redFlags

Nine Letters to Our Comrades: Getting Beyond Avakian's New Synthesis

Mike Ely, a life-long communist and former editor of the RCP's press, has released a major polemic on Avakian's supposed "New Synthesis" and the failures of the RCP to become a leading party of revolution in the USA. I'll hold off on my own commentary by way of introduction... but discussion has already taken off on Ely's new Kasama website. For anyone working to build a revolutionary movement in the United States, this is among the most thoughtful, engaged analyses you will find on such efforts over the last few decades. It is no "so long to all that" – rather, it is a call to begin the "audacious task". 

Download – Nine Letters to Our Comrades: Getting Beyond Avakian's New Synthesis (PDF)

Finkelstein case: Urgent need to right wrongs at DePaul University

The following is an open letter from Prof. Bill Martin, a tenured professor of philosophy at DePaul University, site of the recent fight over Norman Finkelstein's tenure  and the very ability of intellectuals to engage in work that runs counter to the dominant politic.

"Two things that are very simple to understand need to be said up front. First, you cannot deny tenure to a professor because she or he takes a political stand that you do not like, agree with, or that is going to incur the disapprobation and wrath of some group. Yes, frankly, I think a professor who is an outright racist or misogynist or anti-gay bigot ought to be removed from the university (though even here there have to be procedures, and judgments cannot be based on whims, innuendo, or the self-promoting agendas of powerful persons or groups), but that is not what is going on here. Second, you cannot deny tenure to a professor simply for a rhetorical style that you do not like. A person cannot be denied tenure simply because you find his or her rhetoric 'inflammatory.'”

Akil Bomani's Authoring a Culture

Okay, so I confess that as a New Yorker, the fact that "Burningman" was an over-priced participatory arts orgy in the Nevada desert didn't quite register with my hard head. Every year, around this time, I get a surge of traffic from folks looking for information or reports on the Burningman festival. Haha! Bet you didn't see this one coming! I was just a man on fire... Adopting the Burningman pen name was only a play on the translation of my family name. In any case, I thought I'd post a link for ya'll burners to a scientific essay about the art of revolution. What does that mean?

Read it!

Up on the Mountain, Down on the Ground

By R. John
special to redFlags

Here's what I want to understand more deeply: this question of the "everyday" – the place, importance, meaning and political relevance of that “everyday” locus of human existence. What emerges from that vantage point for viewing and evaluating human existence? How important is specificity and how do we know that importance?

I remember during the civil rights struggle when white racists insisted that “outsiders” didn’t “understand” Mississippi, and had no right to denounce its long evolved local “ways.” Their slogan was seen on handcrafted signs as marchers came. “We live here, you suck,” one read. “States rights” after all defended jim crow (and before it slavery) under the banner of local rights (and even “self-determination”!)

 

I think it is the larger material coherence of society, that makes politics possible. You don’t have to know all the many particularities of each county or township, or else a Red Army couldn’t march through on a Long March liberating people, or enter Tibet with profound insights into the transformations needed there.

   

I start here: Some things can only be known well by direct experience. All knowledge has its roots in experience (however removed the specific practice and practitioners may be from those synthesizing that knowledge). But intimate contact with everyday life (and especially a close personal focus on the everyday in life) does not at all automatically or directly breed insight to the problems and solutions of that life.

"I do not recognize myself anymore"

Found poem.

"Actually, everything is quite clear if one thinks it over and reaches the conclusion that indirect democracy is a hoax.  Ostensibly, the elected Assembly is the one which reflects public opinion most faithfully.  But there is only one sort of public opinion, and it is serial. 

"The imbecility of the mass media, the government pronouncements, the biased or incomplete reporting in the newspapers -- all this comes to seek us out in our serial solitude and load us down with wooden ideas, formed out of what we think others will think.  Deep within us there are undoubtedly demands and protests, but because they are not echoed by others, they wither away and leave us with a 'bruised spirit' and a feeling of frustration.  So when we are called to vote, I, the Other, have my head stuffed with petrified ideas which the press or television has piled up there.  They are serial ideas which are expressed through my vote, but they are not my ideas. 

"The institutions of bourgeois democracy have split me apart:  there is me and there are all the Others they tell me I am (a Frenchman, a soldier, a worker, a taxpayer, a citizen, and so on).  This splitting-up forces us to live with what psychiatrists call a perpetual identity crisis.  Who am I, in the end?  An Other identical with all the others, inhabited by these impotent thoughts which come into being everywhere and are not actually thought anywhere?  Or am I myself?  And who is voting?  I do not recognize myself any more."

