apathetic district leadership were members of a defunct club of retirees.

While I was spending mental energy and time trying to convince non-members of the virtue of our organization and prove that virtue with tangible action, I faced accusations of having bad intentions regarding this party, being called a “wrecker” or participating in factionalism.⁷ The patronizing attitudes I have seen expressed to myself and others trying to effect change in this organization is demonstrative of a culture of elitism and a focus on dogmatic adherence to a misconception of Communist theory and its processes, where structure has been replaced with formality and work has been replaced with words, despite the known dangers of bureaucracy becoming the focus of a party.⁸ 

More patronizing was the constant attempts at gas lighting by some of our members demanding concrete proof of instances of undemocratic actions that we personally witnessed, such as those that occurred at the 32nd National Convention. I will not beat that dead horse more than necessary, but suffice to say that calling something a democratic decision does not make it so, and trying to convince people that witnessed it that they require proof of what occurred for their views to be considered valid is a childish act of bad faith. It is revealing of the direction of this party that most of those I met at that convention, people chosen by their Districts to represent them at the national level, have been either forced out of the party⁹ or have left due to their own frustration with it.¹⁰ I had remained in an attempt to raise the objection to the way things were done while hearing from my now non-member Comrades of the success they have experienced in different organizations that are more committed to ML doctrine.

Recently, I brought up a question for discussion on our club chat concerning a phone call I had just had with a club member who is part of the National Committee. In the effort to present the options for actions we could take in regards to our use of “Kansas Communist Party”¹¹ vs “Sedgwick County CPUSA”.¹² As it pertained to our relationship with our close allies in the local activist community, I also asked for their views on the matter in order to inform my own.¹³ This was seen as a breach of club discipline. This member has, in nearly every instance, raised objections to the presentations of questions or actions before the club or has attempted to subordinate the club to the views held by the leadership he is so unquestioningly devoted to, even when those views run counter to those held by the club members. Many of these objections have been based on an unoriginal devotion to obscure party lines or rigid readings of theory that this party has widely misapplied.¹⁴ It is tedious and interrupts the work being done, but at least it’s in keeping with the party leadership as a whole.

Another instance which now shines bright in my memory is my experience attending the “Peace Conference” in New York City in 2023. During my stay in the assigned dorms, I overheard “Noah”, a member from Illinois speaking about how they had purged members for not being sufficiently supportive of the Democratic Party. When I brought up my concerns with that claim at a club meeting in which Joe Sims was in attendance, Joe called me a liar and demanded proof of those statements, perhaps thinking that I would be carrying a tape recorder wherever I went, but more transparently in an attempt to silence any criticism or concerns with the party (this is made all the more hypocritical due to articles written in which he makes even more damning and unsupported claims, including accusing Kansan clubs being led by “ex-communists”, and other outright lies¹⁵). I later met that same Comrade at the 32nd Convention,¹⁶ in which he called me “chauvinist” for questioning the leadership’s continuing hold on power despite the obvious stagnation we are experiencing.

These stories outline a repeating pattern in the Party in which its leadership ignores its own bylaws and processes and then works fast to expel, silence, or otherwise exclude any member who raises objections to their policies. In the immediate past, the Party has done things like putting people in governing roles as a reward for loyalty, rather than due to competence or the will of those they will be governing, or refusing to issue the required financial reports to what is supposed to be the organizations highest authority¹⁷ (the Delegates of the National Convention). For an example, when the District Organizer position was about to open up in the Kansas/ Missouri district, rather than consult the membership, as is required by the CPUSA Constitution,¹⁸ the leadership unilaterally and unanimously decided to put in place the previously mentioned local club member without any vote or consultation with the membership.¹⁹ Due to these types of actions, we see good members leaving the party in favor of those who do not delve too deeply into the Party’s history or methods of “activism”. The Party cannot fathom itself as anything but the leader of any and all movements, even as they continue to prove themselves unworthy of leadership.

A great Comrade of mine once asked me “at what point [am I] fighting for an acronym”. I can no longer offer my support or participation in the CPUSA. I am tired of making excuses for a bunch of liberals and pork choppers more interested in what they consider journalism and singing than in the success of communism. I’m tired of trying to build a party only interested in perpetuating itself for the benefit of a few in leadership²⁰ while taking up space in activism. I’m just plain tired.

I know it will not happen, but I would encourage this document to begin a series of self-criticism within the party leadership. I would also encourage the present membership to use the structure we have built in the Kansas Communist Party as an example of the way to unite the U.S. Communist movement (at least locally) rather than putting it into the control of the CPUSA.

Update: Since sending this letter to the District and National leadership of the CPUSA, they have engaged in the predictable course of accusations against me, declaring that I am a “wrecker” and removing me from chats they control (overriding a club vote to do otherwise), as well as attempting to gain control over all the assets I created for the use of all local activists (they are claiming that my work was the work of the party, in an echo of the claims used by capitalist corporations when an employee leaves). Furthermore, they claimed entitlement to the name “Kansas Communist Party”, and have decided that they will not work with any organization I am a part of without permission from the national leadership , who will now directly oversee all local elections. They are perhaps forgetting that the entire sequence of events around my final decision here involved the confusion created around having two names for the same organization, and how we created the KCP to be under the sole control of the members as a group and not the national party, even including bylaws to that effect (objected to from those close to leadership). It is clear that the Leadership takes issue with any club acting independently, even when those clubs are doing the work they are supposed to be doing. It does not matter to Joe Sims or Rossana Cambron if the cause is benefiting, if they themselves are not getting the credit and a cut.

“Disco Ambition” – Previous Chair Sedgwick County, KS CPUSA

1. We live in a heavily militarized police state ruled by oligarchs & currently engaged in a genocide. ︎
2. Ex: After over a year, we were unable to get a list of present members contact information from the National or the District. ︎
3. Spent-cost heuristic is something I knew could happen, but ignored. ︎
4. My contacts in other clubs had faced the same, even when we proposed similar plans. ︎
5. See: Reorganizing Proposal. S.G.G. II. ︎
6. Such as the arrogance required for coastal city dwellers to talk about things such as rural engagement (& how Obama was good for us). ︎
7. Despite the party leadership itself having seemingly little understanding of that term. ︎
8. See: The fight against bureaucracy in the Soviet Union under Stalin | The Communists. Carlos Rule. 01/25/2022. ︎
9. I’m constantly told that these purges were “District Actions” in another patronizing and transparent attempt to protect the national leadership. ︎
10. On Why I’m Leaving the Party – The Red Clarion. Comrade Khadija. 08/01/2024. See also Why I Left the CPUSA – The Red Clarion. ︎
11. Registered openly as the “Kansas Communist Association” Kansas nonprofit, rather than by use of shell companies (see also) owned by party leadership (there are no Communist entities registered in NY). ︎
12. My analysis of the question can be found here, and the response can be found here. ︎
13. I, whenever possible, attempt to inform my opinions with those of people around me connected to the issue. ︎
14. I have long wondered if anyone constantly citing “Left Wing Communism” has actually read it. ︎
15. CP National Committee says “Keep your eyes on the prize” – Communist Party USA. Joe Sims. 07/22/2024 ︎
16. Where he was made a member of the NC for his devotion. ︎
17. Violating the CPUSA Constitution, Article VII, Section 1. (accessed 2025) ︎
18. Violating the CPUSA Constitution, Article II, Section 4, & Article V, Section 4. (accessed 2025) ︎
19. Minutes of the CPUSA National Executive Board. September 3, 2025 ︎
20. Ex: John Batchtell, the head of The People’s World and committed democrat, (I previously had access to IRS records indicating his income, but have since lost that access). ︎

On June 16, 2025, days after the Paramount Insurrection and the popular attacks on the ICE facility at Delaney Hall, Unity–Struggle–Unity Press received a double criticism from our comrades at the Southern Coalition for Revolutionary Consciousness identifying two recent articles in the Red Clarion as “left-opportunist,” “adventurist,” “defeatist,” and “bowing to spontaneity.” These comrades ask for a self-criticism to be published by the Press containing the self-criticisms of the two authors and the Editorial Board (“any persons involved in the publishing” of the two articles). The comrades take issue with “Forward the Red Flag,” and “Liberalism and Fascism with Communist Characteristics.”