• —Jean-Paul Sartre's Elections, A Trap for Fools

Nazim Hikmet: On Living

Living is no laughing matter :
you must live with great seriousness
                           like a squirrel, for example -
I mean without looking for something beyond and above living,
                           I mean living must be your whole occupation.

Living is no laughing matter :
you must take it seriously,
so much so and to such a degree
that, for example, your hands tied behind your back,
                     your back to the wall,
or else in a laboratory,
    in your white coat and safety glasses,
    you can die for people -
     even for people whose faces you have never seen,
     even though you know living
     is the most real, the most beautiful thing.

I mean, you must take living so seriously
that even at seventy, for example, you'll plant olive trees -
and not for your children, either
but because although you fear death you don't believe it,
                     because living, I mean, weighs heavier.

More poetry from Nazim Hikmet

U.S. Imperialism, Islamic Fundamentalism… and the Need for Another Way

by Sunsara Taylor, Revolution

As the U.S.'s crimes against humanity in the Middle East mount, it is of tremendous importance for people in the U.S. to honestly confront and rise to the profound challenges and responsibilities before us in bringing this to a halt. In this spirit, I welcomed the argument made by Hadas Thier and Aaron Hess in the Socialist Worker on April 20, 2007 entitled Standing up to Islamophobia, even while I find their central arguments to not only be wrong, but harmful.

I do not doubt that Thier and Hess want to oppose U.S. wars of aggression and their accompanying assault on Muslims, Arabs and South Asians living in the U. S. But they end up arguing for an approach that will neither meet the actual challenges of opposing the U.S. “crusade,” nor bring forward new, truly liberating possibilities here and around the world. They end up in this unfortunate place through the use of bad logic, flawed methodology, and a duck-from-unpleasant-realities epistemology (method for arriving at what is true).

Class Instinct?

In a comment on Avakian's Three Alternative Worlds, which was the most widely distributed radical essay at the recent antiwar march in Washington, Zamora posed a question that opens a few lines of discussion on what she calls "class instinct". Maybe I'm old fashioned for thinking in terms of "class consciousness", but the underlying questions of what materialism is, the nature of leadership, the role of passion, and the relationship between identity and solidarity are a lot to unpack. Zamora writes:

In my own communist training, and in conversations with fellow communists, I have always understood ‘class instinct’ or ‘class feelings’ to play some sort of indeterminate role in the formation of a class stand that allows us to apply our scientific method in the interests of the proletariat and not, as many have done, in the service of just understanding the world better and perhaps furthering their own personal interests in the process.

Class feelings has never been understood, in the context I have encountered it as a revolutionary communist, as a ‘Jimmy Higgins’ type attitude. Rather, I have understood it as the sort of feelings and emotions that lead us, even in many cases before gaining our broader understanding of MLM and world history, and then deepened on the basis of that understanding, to oppose the police and to oppose the various crimes and wars of imperialism. That somehow, there is this visceral, emotional component to our understanding that allows us to make sacrifices and to wield the classless knowledge (i.e., truth that, as truth, has no class character per se) for a partisan class cause.

And yet, I can’t but feel a little uncomfortable with that.

Capitalism, Revisionism & Revolution: Avakian's "Three Alternative Worlds"

The Bob Avakian Show continues full steam. In the latest edition of Revolution, the publication of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, they've printed a transcript of a talk that opens up the question of agency and socialism. What is, after all the difference between a social-welfare state and socialism as the dictatorship of the proletariat?

For the generations coming up with no living memory of 20th Century socialism and reared on the (neo-Conservative) end of history narrative, it's worth digging into how revolutionary communism developed in opposition to the welfare/police state model of "socialism" that was unfortunately not just a cariacture.

It's not just the ruling class and its courtiers that want to equate revisionism and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, it's also every shade of opportunist you can imagine. Anything that turns the specter of the future into the ghost of the past...

"...the rights of the people cannot be reduced to the right to have a job and earn an income, as basic as that is. There is the question of are we really going to transform society so that in every respect, not only economically but socially, politically, ideologically, and culturally, it really is superior to capitalist society. A society that not only meets the needs of the masses of people, but really is characterized increasingly by the conscious expression and initiative of the masses of people."