We disagree with the propositions put forward by these comrades and decline to offer such self-criticism. This article contains our response.

To begin with, we must clearly state the comrades’ argument: that the acts of Elias Rodriguez, and all support for those acts, constitute “left opportunism,” “defeatism,” “tailism,” and “adventurism.” The comrades counterpose the strategy of “raise[ing] consciousness for the ultimate purpose of raising the progressive movement’s consciousness.” What this raising of consciousness involves or how it is to be achieved, our comrades are not at all clear! Certainly, given their criticisms, they believe it does not include the denunciation of moribund parties when they distance themselves from political violence, nor can it encompass the defense of spontaneous political terror. Our comrades also warn us that Communists must not prepare the masses to confront the enemy state with guns and bombs. This, they caution, is “the line of an Anarchist!” They urge instead that we engage in a two-line struggle, although with whom is not clear. The masses? The would-be terrorists? The narrow field of other Marxists?

Before we respond to these criticisms, let us define our terms as Marxists understand them. Opportunism is the adoption of politically-expedient but incorrect positions primarily with the aim of capturing a popular sentiment. Adventurism is the action of “tiny groups” or whole parties without roots in the masses. Defeatism is the position that a revolution is impossible or that socialism cannot be achieved. Tailism is the adoption of positions that have already been made irrelevant by mass consciousness.

The comrades begin their criticism of what they identify as our “left” errors with a quote by Bukharin: “All the aims which a party representing the interests of its class vigorously pursues constitutes the party program.” To this we must ask: What is the purpose of this quotation? What party are our comrades referring to? What class? What program? These are things that do not yet exist. What bearing does the conception of a party program have on our activities? I do not understand the comrades to be arguing that there exists a positive party or program to adhere to. It is my hope that they do not refer to an existing class-in-itself, much less a class-for-itself, within the U.S. that constitutes a revolutionary base. No such class presently exists! It is our job to call that class into existence — indeed, it seems our comrades know (or perhaps instinctually felt) this, for they later quote False Nationalism, False Internationalism, “No revolutionaries find conveniently ready-made, pre-packaged, social bases, but must develop and build the masses and themselves in the same process.”

Indeed, we intend to provide an analysis of the immediately revolutionary strata in a forthcoming article, relying on a formula that compares an individual or household’s present wages to:

Wages
– Superwages
– State benefits
– Real property
+ Value of socialized benefits under communism

(which, not coincidentally, provides insight into the formation of a program, where we identify housing, healthcare, child care, education, transportation, food, and utilities as socialized benefits).

Our comrades clearly see the necessity of building the party, but in their eagerness, their analysis considers that party already built. They criticize anarchic tactics that the masses themselves are adopting. Very well! But they go on to criticize this Press for drawing from those tactics object propaganda lessons to rouse the lowest and deepest members of the working classes to act in their own defense. They mechanically repeat the adages of parties of the past, but the historical development of our present situation must be accounted for. The chief error of the CPUSA, etc., is a warmed-over Lovestoneism. This is the real defeatism! The class that should serve as the motor of the revolution has been completely disorganized over the past century. Its members have trouble even dreaming of a tomorrow free from the capitalist state and have entirely swallowed the Lovestoneite deviation. This cannot be combatted by struggling with other Marxists alone; only propagandizing on the actions and trials faced by the masses themselves can bring them to that understanding.

Indeed, we fear that our comrades have misidentified the masses entirely. “The collective,” they warn us, “is not ready for armed struggle.” It is the advanced masses themselves who are the very people engaging in violence in Paramount and New Jersey! Perhaps our comrades consider the sedate, middle-of-the-road centrist as the “masses.” Perhaps they envision Democratic voters as the masses. The masses, however, the revolutionary strata of the masses, are those who routinely do not vote. Their advanced elements are the Communists. Those coming into consciousness must be guided into our ranks in order to form the revolutionary party.

There is no division between us and the masses.

We are already embarked on the journey to form that party. It is the purpose of this Press and the All-Empire Worker’s League to make it a reality. We ask our comrades to consider advancing the project of forming the party, of adding their voice to the others that now flock to the red banner.

We cannot ignore the spontaneous movement of the masses — this is hardly “bowing” to spontaneity. To disclaim Elias Rodriguez or the Paramount Insurrection as adventurism is to split ourselves from the masses, to declare that the active portions of the masses are in fact not the masses at all. Under this rubric, the masses in motion will never be recognized. We cannot intend to go into direct conflict with the state while wringing our hands about violence against it. On the contrary, we are required to harness this spontaneous energy, not restrain it. The masses must be made ready to do violence. Our comrades accuse us, by refusing to condemn spontaneous terror, of “tailing” the masses. It is the attempt to restrain popular feelings that “tail” the masses — indeed, it is not possible both to bow to mass spontaneity and to tail the masses, for tailism is the adoption of positions that are already outdated, that the masses have already discarded as useless, that have outlived their usefulness.

The comrades also take us to be claiming that any and all anti-state violence heightens the struggle. We say no such thing! But, to deny the evidence of our eyes — the actual heightening of the struggle from October 7, to the Student Intifada, to Aaron Bushnell, to Elias Rodriguez, to the Paramount Insurrection, to Delaney Hall, is to risk a state of permanent tailism and obsolescence. Our comrades are wrong where they suggest that the spontaneous acts of any portion of the masses cannot drive struggle forward. They would, I think, struggle in vain to find any Communist who has held this view uncontested. Spontaneous acts can heighten the struggle, but when they are not guided by the organized party of the revolutionary proletariat, they risk defeat, disorganization, and co-option by the liberal reformist currents.

Although our comrades denounce CPUSA and PSL in words, their criticism in effect embraces the CPUSA position: to allow the “revolutionary” revisionists to teach the masses that Communism is passivity and cowardice.

Briefly, as to our comrades’ last section on safeguarding the movement, here, our comrades fully embrace the CPUSA position with only the slightest hedging. They hold that the security apparatus of the U.S. state requires us to “keep[] our people out of the enemy’s hands and… shield[] them from the political police’s awareness.” No revolution can remain underground. This is a call not to organize an aboveground, unrelated to any of the other issues our comrades address. There is risk. We must be prepared to accept that risk. Anyone who is not prepared to accept that risk is not prepared to be a revolutionary.

These statements also demonstrate a mechanical thinking; there is a dialectic between security and visibility. There is a contradiction between organizing the class and staying hidden. Right now, the disorganization of the class is its defining feature. This means we must overcome that disorganization by above-ground work.

We hope these thoughts are taken in the spirit in which they are meant. We invite our comrades to further conversations on this subject, and further struggle. More, we hope our comrades will take seriously our efforts to unite all that can be united, and, true to their own words, that the thing of greatest importance is the coherence of the movement, act to cohere it and organize it. Let us take concrete steps toward unification.

Southern Coalition for Revolutionary Consciousness (SCRC) Letter to the Editor

“All the aims which a party representing the interests of its class vigorously pursues constitue the party program.”

Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism

This article is a response to and criticism of the recent Red Clarion articles “Forward the Red Flag” and “Liberalism and Fascism with Communist Characteristics”. The article discusses specifically the left-opportunism present within both articles regarding the prevalence of adventurism, anarchism, and the general tendency towards the so-called “propaganda of the deed”. We see the defense or affirmation of these tendencies by Communists as opportunistic and defeatist. This is also an example of the present ideological weakness of the Communist movement in the imperial core. Ultimately, it is our understanding that moving beyond this current stage of development regarding the Communist movement, as well as the broader progressive movement, requires that all those who have embraced the Communist ideology further dedicate themselves to the development of a Communist program for revolution as well as the establishment of a legitimate Communist party to struggle out the way forward. This task necessarily demands that Communists refuse the opportunistic instinct to bow to spontaneous action, and instead strive to provide the Communist movement, and the progressive movement, that which it has historically lacked and still desperately needs, revolutionary class consciousness and organization.