Anyone with links to other leaders discussing this kind of vision, I'm all ears.

Workers Party of Belgium: Pageantry, Parliaments & Uncle Joe

By way of Jimmy Higgins from Fire on the Mountain, this report about the recent growth of the Workers Party of Belgium (PTB) is interesting on a few counts. The PTB has been the center of international gatherings to re-form the international communist movement on the conflation of revisionism and Marxism-Leninism, promoting left Stalinism against MLM. At the same time, they have grown from the "biggest of the small parties" to the "smallest of the big" in the Belgian parliament and local electoral lists. Running a high-profile campaign in her district and of mixed immigrant/European family, Miss Brussels Halima Chehaima came in second promoting the PTB platform. Cuts a better profile than Uncle Joe, but what of this program they run, what of their international profile, of shop stewards vs. tribunes of the people? What of syncretism vs. synthesis?

Maybe this is a good time to have a discussion about the Old Synthesis.

The full report is here on the link.

Lenin: On Confounding Politics for Pedagogics

In a discussion on Bob Avakian, and conceptions of communist leadership, one comment recommended this piece by Lenin. "Worth a read, stressing the importance of doing communist work and not letting a slogan of "to the masses" mean a denigration of doing precisely communist work among those masses."

Lenin: On Confounding Politics with Pedagogics

[NOTE: in lenin's time, before the Russian revolution, communists were known as "social democrats." Paragraphing of excerpts is added for emphasis.]

"It is our duty always to intensify and broaden our work and influence among the masses. A Social-Democrat who does not do this is no Social-Democrat. No branch, group, or circle can be considered a Social-Democratic organisation if it does not work to this end steadily and regularly.

"To a great extent, the purpose of our strict separation as a distinct and independent party of the proletariat consists in the fact that we always and undeviatingly conduct this Marxist work of raising the whole working class, as far as possible, to the level of Social-Democratic consciousness, allowing no political gales, still less political changes of scenery, to turn us away from this urgent task.

"Without this work, political activity would inevitably degenerate into a game, because this activity acquires real importance for the proletariat only when and insofar as it arouses the mass of a definite class, wins its interest, and mobilises it to take an active, foremost part in events."

Stan Goff Follows the Logic of the "Refoundation" Logic

What is a website like this to do? For regular readers that's obviously been an issue for me. My hope has been to create a discussion board for the broader communist trend in a time of tremendous political crisis. I don't think that "crisis" is mainly in socialism: but in the whole creaking, bloody edifice of capitalism itself, a crisis that has most certainly extended to those sections of the socialist movement that do not accept, or cannot honestly conceive, of a revolutionary break with the existing social relations.

Organized, self-described communist forces have tended to do one of two things. Either they pragmatically tailor their politics to what they take as their immediate needs, or they play the lonely beacon — shining the light into the conceptual darkness of the "masses." The pragmatists lose the forest for the trees, and more often than not themselves along the way. The vanguardists confuse the Forest for its dialectical ecology. And the system has stood through this, if not impervious to resistance – still standing, still dangerous, still wasting lives by the millions.

I've never believed that the conscious, active, vanguard element is fundamentally separate from the "masses." (Self-)Consciousness itself is not an alienation. I have to work. I've been a waiter and a glorified typesetter. Sometimes I've also led and participated in social movements; felt a glow from the people in struggle, like Etienne, the hero of Emile Zola's classic novel Germinal. My old friend Nilda, who introduced me to Wu Tang, also taught me a simple, important lesson: "you're in the mix, kid."

We are in the mix.

Why say all this? ...By way of introduction to Stan Goff's renunciation of Leninism as "doctrine." Goff has been one of the more interesting Marxist-identified writers in the US for a minute. A former Special Forces soldier, he served in Haiti, Somolia and Colombia, writing a chilling memoir of the former. Like a modern Smedley Butler, he went from being a "racketeer of capitalism" to a dedicated opponent not just "imperialism," but each of the systems of oppression that feed each other. In particular, he has dedicated substantial attention to questions of patriarchy. In one line he summed up the link between militarism and the domination of women in a way that helped me understand a lot: "Perfect masculinity is sociopathic." Indeed.

Renunciations are important — even when I disagree, strongly. It's necessary to reject "doctrine" if you want to think, let alone accomplish something. For those who view Marxism as a monolith, or conflate a scientific method with a search for purity, it is this same rejection of orthodoxy and dogmatism that has led me not to reject Marxism for the "sins of revisionism," as Lenin put it, but to engage what Avakian calls an "epistemological break."

There is no doubt the Soviet Union created a "doctrine" of Marxism-Leninism. They gave PhDs in it for crissakes. Sects have come and gone, it's true,  be they Trots or Mao-Maos (or Hoxjaites or New Americans or anti-authoritarians). There is also no doubt that the Marxist-Leninist party is the single most important "movement technology" to ever be developed. Where there are revolutions, that seek socialism and not just a re-shuffling of the same deck, these are the organizations that do it.

The reason for this isn't magical, or related to any orthodoxy or doctrine. In this, Goff always failed to understand what Marxism is. [Hint: It's not a normative vocabulary binding disparate reform struggles.]

I've posted Goff's piece in full on the continuation of this post to see what other folks think about it, and to comment myself when I've thought on it a bit. I hope those who respond do so having read what he's written. 

Blinded by the white

Graphic depiction of how whiteness blinds the mind.

The Revolution is here in Nepal

I'm currently working on a short article about the rapid developments in Nepal. It will be up soon in place of this. For now, I've posted an open thread where any reporting/comments on the unfolding revolution can be posted.

The Royal army has encircled the king's palace with barbed wire. Democratic protests in the cities defy shoot-on-sight curfews. The People's War proceeds virtually unchallenged in the countryside. Prachanda warned on the eve of these protests that King Gyanendra faces "exile or death" for his crimes.

The Communist Party of Nepal has risen above Stalinophilic nostalgia and seeks a 21st Century communism, and sees the liberation of Nepal in both a regional and global context of revolution.

Will red flags fly from Katmandu? Have we finally kicked the end-of-history shroud? Is a secular, popular and revolutionary communist force pointed a way beyond the "clash of barbarisms?"

News & Views on Unfolding Revolution in Nepal
On the Scene in Katmandu: Revolution interviews Nepal expert and anthropologist Stephen Mikesell | Li Onesto's digest of breaking events: Mass Upsurge Against the King | Sudhanva  Deshpande: Nepal on the Verge of Bastille | International Nepal Solidarity Network -- tons of articles | Maoist Information Bulletin from the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) | The Royal Regression and the Question of a Democratic Republic by Baburam Bhattarai

UK Guardian: Protesters Plan Final Heave to Rid Nepal of Monarchy

And, like anyone asked, according to (boo, hiss) Bloomberg: US Demands Nepal's King Relinquish Power

And... word from the fierce one...
CPN(M) Chairman Prachanda:
Constituent Assembly Now!
Prachanda, the political and military leader of the revolutionary forces demands an "unconditional constituent assembly."

The tried ceasefires, they tried to negotiate -- but the people are done with all of it and will not wait for permission to proceed. The King's statues are being torn down and the monarchy is in fact over on the ground. The King is now the mayor of his own palace, hiding behind barbed wire and (if he's smart) checking if JetBlue has any specials to Dehli.

Raymond Lotta "Sets the Record Straight" on the history of 20th Century socialism

Next stop for Raymond Lotta's Setting the Record Straight campus speaking tour is Columbia University... into the belly of the intellectual beast. Challenging the barrage of reactionary garbage thrown over the history of revolutionary socialism with a powerful grasp of history, Lotta is more than up to the task.

For anyone concerned with changing the world, who wants a deeper history of the triumphs and failures of 20th Century socialism – break plans and make plans to hear Raymond Lotta. Ask your real questions, treat socialism and communism with an open mind -- even if that's already where you're trying to get.

I heard that after an hour-long presentation, Ray Lotta will open the room up for questions and answers. He knows the history as more than just a "narrative." He is a materialist who understands the force of ideas.

I'll be there, with my toughest questions.

Columbia University
Thursday, April 20, 6:00 pm
Faculty House, Harison Rm, 2nd Floor
400 West 117th St. (between Amsterdam & Morningside)

Download the leaflet and postcard for the NYC program.

Full event description follows

Campaign proposal to "Celebrate Historic Milestones in the Struggle Against Modern Revisionsim Since 1956"

That's quite a mouthful, but until we start chewing it we can be sure of nothing but indigestion. The most significant Maoist parties in the world that are not participants in the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement have issued an international call to engage the history of struggle against modern revisionism. The initial signatories include: Communist Party of the Philippines, Communist Party of India (Maoist), Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist, and the first mention I've heard of the Communist League of Indonesia.