There is a common refrain that those who critique in any way the spontaneous actions of individuals, such as the action undertaken recently by Elias Rodriguez, are counterrevolutionary, right-opportunists, or simply cowards. In some instances this line is proven correct, as in the instance of the capitulationist and defeatist anti-violence positions taken by the so-called Party for Socialism and Liberation(PSL)and the Communist Party of the United States(CPUSA) regarding the action. These positions, which totally denounced the action, the CPUSA calling for “militant non-violent protest”, are examples of the ideological weakness and counterrevolutionary limitations of these organizations. Both of these so-called parties refused to embrace a revolutionary line on revolutionary violence against the imperial/colonial violence that is regularly practiced by the enemies of the oppressed and working masses globally. In doing so both PSL and the CPUSA have revealed their inability to guide the conscious development of the Communist movement nor the broader progressive movement that seeks to overcome the present state of things.

“Now the struggle will be unfolding primarily within the revolutionary trend around the program, strategy and tactics of socialist revolution which is first of all a question of how is revolution unfolding objectively, the ideological line, and second of all what shall communists do about it, the political line.”

Committee for Scientific Socialism, History of Two-Line Struggle on Party Building

That fact acknowledged, the line that regards Elias Rodriguez’s actions not as adventurist but instead as “liberatory acts of spontaneous terror”(Gracchus) is plainly opportunistic. Spontaneous actions by individuals or by organizations that outstrip the current stage of development of both the objective conditions as well as the capabilities/consciousness of the subjective forces of progress is the essence of adventurism. Communists can and should understand the manifold reasons and forces behind all things in reality, however, there is a line between understanding and affirmation. It remains painfully true that the present organization of the Communist movement and progressive movement at large is currently incapable of stopping or even noticeably slowing down the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionist entity and its master the USA. This reality is beyond regrettable and deeply shameful to admit, but more than this it remains necessary that this fact be acknowledged. The collective is not yet ready for armed struggle in part because they are not yet conscious of the necessity of armed struggle. Discounting the present state of the progressive movement and running ahead of it in practice without its unyielding support can only and has only resulted in activists, organizers, would-be revolutionaries, and their organizations being overwhelmingly targeted and destroyed by the enemy’s political police. The apparent lack of desire to combat and end this veritable hemorrhaging of our people from the movement at large is due principally to the worship of spontaneity embraced and proselytized primarily by anarchists.

There are certain ideological and political principles that all those who have chosen to embrace Communism and the struggle for its realization must also comprehend. These principles are borne out of the historical and current experiences of Communists struggling for revolution and the end to the rule of the exploiting classes. Opposing anarchism/adventurism and refusing to align oneself with the belittling of the conscious element is one such principle. Comprehending what we as Communists should know through both study and practice, that spontaneous actions cannot be depended on for the development and sustenance of class consciousness, is another aspect of this commitment. The Communists of this era should feel free to be inspired by the ongoing spontaneous actions and rebellions, these are clear signs that the forces of progress and resistance are alive within the masses of oppressed and working peoples. However, we should remember that our duty is to raise our consciousness for the ultimate purpose of raising the progressive movement’s consciousness. The forces of progress and resistance must be cultivated and developed into revolution; dependency on spontaneity has proven insufficient for this monumental task.

“Just as it is important to remember that theory is not just book learning, it is important to remember that practice is more than engaging in spontaneous struggle.”

I Wor Kuen (IWK), Make the Struggle for Marxism-Leninism Mao “Tsetung” Thought Central in Party Building

The claim within Forward the Red Flag that “one of the tasks of the Communists, especially now, while the revolutionary class in the West is scattered and incoherent, is to teach the masses to reach toward a revolutionary horizon; it’s to give the working class the power to imagine a future where they actually confront the enemy class and its footsoldiers not metaphorically, but actually—with guns and bombs” is not the line of a Communist but that of an Anarchist. Where they should argue for coherence of the Communist and progressive movements into revolutionary organizations, they instead argue only for confrontation with guns and bombs. Confrontation with guns and bombs is nothing new to the struggle against the settler-bourgeois state. Confrontation with guns and bombs, and the call for such confrontation, is not enough to develop class consciousness or foment revolution. Communists who know at all the history of the struggle here know this fact, because in the history of the struggle here it has not been enough. The weather in the Communist movement has unfortunately not changed very much since the seventies.

In addition to this ideological and political failure, the author’s further claim that Russia “had to pass through Narodism before it arrived at Marxism Leninism”(Gracchus) unqualified by the fact that this passing only came as the result of bitter ideological struggle between the Marxists and Narodnaya Volya is questionable at best and undeniably problematic. This line lends itself to the legitimizing of the current anarchist trend in the progressive movement. The very trend that has done more to disorganize movements than to organize them, like with the STOPCOPCITY movement in Atlanta. Omitting this fact regarding the history of Communist struggle cannot go without direct criticism, therefore a written self-criticism is called for as a consequence of this lack of ideological and political consistency and quality. In addition to this call for self-criticism, a reading list will be provided for assistance with overcoming this lack of historical and ideological consciousness.

“Opportunism is the sacrifice of the long range interest of the working class for the immediate interests of a minority of the working class. It is bourgeois thinking developed as a trend in the working class movement. Common forms of opportunism in the working class today include such outlooks as reformism, trade unionism, national chauvinism, narrow nationalism and anarchism.”

I Wor Kuen (IWK), Make the Struggle for Marxism-Leninism Mao “Tsetung” Thought Central in Party Building

The author of Liberalism and Fascism with Communist Characteristics makes similarly opportunistic considerations of Elias Rodriguez’s actions. The claim that Rodriguez “tangibly brought the struggle for liberation into the rear base of the US-israeli empire”(Winter), seems to argue that the struggle til May 22nd had not been tangible, and is tangible only now that Rodriguez is in enemy hands and beyond our still limited/non-existent organizational capabilities of freeing him. Furthermore the claim that Rodriguez’s actions represent a “heightening of the struggle”(Winter) is also opportunistic. Is the struggle heightened every time an individual undertakes violent action against the enemy state? If so then this form of heightening is undoubtedly insufficient for heightening the struggle to the level of revolution, seeing that individual actions against the enemy state occur and have occurred regularly for the entire history of the struggle in the US and in the Zionist entity. The conclusion instead should have been, recognizing the insufficiency of individual spontaneous actions, adventurism, that Communists should further commit themselves to the consolidation of the movement for conscious collective armed struggle against the enemies of the colonized and exploited masses.

In their attempts to rightly critique the capitulationist and counter-revolutionary positions taken by PSL and the CPUSA, both authors go too far and lend their conclusions to anarchistic operations. They, like many in the progressive movement, are in awe of spontaneity and it leads them to uncritically support spontaneous actions committed by those who have insufficient faith in and understanding of the masses of this land. The current lack of a Communist program for revolution and the absence of a party are not license for today’s Communists to forfeit ideological principle for the sake of combating capitulationism, revisionism, and right-opportunism. What our movements lack it is incumbent upon the conscious element to develop and provide. That development still underway, failure to resist bowing to spontaneity is a harm to both the Communist movement and the progressive movements generally.

“The unity between ‘left’ and right opportunism is that both belittle the subjective factor in its ability to correctly assess the social conditions and in its role of consciously bringing politics to the masses and transforming the spontaneous movement into a class conscious one.”

I Wor Kuen (IWK), Make the Struggle for Marxism-Leninism Mao “Tsetung” Thought Central in Party Building

Elias Rodriguez should have been surrounded by comrades and acted with the unyielding support of the Communist and progressive movements as he undertook armed action against the Zionist entity and its factotums. That he went without these things is not his fault, but the fault of the current political and organizational insufficiency of the Communist movement. Until we have united our movement around a Communist line on revolution, a program, and until we have consolidated this unity through the establishment of a Communist party, people with the will to struggle like Elias will be left without in their struggle against the forces of reaction. If Elias Rodriguez “would not have done what he did, because there would have been a viable alternative”(Gracchus) then the conclusion reached by every Communist should be that Communists must provide the progressive movement, which is continually conveying a desire to struggle, its viable alternative to spontaneous rebellion. Such a viable alternative can again only be realized through the process of developing a truly revolutionary program and the establishment of a Communist party.

The principal responsibility for Communists in the imperial core is to lead and guide the development of the progressive movement, not tail the spontaneous rebellions that are the inevitable consequence of the constant exploitation and oppression wrought by the settler-colonial bourgeois state.  If the consciousness of the exploited and oppressed masses is limited, and it is, then the practice will also be limited whatever it appears to be at the moment. The principal task of Communists at this current stage of development is to cultivate revolutionary class consciousness among the exploited masses. Revolutionary class consciousness, more than just the acknowledgement of bourgeois exploitation and colonial/imperial violence, means being conscious of the need for and inevitability of the total dictatorship of the oppressed and working masses over and above the current ruling classes of oppressors. This kind of consciousness is not ready-made nor can it be the result of spontaneous or haphazard practice. For its development it requires dedicated ideological and political training in the theory, history, and practice of scientific socialism.