What is "modern revisionism?" Well, the 1956 date is a clue to their meaning. It's when significant sections of the "communist" movement fundamentally abdicated their revolutionary, internationalist and communist responsibilities under the leadership of Kruschev. It was when the Soviet Union became irredeemable, and state capitalism (social-imperialism) stood in place of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Again, a mouthful. But more than a few nutrients when we unpack all that's there. The statement reads:

We, the undersigned, hereby propose to all Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties and organizations to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the struggle against modern revisionism and to undertake activities for the purpose of renewing our commitment to pursue this struggle, which started in 1956 in opposition to the revisionist content of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in February 1956.

The struggle against modern revisionism reached a new and higher level when the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution began in May 1966. But alas, since the death of Comrade Mao in September 1976, we have been confronted with the betrayal of socialism and the restoration of capitalism in China. We are challenged to uphold Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, combat modern revisionism and its evil consequences and achieve greater victories in fulfilling the historic mission of proletariat to achieve socialism.

In the 20th Congress of the CPSU, the Soviet revisionist clique headed by Khrushchov repudiated the fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism and the revolutionary achievements of Comrade Stalin under the pretext of opposing "personality cult". It unveiled the phenomenon of modern revisionism in opposition to pro-letarian dictatorship and put the Soviet Union on the road of capitalist restoration.

The full text follows.

Why Dialectics? Why Now?

Bertell Ollman is one of my favorite Marxist writers, and not just because he introduced me to the wonderful world of pugs, Ruby Fu!). Perhaps best known for his popularizations of the renegade Marxo-psychologist Wilhelm Reich, Ollman also wrote the classic study of Marx's concept of Alienation. And, of course, he's the mastermind behind the cult classic boardgame Class Struggle, a play on Monopoly where every player picks a social class... and it's on! No, for real real!

As a prof, Bert's a student favorite at New York University (boo, hiss) for his lively classes and interest in learning. So, I was tickled to find a recent essay of his on dialectics at the Canadian Autonomy and Solidarity website in the midst of all the discussions breaking out on Red Flags. (Regular readers may have noticed that I'm adding feeds to the site. A&S was among the first.

So, the dialectics thing. Some claim it doesn't "exist," other use the term to justify any far-fetched claim... "hey, I know it sounds like gibberish... that's dialectics, baby!"

Not quite. Ollman wrote a great general introduction to this widely misuderstood method, and here shares a quick piece that's germaine to recent discussions about philosophy and the scientific claims of Marxism. The full text follows.

Gramsci Matters

Apparently the only way to get debate going on this site is to say the "A" word. Ahem. But in the mega-thread on the importance and problems of "Bob Avakian" as man and signifier, Red Flags regular Christopher Day took up the tangent of explaining why Antonio Gramsci (and by implication a whole host of other thinkers beyond the "five heads") is necessary for those concerned with revolutionary transformation.

Christopher Day writes:

Gramsci is concerned with developing a revoluitionary strategy appropriate to the conditions of more advanced capitalist countries.

The Russian Revolution revealed the importance of a disciplined revolutionary party oriented towards the seizure of state power. Some aspects of what occurred in Russia were generalizable to more advanced industrialized countries, others less so.

In Russia, Lenin's simple characterization of the state as bodies of armed men, was largely adequate to the political situation. Russian absolutism had greatly restricted the development of civil society making it possible for a comparatively small party like the Bolsheviks to really seize power and begin the reorganization of society in a manner that would be much more difficult in capitalist core countries. (continued)

Kim Jong: License to ill?

It was a few years back and have was having a chill Sunday brunch with a couple of friends in Clinton Hill, Brooklyn when we found a full-page ad in the New York Times proclaiming "Kim Jong Il: Lodestar for the 21st Century." 

And I thought, what the hell is a lodestar? (Shoutout: Left Spot and my fav babe from Babeland)

Now, I like Jong Il's eyewear as much as the next guy, and he's in close competition with Kadafi for most entertaining head of state. (Kadafi wins for the all-female ninja bodyguard bridgade, hands down.)

What the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has to do with socialism is beyond me. That's why I was surprised to see the central committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines send birthday greetings to the hereditary monarch of the DPRK, Kim Jong Il. Not quite as happy-happy as the Korean celebrations... (continued)

Octavia Butler: A Freedom Dreamer

Octavia Butler was one of the only writers I feel spoke for my culture. Born in 1947, She died yesterday after a fall outside her home in Washington. What can you say about a boundary-buster who's very last novel was titled Fledgling? Diagnosed with dyslexia as a child, she went on to win the prestigious Hugo and Nebula awards for science fiction writing. She was also a MacArthur "genius" fellow and deeply loved daydreamer who left us at the height of her powers.

She told stories from the people, with a distinctly African-American sensibility. Butler got weird, such as the insane ethical quandaries of Kindred, the story of a black woman sucked through some portal back into slavery days (along with her white husband!). But isn't that just like life? Problems you couldn't dream up... and that nobody every wants to talk about.

In my two favorite books by her, The Parable of the Sower and The Parable of the Talents, she explored the seeds of what is coming to be in the collapse of the American dream through the journey of a young, black woman named Lauren Olamina. She suffers from a condition called "hyper-empathy"  in a dystopic near-future California that's an archipelago of walled communities surrounded by social and ecological disintegration.

In the failure of her father's religion, Lauren becomes the prophet of a new philosophy called "Earthseed," which to my simple eye is good, ol' fashioned dialectical materialism... with a penchant for space travel. Her collected writing are a high expression of what Robin Kelly called the Freedom Dream.

Let the opening words of the Parable of the Sower speak now for Octavia Butler's well-lived life:

All that you touch
You Change.

All that you Change
Changes you.

The only lasting truth
Is Change.

God
Is Change.

Kazembe Balagun, a leading voice of New York's lumpen intelligentsia, recently interviewed Octavia Butler for the Indypendent. The full text follows along with some defining titles from the genre of speculative fiction she came to personify.

The Party Line: Bob Avakian's "The New Situation and the Great Challenges"

I am a defender of Bob Avakian and the following piece he wrote is exactly why. Amid the moaning about the "lack of backbone" among Democrats and all the diffuse inertias of "the left," Avakian has his finger on the pulse of this moment -- recognizing both the profound peril, and connected opportunities that cry out for action. He is not another analyst, not a manager. He is a leader.

Currently re-printed in Revolution, the national, bi-lingual newspaper of the Revolutionary Communist Party, The New Situation and the Great Challenges is effectively the RCP's line on What Is To Be Done. That's an expression that starts as a question, our duty is always to answer it in fact.

For those who can't see how to fight for what they most want, it is a challenge to put some dignity in the struggle... and some struggle in your dignity. Before the next dismissal of Avakian crosses your lips, read this and see what this man is giving his life for -- and what he offers to a world choking on its own impossibilities.

Anti-Islamic cartoons: Communists speak out

Time to stop choosing sides set by our enemies. The imperialists in Europe and the USA hide behind the mantle of liberal psuedo-tolerance while Arab reactionaries and autocrats claim the name of Allah. A World To Win News Service distributed an editorial at the beginning of the anti-Islamic cartoon controversy that stripped away the bullshit on all sides. Send this to everyone you know, especially to countries where communist writing is banned. When versions of the AWTW commentaries are available in Farsi, Arabic and Urdu, I will post them here.

---------------
From A World to Win News Service:
The anti-Islam cartoons and the imperialist powers’ strategic considerations

The worldwide upsurge of anger sparked by the anti-Islamic cartoons was the main item on the agenda for the meeting of Nato defence ministers at the weekend. This reveals how much all the imperialist powers feel that their strategic interests are at stake. It is impossible to understand the fury surrounding these caricatures first published in Denmark without looking at the material interests and political and economic factors involved. It is also important to examine the relationship between those interests and the propagation of certain ideas, and the complex interaction between those two spheres.

Setting the Record Straight: The Legacies of 20th Century Socialism

Set the Record Straight is challenging the anti-communist hegemony that has passed for conventional wisdom for the last couple of decades, particularly on college campuses. For anyone who has never heard the revolutionary communist read on their own history, it beats the hell out of trying to disentangle the lies promoted by the "end of history" crowd.

Starting with a speech by the Maoist political economist Raymond Lotta: Socialism Is Much Better Than Capitalism and Communism Will Be a Far Better World, their website ThisIsCommunism.org features a growing list of articles on the epochal changes that socialism brought to the world in the 20th Century: Socialist Experience. All of the articles are written from the perspective pioneered by Revolutionary Communist Party chairman Bob Avakian.