“No revolutionaries find conveniently ready-made, pre-packaged social bases but must develop and build the masses and themselves in the same process.“

False Nationalism, False Internationalism

Call for Self-Criticism from Red Clarion authors

To remain consistent with the goals listed in the Red Clarion mission statement; to develop revolutionary consciousness in the masses and a revolutionary vanguard party, and because you have declared yourselves Communists, we representatives of the Southern Coalition for Revolutionary Consciousness, who have united  to the same goals, are calling for a collective public self criticism from any persons involved in the publishing of “Forward the Red Flag” and “Liberalism and Fascism with Communist Characteristics” on the basis of these articles’ left-opportunism and affirmation of adventurism. We also request a public reassessment of spontaneity and left-opportunism, clarifying for readers that criticism of right-opportunism should not lead to the unprincipled affirmation of anarchism and adventurism generally.

If Communists allow the development of the revolutionary movement to remain at the level of spontaneous action, then we have chosen to sacrifice the future vanguard for moments of temporary excitement and acts of adventurism. Acts that more often than not lead to little more than arrests and movement stagnation must be struggled against. We suggest a thorough reading of the works listed in the provided reading list. We also call for a public reassessment of Elias Rodriguez’s action that emphasizes the importance of a legitimate Communist party to the consolidation of movement practice. Finally, it should be acknowledged that his action, and other such adventurist undertakings, are not required for the development of a legitimate Communist party.  In being critical of these mistakes, and struggling for a more-correct way forward, we not only allow ourselves to evolve, but also affirm the scientific character of our ideology. Practice, knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge, correcting flawed practices, alongside comprehending the lessons from our revolutionary predecessors, is how the future we have united to building becomes inevitable.

“The Communist Party does not fear criticism because we are Marxists, the truth is on our side, and the basic masses, the workers and peasants, are on our side.”

Mao Zedong, Speech at the Chinese Communist Party’s National Conference on Propaganda Work

“We have the Marxist-Leninist weapon of criticism and self-criticism. We can get rid of a bad style and keep the good.”

Mao Zedong, Report to the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China

Note on Movement Security and Care

Anyone who does not feel any concern at the thought/possibility/likelihood of themselves or others being arrested or targeted by the political police or the other organized servants of reaction either does not know the history of the struggle both here and abroad or has simply decided not to care. Whatever the reason, such a perspective on matters of movement security and longevity is objectively detrimental to the struggle against capitalist exploitation and imperial/colonial domination. This brand of amateurishness has resulted in scores of activists, organizers, and revolutionaries being brutalized, imprisoned, and murdered by the enemy state and their forces. Countless more have chosen to abandon movement organizing entirely on the basis of their negative experiences of engaging with the enemy. At present we have neither the organizational infrastructure nor the resources to protect those who have embraced the struggle. What is worse is that the progressive movement in general seemingly lacks the conscious belief that our activists, organizers, and developing revolutionaries should be protected, that their lives should be valued above and beyond mere spectacles for the masses that have long gone unmoved by mere spectacles.

The “goal of security,” as laid out by J. Sakai in Basic Politics of Movement Security, “is to protect the movement itself, to let the larger struggle against capitalism move forward.” Adopting a lackadaisical perspective on what individuals should be prepared to risk in the struggle, or how they should undertake risks, does not at all protect the movement, but instead views the very people needed to forward the movement as merely cannon fodder for the political police and the enemy state. No one should be expected to “throw their lives away” for the realization of the revolution. Lives must be given and dedicated to revolution, aimed at serving the revolution. The revolution is not served through getting arrested or brutalized by the police. It is not served when people imagine that the only or best way to confront or resist the violence of the settler-colonial bourgeois state is by bowing to spontaneity and forgoing conscious development. It is on the conscious element to ensure that every sacrifice, every gift of a life to revolution, has the impact on the struggle that such a sacrifice should always have. There have already been so many sacrifices, and there will necessarily be countless more to come.

The revolution is inevitable, but the process lags every time Communists concede to carelessness and defeatism regarding our movement, our responsibilities, the broader struggle, and decide to bow to spontaneous action. It is more meaningful to struggle for keeping our people out of the enemy’s hands and increasingly shielding them from the political police’s awareness. It’s more meaningful to work now on developing the networks, strategies, and organizations that will ensure, whatever ways the enemy state and the political police seek to attack the movement, the movement will continue moving forward. 

Reading List

• False Nationalism, False Internationalism, E. Tani and Kae Sera
• What Is To Be Done, Lenin
• On Practice, Mao
• Materialism and the Dialectical Method, Cornforth
• History of Two-Line Struggle on Party-Building, Committee for Scientific Socialism
• Make the Struggle for Marxism-Leninism Mao “Tsetung” Thought Central in Party Building, I Wor Kuen (IWK)

[New Britain, CT] – We are inviting any and all media to our rally at Central Park in New Britain on April 22nd 2024 at 3:30 pm to bring attention to the gentrification unfolding in New Britain and around CT, as well as the gentrification yet to come. It is also to call out one luxury developer in particular, Jasko Development LLC and its CEO Avner Krohn. He and his company have been described as leading New Britain’s “comeback” (translation: bringing rich people in and kicking poor, homeless, and long time residents out). Like all luxury developments that have been built in once poor and underdeveloped areas across the U.S, the 3 luxury developments Jasko is building downtown will release the floodgates of gentrification. As more wealthy people, who can afford Jasko’s $1650 / month rent for a studio, move to New Britain, as more landlords in the surrounding area speculate that they can charge more for rent with the influx of rich people, the homeless, poor, and long time residents who can’t afford the rent increases and housing costs will be displaced. They will either end up homeless or be forced to move to an area with cheaper housing. It’s a process and story that has unfolded in San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, and Boston. Look at the changes in New Haven over the past 10-15 years!

We are here to say enough! Jasko Development LLC and Avner Krohn are the face of gentrification in New Britain whether they intend to be or not. If they want to be helpful to the New Britain community, where plenty of people are desperate for housing they can qualify for, then they should meet the following demands from the community:

1. Cut the rent in 1⁄2 and don’t raise it
2. Remove 3x income requirements, disregard prior evictions, credit history, and criminal records,
   no application fees
3. Prevent police harassment, especially of homeless and poor people, on your property
4. Only rent to New Britain residents, employ residents of New Britain with a living wage
5. Subsidize rents with your estimated $7.5 million tax break

If they are unwilling to do the above, then they make it clear they are not for the people of New Britain in these desperate times, they are only about their money, and we need to evict them before they evict us!

It’s election season in the USA, and once again, we are being asked to choose between the lesser of two evils. On one hand, we have Donald J. Trump with his dangerous racist rhetoric, his misogyny, his open bribery and crimes. On the other hand we have Joseph R. Biden with his uncritical support for genocide, his repetition of zionist lies, and his continuation of Trump’s fascist border policies. How is one to choose and proudly cast a vote for either of two obvious evils? 

Comrade George Jackson in 1969 expressed this conundrum succinctly, “The fascists already have power. The point is that some way must be found to expose them and combat them. An electoral choice of ten different fascists is like choosing which way one wishes to die.”

As communists, we should analyze this election scientifically. We can look at present and historical conditions to reach our answer of what is to be done.  

Rajani Palme Dutt in 1935 spoke on the dangers of lesser evil voting, “the continued hesitation and retreat of the reformist working class leadership at each point (policy of the ‘lesser evil’) encourages the growth of fascism. On this basis, fascism is able finally to step in and seize the reins, not through its own strength, but through the failure of working class leadership. The collapse of bourgeois democracy is succeeded, not by the advance to proletarian democracy, but by the regression to fascist dictatorship.”

We understand that, throughout history, liberals have always sided with fascists. [Editors: Liberals here mean not only the left “aisle” of the U.S. state, but the entire tradition behind liberalism; these liberals — private property owners opposed to absolute monarchy and systems of privilege — definitely turned on the movement for liberation when it attempted to extend its work to property in the middle of the 19th century and have been implacable enemies of anti-propertarian ideologies ever since.] Liberals vote and govern in ways that protect their private property and bourgeois interests. While working class liberal-minded folks can be reached with a message of class solidarity, the professional managerial class will always protect their interests. 

Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds. 

Tailing the Democratic Party is out of the question. This major party is fully beholden to the corporate interests that finance it. The DNC is the party of Silicon Valley, of defense contractors, and is now the party of war in Ukraine and genocide in Gaza. We, not only as communists, but as humans, cannot back Joe Biden for president in 2024. 

It should go without saying, but we also cannot back the Republican Party. They are the party of Christian Nationalism, of right to work laws, of abortion bans and homophobia. No, we will not support the GOP nor Donald Trump. 

Section Four of the CPUSA Party Program states:

Both Democrats and Republicans have collaborated over many decades to restrict ballot access for ’minor’ parties, massively increasing signature requirements to get on the ballot and increasing the percentage of votes needed to remain on the ballot over several election cycles. Many media outlets also restrict democracy by focusing on the horserace and personality aspects of elections, reporting endlessly on polls and perceptions rather than on coverage of the issues of importance to voters.

We, as the Communist Party, are considered a minor party. We are running several candidates in local and state races, but we are not running a POTUS candidate in 2024. While we recognize that electing socialists and communists into the bourgeois system will not change it (only revolution can accomplish that goal) we understand that electoral struggle is one method to spread our message of working class solidarity, and to show the masses that the system under which we live is the cause of our pain. We can and should utilize bourgeois electoralism to advance our cause. 

There are many minor parties running candidates with platforms that align more closely to our goals than those of the major bourgeois parties. So the question now is: “Shall we form a United Front against fascism with one or more of these minor parties?”

The Party for Socialism and Liberation is running a presidential campaign in 2024, and standing with them could be a great opportunity to form a United Front against the fascism of the neoliberal Democrats and the MAGA Republicans. 

The PSL candidates, Claudia De la Cruz and Karina Garcia, have seven major policy goals stated on their website: 1. Seize the Biggest 100 Corporations, Create A New Economy for the People, 2. Overthrow the Dictatorship of the Rich — Build a Democracy That Serves the Working Class, 3. End the Rule of Money and Lock Up the Corrupt Elite, 4. Cut the Military Budget by 90% — Peace, Not War with China & Russia, 5. End the War on Black America, 6. Defend Women’s Rights, Full Equality for LGBTQ People, and 7. Save the Planet from Capitalism. 

These seven simple goals are not wholly different from the CPUSA party program goals. Claudia and Karina are also under no delusion that they might win the election or if they were to, that their victory would fundamentally change the United States. It couldn’t, but, as Lenin explained, running socialist candidates at all levels is one way to spread our message of socialism, and this is their goal in 2024. 

Many CPUSA members have a lot of experience working with Party for Socialism and Liberation comrades on the ground in our communities. We understand that they are good, principled comrades. PSL has been incredibly active in the FREE PALESTINE movement, they rallied with us against the Dobbs decision, and have worked with us on lobbying city councils regarding issues of policing. 

Dr. Cornel West, while not a Marxist, is running a progressive campaign for president as an independent candidate. His platform contains the following pillars: 1. Economic Justice, including a $27/hour minimum wage and breaking up monopolies, 2. Worker Justice — establishing a workers bill of rights and ending “right to work,” 3. Environmental Justice, 4. Health Justice by nationalizing the entire healthcare industry and protecting women’s and LGBTQ healthcare, 5. Racial Justice, including reparations to Black Americans, 6. Transformative Justice — ending mass incarceration and investing in alternatives to policing, 7. Voter Justice — instituting ranked choice voting, 8. Education Justice — canceling all student debt and making community and state colleges tuition free, 9. LGBTQIA Justice, 10. Gun Violence Justice, 11. Immigration Justice, and 12. Global Justice. 

The Communist Party has worked with Dr. Cornel West in the past through the Poor People’s Campaign. He has never claimed to be a Marxist, but he is an anti-imperialist. Take a closer look at his twelfth campaign pillar, Global Justice. This plan includes the goal of an expeditious closure of global U.S. military bases, disbanding NATO, and ending all weapons shipments to Ukraine to instead invest in peacemaking; ending military aid to Israel, ending zionist apartheid of the Palestinian people, and pressuring the U.N. to establish a program for Palestinian dignity and liberation; ending the embargo on Cuba and normalizing relations by removing the nation from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list; and no intervention, military or otherwise, in Haiti. 

Dr. West’s platform of anti-imperialism is well thought out, and stands in stark contrast to the stances held by either leading bourgeois party in the United States. Working through an independent grassroots campaign like his is one way we can spread our message of working class solidarity and anti-imperialism. He is a candidate who has aligned with us in the past, and would likely welcome our alliance in this election cycle. 

If we want to stop the rise of fascism in the United States, we need to work together with other progressive forces, and this election season is an opportune time to reach out. We have built-in allies in the PSL, the Dr. West campaign, Palestinian liberation and anti-war groups, labor unions, and workers all over the country disillusioned with the two corporate-aligned imperialist parties. We can use our collective power to show people that we don’t have to settle for an “evil” candidate, but that we can demand a different way of life. We can disrupt this election cycle, and use it to bring working class Americans into the struggle. 

So, let’s form a true United Front against fascism in 2024. Let us join forces with other socialist and communist parties, unions, and unaffiliated comrades. Let us work together to defeat all the faces of fascism, including both major political parties in the USA and their corporate overlords. Let us stand firmly against zionism, and all aspects of settler colonialism. Let us collectively say “No!” to militarization of the southern border, “No!” to the oppression of women and trans people, and “No!” to the over-policing of Black and Brown neighborhoods. 

Let us say “Yes!” to solidarity, “Yes!” to working class power, and “Yes!” to socialism. Let us say “Yes!” to a United Front against the fascist threat. We have nothing to lose but our chains.

As a former Sergeant who served in the U.S. Army for almost a decade, I can relate strongly to the guilt that Comrade Bushnell felt from the realization of his complicity. I too, much like Aaron, was prepared to take my life in an act of defiant protest against the crimes I realized I was committing. I was going to shoot myself at a range in front of my battalion command team as an act of desperate protest.

I’m glad I didn’t follow through on that plan, because now I’m able to commit myself to the cause of liberation. I also get an opportunity to raise my children with these values — something that dead people can’t do. I bring this up not to make it about me, but rather to emphasize that l know exactly what drove him to commit self-immolation. 

I never met Bushnell, but it pains me I will never have an opportunity to meet someone with whom I feel so much solidarity. What I see, besides a younger me, is someone willing to forgo a comfortable life of privilege, an awesome DevOps career, and a whole life in front of him. He was willing to forgo all of this so that he could offer himself in service of colonized people he’d never met, half a world away, simply because he viewed them as human beings deserving of liberation. Comrade Bushnell’s selfless love for humanity is the highest example of all that a Communist should strive to be.

I can’t change the fate of Comrade Bushnell, but I do know that I can reach the other Bushnells in the military. I know they’re out there. They aren’t common, and I never met one while I was in service. But I know they exist, because I was one. And Comrade Bushnell martyred himself as one. They’re out there, and they would make invaluable servants to the cause of liberation.

All comrades, civilian or military, are worth more to our struggle alive than dead. This is not said to detract from Aaron’s heroic sacrifice, but it has to be made clear: burning yourself alive does not disrupt the flow of weapons. It does not impact things materially. As Marxists, it is the material which we care about.

It is in that spirit that I want to reach out with a heartfelt plea of solidarity to all United States Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines. To put the bottom line up front: I challenge you to be bold, fearless and principled, just as Aaron was. I will close out this brief letter assigning you a mission and laying forth my commander’s intent. You are responsible for executing the principles of mission command to reach the desired end-state.

My commander’s intent to you, American Soldier, is to disrupt the flow of weapons to the Zionist Entity (so-called “Israel”) by whatever means are available to you. The desired end state of this operation is for the United States Military to cease the shipment of arms to the Zionist Entity. It’s a broad vision; I trust in your creative faculties and outstanding leadership to fill in the blanks, draft up your own OPORD, and iteratively implement the Military Decision Making Process. Only you know what you are best equipped with and able to accomplish.