Raymond Lotta will be speaking on Thursday, February 23, 6:00 pm, in Harvard Yard, at Emerson Hall, Rm 105.

The Tyranny of Structurelessness

Sticking my finger to the wind, the wave of anti-authoritarian social movements that picked up steam from the late-90s through the September 11 attacks is exhausted. A fascination with meeting norms, immediatism, "affinity" based tactical organizations as the limit of what can be organized, and a party-line anti-communism have not born the promised fruit. Anti-vanguardism has fostered a subcultural milieu far weaker than the sum of its parts, which boasts strengths it doesn't possess by ideologically claiming cooperation, resistance and solidarity as "everyday" examples of their "all the good things, none of the bad shit" philosophy. Aesthetics and ethics, no time for politics... too cool for school.

Thousands of activists are still limited by self-imposed methodological constraints. None of these is more pernicious than the substitution of "space" for "movement." As if we could create private né pirate utopias in the midst of raging war and the darkening shadow of domestic fascism. Many of the best activists -- and those most enamored of "the new New NEW" return to 19th century anarchish sophistry -- are more disoriented and demobilized than challenged and learning. Some have even embraced this haplessness as a strategic virtue.

In place of this somatic boosterism, I'd offer that there's nothing wrong with getting disillusioned. Who needs utopia when revolution manifests in hand, when politics isn't a personalized moral commitment -- but is a living force that we can help bring to fruition.

Poltics is back on the agenda for resistance movements. Recent breakthroughs in Latin America, including the Zapatista re-orientation towards the left and Hugo Chavez's proclamation of "21st Century Socialism," and the stunning resurgence of revolutionary communism in Asia are locally accented by the fervent activism of several distinct left parties in the USA. This actual left turn has all combined to give what had become meta-narrative arguments some running legs to race,

How will social movements relate to political revolution in the coming days?

One place to start that discussion is by turning to an older feminist text, and a penetrating look directly at (some of) the everyday processes of New Left activism, The Tyranny of Structurelessness by Jo Freeman. It was mimeographed before it was photocopied. Here it is, again.

Often floated around by exasperated, movement-centered activists seeking to develop politics (and healthy accountability) amid the misconceptions of anti-authoritarianism, Freeman directly challenges the primative egalitarian myths of democratic fetishism as they manifested in the early women's liberation movement -- and in particular the ways that anarchist dogmas (unnamed as such) hobble what they intend to unleash. While Freeman's essay orients towards the horizontal organizing methods as demonstrated by women's consciousness-raising, she can't help but see the foibles in plain sight. The full text follows.

Prachanda's interview with The Hindu, speaks to the current situation in Nepal, and new beginnings

Communist Party of Nepal leaders are speaking directly to the situation in Nepal and South Asia, but also recognizing the mistakes that led to the defeat of 20th Century communism. Issues of power, sovereignty, leadership and the historic import in what looks to be the first successful communist revolt since the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and China.

This series of interviews is earth-shaking. For anyone who thinks all communists want is everybody in khakis... the real deal is going to blow your mind. Anti-communism runs deep inside the bubble of Americanism. It's gone virtually unchallenged without a vital revolutionary communist movement. That's over, and not just in Nepal.

For communists... here's a highlight from the revolution's leader Prachanda with one of India's leading dailies, The Hindu:

Varadarajan: The question was raised of a cult of personality in the party. As you know, any objective evaluation of the experience of the 20th century communist movement has to consider the cult of personality as certainly one of the factors in the reversals.

Prachanda: That is correct. But I want to clarify one thing. Between Dr. Bhattarai and me, there was never any debate on the issue of leadership. He has never challenged my leadership. On the issue of leadership personally, there has never been a difference. There were differences on ideological questions, about what we should do now, and there was a debate. And this debate we solved in the Rolpa plenum in August. We took it to a higher level and our unity has become stronger.

On the issue of leadership I want to say that our party will be the first communist party in the 21st century which has picked up on a clue from the 20th century - where it had got stuck - and we are going to open it. At our plenum, we placed a resolution on the question of political power and leadership. That when we go for state power and are in power, then we will not do what Stalin or Mao did. Lenin did not have time to deal with issues of power. Although Stalin was a revolutionary, his approach, was not as scientific as it should have been, it was a little metaphysical, and then problems came. We also evaluated Mao in the plenum. If you look at his leadership from 1935 to 1976 - from when he was young to when he was old and even speaking was difficult - must he remain Chairman and handle everything? What is this?