With that said, ensure that you are creative in your thinking, intelligent in your planning, and do not limit yourselves. Be realistic, but be bold. The revisionist Michael Harrington developed the poisonous slogan “Left Wing of the Possible”; I’m telling you fuck that, the sky’s the limit, and the world’s your oyster.

You may feel scared. You may ask yourself “This would be disobeying orders, I’d get in so much trouble by my commander!”  And while I completely understand where you’re coming from, it’s also a misconception. Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states that soldiers have a duty to obey all lawful orders. Genocide is illegal, according to both United States Law and Article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The penalty for those found guilty of Genocide is life imprisonment, with the possibility of execution. 

Just Following Orders is no excuse under the law. Neither is rank. A private can be just as guilty as a general officer. This is the precedent that the United States herself set during the Nuremburg Trials. Ask yourself if you want to risk being executed after being found guilty of genocide. The only defense against such charges is an explicitly refusal to comply, or better yet, active resistance to such illegal orders.

Signed,

An anonymous NCO who wants you to do the right thing

TO CONTACT THE NCO, PLEASE EMAIL ANONYMOUSNCO@PROTON.ME

Dear Youth of America, 

So, you’ve read Bin Laden’s letter and your mind is blown. How could such an obviously evil man have a somewhat correct analysis of the Palestinian conflict? I’m very sorry to have to blow your mind further. Osama Bin Laden isn’t really the anti-imperialist fighter he seems to be in that letter. 

Osama Bin Laden was born into the family of a billionaire construction magnate with close ties to the Saudi royal family. He first gained recognition in the West as a Mujahideen leader in the Afghan-Soviet War, in which he was funded by the CIA in order to foil the USSR. At the tailend of the 80s, guided by his extreme interpretation of Islam, he founded Al Qaeda in order to conduct Jihad against America and its allies. This included operations in Sudan and Somalia. However, operations conducted by his Mujahideen in Bosnia between 1994-1996 draw into question whether Bin Laden was ever truly free of his handlers in Washington, or always serving as their useful idiot.  

Bin Laden gained further notoriety in the West for allegedly financing the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, though he denied involvement. Eventually he would gain international infamy as the architect behind the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks, though he remained ambiguous about his involvement for years afterward. Ultimately, by allowing the United States to create a terrorist mastermind mythos around him, Bin Laden was helping the ruling class to obscure an important detail about 9/11 — that everyone, from the CIA and FBI, to the zionist intelligence agency Mossad, to the Saudi royal family, was in on the plot, and could have prevented the attacks. If they’d wanted to. But why didn’t they want to?  

Saudi Arabia’s monarchy has been America’s second most solid ally in West Asia, surpassed only by the zionist occupation of Palestine, commonly referred to as “Israel”. These countries serve as the frontline for the U.S. Empire’s regional imperialist interests — they do America’s bidding, and are granted a degree of autonomy and a share of the spoils. They aren’t the only two regional pawns, however. The United States originally helped Saddam Hussein come to power in Iraq, but he proved to be an unreliable ally whose nationalism exceeded his loyalty to the Empire. Hussein disobeyed his overlords and they overthrew him. They garnered popular support to achieve this through now infamous lies such as Colin Powell’s assertion that Hussein “possessed weapons of mass destruction” and the Nayirah Testimony — in which Iraqi soldiers were accused of dumping premature babies out of incubators. Like Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden was a comprador who disobeyed and invoked the metropole’s ire. In Bin Laden’s case, his mistake was calling for the destruction of Israel and the overthrow of the Saudi royal family, who he accused of straying from Islam. Allowing 9/11 to occur gave the U.S. Empire a necessary excuse to solidify its regional control, and dispose of an asset who had outlived his use. 

Nobody went after the Saudi royal family for their role in 9/11 because they continued to obey America in every way. They normalized relations with the zionist occupation and continue to stoke the flames of the Wahhabi Islamic conservative movement. This strain of Islam is despised by millions of Muslims around the world because it’s insanely hateful to Muslim people who don’t follow its extreme interpretation of the religion. It’s similar to how the Christian fundamentalist movement hates any American Christian who doesn’t follow their interpretation of Christianity. It’s convenient for the U.S. to encourage Wahhabism abroad so they can stoke the fires of Islamophobia and fear of Sharia Law at home.

But what does this have to do with Palestine? Bin Laden’s letter talks about large “Jewish capital” taking control of the American state apparatus, and using it to attack Palestine.. This is a convenient lie for the large capital interests that actually control America (90% identify as Christians, for the record). It serves to disguise who is in control, and makes it seem that Israel is in control, when in fact the current president has said multiple times that Israel protects America’s interests in West Asia. Osama Bin Laden was highly educated and could have easily dispelled this myth, which is the most common and misinformed antisemitic myth on the planet, yet it appears in his letter. In fact, it’s clear from other letters and communications in which he distinguishes between Zionism and Judaism, that Bin Laden himself knew it to be untrue. Yet it appears in his letter. Of course this man, who was born into great wealth, could never tell everyday people that the real enemy is people like him and his family, that the wealthiest people of any country, including America, are their real enemies. 

This, my friends, is what we call shared class interest or class solidarity. The very wealthiest people pretend to fight one another in public, in front of us, but actually help each other behind closed doors. They teach us to suspect each other and prevent us from achieving the class solidarity that they have. They will always try to turn everyday Muslims and Christians against everyday Jews (including countless anti-zionist Jews), because that’s exactly what serves their interests most. Although Bin Laden’s letter rightly decries the occupation of Palestine, by misidentifying the enemy he still performs a useful role to the bourgeoisie. They try to set us against each other in many other ways — along racial lines or lines of gender and sexuality. All of it serves the purpose of a smokescreen, to prevent us from identifying them as the real enemy.

The ultimate result of 9/11 was the American government stripping its citizens of their constitutional rights through the Patriot Act. It was the pretext to re-invade Iraq and invade Afghanistan. Though 9/11 may seem like an attack on America, it allowed the ruling class to consolidate its interests. Though Bin Laden’s letter seems anti-imperialist, it serves imperialism by misleading the people about who their enemies are.

But having been misled is not an excuse for working class zionists in the West who engage in Islamophobic rhetoric to justify Israel’s occupation and genocide of Palestinians. If Osama Bin Laden’s letter can go viral and be widely read, there’s no reason the work of real anti-imperialists, such as Ghassan Kanafani, Leila Khaled, and George Habash shouldn’t — except if you consider the ruling class wants and encourages you to read Osama Bin Laden instead.

At a certain point, working class zionists are choosing to engage in cruel bigotry and sophistry, despite their class interests. They are no better than working class Christians who join the KKK or working class Muslims who joined ISIS. Like Bin Laden, they’re not fighting the real enemy. To paraphrase other genuine decolonial writers Aimé Césaire and Frantz Fanon: “Those who try to dehumanize others, in fact forfeit their own humanity. By justifying the murder and maiming of the civilians they oppress, oppressors sign away their own right to liberty.” The fate of such oppressors should be no less than that of Julius Streicher, who was rightfully convicted along with his Nazi friends, even though he never personally killed a Jew in the Holocaust. His hands were the bloodiest of all, because he published an antisemitic magazine which inspired countless others to take up arms against their neighbors.

The wars I’ve mentioned in this letter, from the two Afghan wars, to the two Gulf Wars, to the Bosnian War, murdered and maimed countless civilians in dozens of Global South countries. The survivors of these wars, who live with permanent disabilities, survivor’s guilt and immense grief over their lost loved ones, have for decades hated America. The writer of this piece is just one of millions of Global South citizens who have suffered incalculable losses because of America’s “foreign policy.” We don’t hate America or you because of your “freedom” — this is another lie your government tells you. We hate you because you allow your government to butcher us and destroy our freedoms.

You may feel it’s unfair of us to hate you — after all, you’re not in control of what your government does. But that doesn’t absolve you of your responsibility to the almost 200 other countries that you purposely repress (whether as allies or enemies). We’ve all been told that the American government is the Best Democracy on the planet and it’s this exemplary democracy that justifies forcing the same system on all of us. But America is no democracy — it’s a dictatorship of the ruling class. Everything the ruling class does — from the grandiosity of 9/11 to the viral Bin Laden letter, serves some role in their class interest. It’s designed to keep you from recognizing your class position, and that you don’t live in a democracy. 

When you don’t live in a democracy, it’s your responsibility to overthrow the political system which represses your voice and murders everyone else. It’s your responsibility to correct the historical errors of the country you claim as your own, and the first step on this journey is properly identifying who the real allies — and real enemies — are.

In Solidarity,

Comrade Leila’s Whitest Stan

The zionist entity is shaken to its core. They did not expect the Palestinian resistance to be as strong as it is. Decades of torturing children, sniping peaceful protestors and medics and conducting airstrikes against civilian infrastructure has left the zionist entity woefully unprepared to fight a liberation force made up of 9 different Palestinian organisations.  

The zionist response has been brutal massacres of Palestinian civilians. Taking this chance to complete their long genocide, the hard right wing of the reactionary zionist state has bombed entire neighborhoods out of existence. Zionist warplanes, supplied with U.S. bombs, struck the Al-Ahli Hospital and murdered 471 civilians. They repeatedly bombed the Jabalia Refugee Camp, murdering  500 Palestinians on the 31^st of October, and dozens more again on the 1^st of November. The zionist entity has begun a barbaric extermination campaign designed to wipe out the Palestinian population of Gaza — and possibly the West Bank. Those they do not kill, they hope to displace into Egypt in order to claim the land as their own. Already, they have begun to demolish houses in northern Gaza. Over 10,000 Palestinians have been murdered in Gaza so far, including 3,542 children, and upwards of one million have been displaced by the zionist entity’s massacres. The colonial regime has not spared the people of the West Bank, who spit in the face of efforts to divide and conquer their nation. Sweeping arrests have taken thousands hostage, young and old, to be tortured and publicly humiliated in a futile attempt to crush the steadfast Palestinian will. Since October 7^th, the occupying forces have killed 132 Palestinians in the West Bank, bringing the year’s total to 340. Do I need to remind everyone that these were people? Living, breathing human beings with hopes, dreams, and aspirations. The zionist entity has shown the world its true colours; no amount of propaganda will hide their true face — their depravity and their weakness — from the world now.

While the Palestinians fight, millions in countries around the world have taken to the streets to march in solidarity. 500,000 people marched in London. One million marched in Turkey. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, more have marched in the U.S., France, Germany, Bolivia, Ireland, Tunisia, and Egypt. Humanity shines through in those brave enough to stand up against the U.S.-backed enemy; they have not been duped by the constant avalanche of propaganda that has been forced upon us by the zionist entity and its allies.

In response to overwhelming support for the Palestinian cause, the Western imperialist states have done less than nothing. President Biden, commander-in-chief of the United States imperial military, ordered that 14 billion dollars’ worth of “aid” be sent to the zionist entity. He stationed American troops in “Israel” and sent two aircraft carrier strike groups to the Mediterranean Sea.

The U.K. has sent 30 million dollars to “Israel” over the past three weeks and the leader of the so called “workers party” of the UK, Keir Starmer, has thrown in his support for this genocide, declaring that a ceasefire “only benefits Hamas” and that “Israel” does have the right to cut off life-sustaining water and power to Gaza. This directly contradicts the Geneva Conventions and “international law” that western countries and politicians putatively uphold.

Many Communist parties, ostensibly representing the committed left wing of their countries, have also failed in their duty to stand with the Palestinians. Many of them draw their political line on Palestine from the “Communist” party of “Israel”, while ignoring the existence of the Popular Front for the liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), two Marxist-Leninist Palestinian parties who are actively engaging the zionist entity for the liberation of the Palestinian people, as I write this. This shameless opportunism, this cowering in self-assured defeat despite victory on the horizon, exposes the leadership of such parties as charlatans and frauds, and indeed as anti-communists. 

The people of the world must not ignore the cry of the Palestinian resistance. The PFLP has called us to action.

In a statement released October 31^st, 2023, the PFLP issued a call to action to us, the people of the wider world. For those of us who are truly committed to the progressive cause, to the fight — and it will be a fight — for liberation, this call isn’t a suggestion. We must interpret them as orders. The actions are as follows:

1.    To expel the ambassadors of aggression (“Israeli” ambassadors)

2.    To stop the flow of oil and gas through Arab nations into “Israel”

3.    To close the American military bases in Arab countries

4.  For workers unions across the world to refuse to unload or load any weapons shipments destined for the zionist entity.

To the first point, we have our orders.

To the second point, we have our orders.

To the third point, we have our orders.

To the fourth point, we have our orders.

The Palestinian people are bleeding to free themselves. From the Mau Mau in Kenya to the African Slaves in Haiti, the African National Congress in South Africa, or the Republicans in Ireland — we find constant examples of righteous struggles. And when we read about them, we tell ourselves that if we had been there in those times, we too would have fought, given aid, ensured their victory. It’s easy to declare that after the fact, but it’s much harder to do it in the present. Well, we have our chance now. We can stand with the Palestinian people as they fight for their liberation against a settler colonial, genocidal, apartheid state, or we can sit by and do nothing. We have our orders.

We must apply constant pressure to our governments, we cannot give any ground, we cannot forget about this. We must apply pressure until the zionist entity’s ambassadors have been expelled from all nations around the globe. So far, Colombia and Bolivia are leading the charge on this issue. We must follow where they lead. We have our orders.

The Arab nations must follow the examples of organisations such as Ansar Allah and Hezbollah who have shown no meek capitulation, and rally behind the Palestinian people against the self-serving coloniser. They must cut off all oil and gas to “Israel”. Already in Iraq, protests have been blocking fuel trucks from entering into Jordan where they’d later be delivered to “Israel”. There can be no excuses. We have our orders.

The anti-imperialist/communist organisations and parties must continue their work unflinchingly. Imperialism is the primary contradiction in the world today, with America being the dominant imperialist power. The zionist entity is the frontline of American imperialism. They must fall. We have our orders.

The trade unions throughout the world, particularly in the nations that constitute the allies of “Israel”, must not load or unload any weapons shipments to the zionist entity. Trade unions in Belgium are already doing their part, we must do ours. In 2021, Italian port workers also refused to load weapons destined for “Israel”. In the past, British trade unions refused to work in factories that were making engine parts for the planes of Pinochet’s fascist government in Chile. We must repeat this. It is a proud moment in British trade union history, and ours will be a badge of dignity as well. We have our orders.

We must persevere. Our job is easy; the Palestinians have it harder, but they have not given up for over 70 years. We should aspire to be half as brave as they are. We must not be stagnated by despair, indecision, or fear. We have our orders.

We will not do nothing. We will not accept half-measures.

We have our orders, friends. Let’s carry them out. 

During World War I, Vladimir Lenin dedicated pages to exposing the mechanisms of opportunism. He showed methodically how opportunism reflects a position of class collaboration, taking, often surreptitiously, the side of the oppressor over the side of the oppressed. In doing so, opportunism sows confusion among the working class. It limits the development of coherent political positions, and ultimately resolves in actions that betray the working people in their moment of need. 

Opportunism, Lenin showed, often comes wrapped in the language of class struggle. It promises to secure short-term gains for workers — higher wages, lower working hours, or better working conditions. But its class essence is bourgeois. In other words, it does not seek to challenge the ruling class, because it sustains a confidence in the ruling class that it does not extend to working people. And so it seeks not to liberate workers, but to redirect crumbs from the tremendous profits of the bourgeoisie towards them — a temporary and ultimately fruitless strategy of lowering the temperature of class struggle to preserve the ruling order. 

That ruling order is imperialist. According to research carried out by Dr. Jason Hickel

and others, the old colonial powers of the Global North have drained $152 trillion from the Global South since 1960. These super-profits, fueled by the systematic looting of former colonies, also sustain the exploitation of the workers in the imperialist heartlands. Sometimes, the workers are bought out with the kinds of reforms Sanders supports; or, their leadership is bought out, creating a “labor aristocracy” that acts as a brake on revolutionary consciousness within the labor movement. Other times, workers are repressed as the technologies of violence honed in the colonies come back home. 

As an imperial outpost, the Zionist state is a central piece of the puzzle. Its existence prevents regional integration and suppresses the self-determination of its neighbors — sustaining a zone of imperial extraction where states lack the power or unity to build an alternative, sovereign political project. The weapons routinely tested on a caged Palestinian population then make their way back to the U.S., where they become the instruments that disperse protestors or police borders. This is what Aimé Césaire meant when he said that fascism is colonialism turned inwards. 

“Opportunism does not extend recognition of the class struggle to the cardinal point, to the period of transition from capitalism to communism,” Lenin wrote in The State and Revolution in 1917. In other words, opportunism is the repudiation of the very possibility of victory. So, when Sanders voices his support for the Israeli regime, he not only stands against the liberation of Palestine, but also against the very possibility of liberation anywhere. It is precisely because of this that Lenin described opportunists as the “principal enemy” of the proletarian movement — of the movement towards liberation. 

History, of course, vindicated Lenin’s position. The same war-hungry Petrograd crowds that would have lynched him for his anti-war positions in 1914 welcomed him back as a hero in 1917, when the imperative of peace and liberation became blindingly clear to Russia’s working people. The work of exposition and organization had been done — by the Bolsheviks, and by the Bolsheviks alone. 

It is essential that we are able to identify opportunism, analyze it, and oppose it because the liberation of all workers and oppressed peoples depends on us not being lured into its soothing trap. This is the trap that whispers of the “lesser evil”, pinning competing forces within the ruling class against each other to obscure their antagonism to the working people. Again and again, it whispers, “both sides”, seeking to erase or obscure the dialectical opposition between oppressor and oppressed. This is true whether it applies to the Palestinians and the Zionists or the Soviets and the Nazis. 

Empire is undergoing a profound crisis — a crisis of military overextension, economic overproduction, and ideological delegitimization. If we are to take advantage of this moment to beat down the ruling classes in their moment of weakness, we need to resist not only the siren song of the fascists. We need to resist the gentler whispers of the social democrats, who seek to pull us back to a status quo that has proven, time and again, incapable of resolving the dilemmas of humanity. 

As the Bolshevik Karol Radek implored the workers of Europe in 1922: “You proletarians of the capitalist countries, you have no fatherland to defend; you must first conquer the land of your fathers.”

The Israeli government and Israeli settlers have been violently oppressing Palestinians and literally stealing their homes for decades. Palestine has been under a blockade for 16 years, and the people there struggle to obtain food and medicine. Their water supply and electricity are controlled by the Israeli government. Palestinian mosques are often ambushed by soldiers, hospitals and apartments are targeted, and schoolchildren are shot. An average of one Palestinian child is killed every three days. Palestinian journalists have been murdered by the IDF for covering these atrocities. The median age in Palestine is nineteen, with 40% of their population under fifteen, and only 3% over the age of sixty-five. 

We, from the comfort of our American homes, have no right to tell oppressed people how to fight back. We cannot pass judgment on the path they choose towards liberation. Peaceful tactics have been tried — be they protests such as The Great March of Return or political activism such as Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) — and those measures have failed. Even peaceful protest by Palestinians is confronted by Israeli violence. All successful revolutions have been bloody, from the American revolution in 1776 to the Russian revolution in 1917 to the Cuban revolution in 1959. Even revolutions or movements that are considered “peaceful,” such as India and Pakistan’s independence from Great Britain and the American Civil Rights Movement, would not have succeeded without violence. When we look back on those fights for liberation, we now know that the people did the right thing fighting back. In the future we will say the same about Palestine.

We must demand that the USA stop funding the genocide of the Palestinian people. We must demand that our government stop supplying weapons to commit war crimes on the people of Gaza and the West Bank. We must stand with oppressed and colonized people across the world. This is hard for Americans, as we must look in the mirror and cope with what we have done to the natives of this land as well. Only then can we be on the right side of history. 

From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free! 

School is the singular place in American society where all manner of social reproduction is expected and taken for granted. Schools shelter, feed, and sometimes clothe their students. Educators are expected to assume the roles of teacher, mentor, counselor, and even friend and parent. Professionally, there are too many hats for one person to wear, boundaries that are pushed, and generally too many responsibilities for one person to bear. Tragically, it’s at the discretion of each individual educator as to how much they will give of themselves to their job.

Such is the case for nearly all aspects of education. How many school events will you volunteer your already scarce time and energy at? How will you configure your classroom furniture to be open and inviting to all students? How will you implement accommodations to keep vulnerable kids from falling through the cracks? How frequently are you contacting home? How often are you meeting one-on-one with your students? Are you advising a club? How are you conveying to your students that you are a safe person while not alerting the reactionary students and parents? Are you interrupting bigotry and implementing restorative practices?

The list of questions is endless, and all answers are ultimately for each individual teacher to decide. 

As more and more aspects of social life are privatized and made inaccessible to the poor, public schools have become a final bastion of public life that can help many families meet some of their most basic needs. But, of course, public schools are themselves under threat from privatization, with charter schools and traditional private schools in addition to a steady increase in homeschooling — all of which ultimately steal funds away from public schools. We are called to do more with less, and the demands and scarcity of resources are increasing daily.

This is not to mention the societal threats that plague our schools. American fascism in crisis has resulted in the constant barrage of attacks from the far-right against educators, championing a delusional conspiracy theory that educators are “grooming” their children and making them gay or “woke” (anti-racist) — or worse yet, both! These attacks are not only launched online; the threat of violence is all too real: angry mobs instigating fights, such as the incident in Glendale, California, where a teacher was put on leave for speaking out against transphobia at a School Board meeting; or school shooters whose manifestos clearly lay out their bigotry, such as the May 2, 2022 shooting at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. Educators have lost their jobs, have been severely injured, or even been killed for their conviction to create a more just and equitable world.

Educators are exhausted. For our sacrifice to public service, we are called upon to give even more while the mass media demonizes us and our profession. The problem isn’t that educators care too much or that educators don’t actually believe in the social justice we try to implement in our classrooms — to the contrary! It is precisely because of our dedication to service, social justice, and the youth that so many of us chose this profession in the first place! But, it’s also the reason our deteriorating society can exploit us so. 

This is not to say we should abandon our shared beliefs and morals or our students’ and families’ needs. We would never abandon them. Educators deeply understand the enormous magnitude of the task that stands before us, and we know the necessity of taking on that challenge. So many of our students face struggles that could be easily solved with proper funding, and so, the “solutions” often presented are unsustainable and, regrettably, sometimes the only option available. At our lowest points, when we are overwhelmed by a system designed to work against us, this necessary task seems insurmountable. 

But we will not give in; we will not falter; and we will not cave to fascist reaction. We will win! The future we desire is within our grasp — we need only reach out and seize it. How will we achieve this victory? Only through a stalwart and unified labor movement — through our unions. The cure to the plague of fascist reaction is solidarity. We must unite and work together to achieve our goals!

Traditionally, most will think of the union simply as a negotiating body to get a better contract — an increase in pay. This is true, but a union can also accomplish so much more. We understand just how much work needs to be done inside our schools, but in order to begin that work in earnest, we need to relieve some of the pressure and return most of the social services our schools provide to the broader public sphere. Educators must fight for more than just a better contract for ourselves — solidarity is the key! 

We are not alone in this struggle. In the fight for educator needs and the welfare of the families we serve, we are also fighting for worker rights more broadly, as well as the rights of children. In linking our struggle with our fellow workers, we can win and create a more sustainable and democratic society in the process. For this, we can look at the history of the Chicago Teachers Union. Since the 19th century, educators in Chicago have organized and fought for the needs of the people. In his article, “A People’s History of the Chicago Teachers Union,” Rethinking Schools editor, Jesse Hagopian, illustrates the necessity of courageous and unswerving union organization. It is in this history of those who came before us, and those who carry on their legacy today, we can find not only the lessons of how to tackle the tasks at hand, but the strength to continue the struggle.

Learning from these examples, our immediate goals become more evident. Who stands with us? And who of those that are in opposition could become an ally? What can we do to support our community? To this question, there are infinite answers, but some examples: rallying against an anti-work bill, raising funds for an organization that helps the unhoused, collecting and distributing meals to families during the summer, rallying to support our worker-siblings who are on strike, etc. Our unions must unite the workers it represents and the families and communities we serve. 

Our struggles are all so deeply intertwined, and it is the process of atomization and alienation that created these horrible conditions we yearn to rid ourselves of. Only through solidarity and unity of action can we successfully fight back and win!