So we decided that when we are in power, the whole team of our leadership will not be part of day-to-day power. Not just me but our team. Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, Badal, Mohra, others, we have a leadership team which arose from the midst of the struggle. When we go to Kathmandu, we will not be involved in power struggles or day-to-day power. That will be for the new generation, and we will train that generation. This is a more scientific approach to the question of leadership. If we don't do this, then we will have a situation where as long as Stalin is alive, revolution is alive, as long as Mao is alive, revolution is alive.

This will be a big sacrifice for our leadership. Of course it does not mean we will be inactive or retire from politics. Our leadership team will go into statesmanship. We are hoping that by doing this we will solve a very big ideological problem of the communist movement. This is not only a technical question but a big ideological question. There can be no question of concentrating power in the hands of any individual or group. When we placed this resolution before the plenum, then our entire leadership team gained confidence in themselves, the movement and the line. Our unity has become much stronger. Now we are in an offensive mood.

We feel we have contributed to the ideological development of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Traditionally, in the international communist movement there are two types of revisionism - right revisionism of class collaboration, and the other, dogmato-revisionism, of turning certain ideas into a dogma and getting stuck to them. This is more among the Maoists. Those who call themselves Maoists are more prone to dogmato-revisionism, and we have to fight against this too. [emphasis added — Red Flags]

Okay. I have tried to take this slowly.,,

These ideas will be tested in the days to come, and there are some ambiguities about what is expected from the proposed constituent assembly. But these are living ideas, with respect for the sovereignty of the people and an eye towards exactly how the people can come to rule. This is the essence of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, what Bhattarai called the philosophy of the wretched of the earth.

Follow the jump for the full text of Prachanda's interview in The Hindu.

 

Maoists & Parliamentary Parties Boycott Nepal Vote, Important interveiw with Prachanda & Bhattarai

The king's municipal elections in Nepal have been a fiasco for the autocracy. Massive abstention and Maoist attacks greeted the first polls since Gyanendra assumed absolute power two years ago. According to the Washington Post, half of the candidacies in cities and towns were not filled. On Sunday, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) called for a bandh, or general strike, which brought the country to a standstill while democratic protest continued throughout the country. The king has no legs to stand on.

So what's going to happen? Aside from Katmandu and the district capitols, the Maoists have freedom of motion throughout the country. Katmandu itself is boiling with protests and insurgence widespread. Maoists and the seven parliamentary parties have reached an agreement and the status quo is not going to last.

Into this, the Katmandu Post released a major interview with Prachanda, leader of the CPN(M), with Dr. Baburam Bhattaria, the public face of the Maoist movement. Their lack of orthodoxy is startling. They seem to have a minimum program for a democratic republic, offer to open the people's army up to other political factions and have a keen appreciation for the international balance of forces. It's definitely worth the read.

ANOTHER interview with Prachanda in one of India's leading dailies The Hindu was just brought to my attention. It will also be re-posted here in the coming days. For now, here's the link: Prachanda interviewed in The Hindu  -- The Katmandu Post interview follows after the jump.

The anti-Islam cartoons controversy – Not about “freedom of speech”

Editorial from A World to Win News Service: Last September the editor of a rightwing Danish newspaper, the Jyllands-Posten, commissioned cartoonists to draw pictures of Muhammad, and published a dozen of them. As he has explained in interviews, he deliberately set out to affront observant Muslims, many of whom believe that it is wrong to depict the face of those they consider prophets. But more than that, some of these drawings are very deliberately insulting to Islam as a religion and to those who believe in it, depicting it as the faith of mad bombers and bloodthirsty barbarians. Taken as a whole, they are meant to humiliate and demean a large part of the earth’s population.

Is democracy a principle outside of class rule?

In the United States, elections are still widely viewed as the defining quality of democracy -- no matter how little popular sovereignty is exercised. Within the left, the question of "democratic legitimacy" is still hotly debated, even if the terms are not always clear. Is democracy the rule of "the people?" Or a particular form of class rule?

Going back to the Russian Revolution, the Lenin and the Bolsheviks were mercilessly criticized by Karl Kautsky, then something like the godfather of social-democracy. The lack of bourgeois democratic standards under Soviet socialism was viewed as worse than liberal capitalism. Lenin's reply was so devastating that Kautsky today is almost entirely known as the Renegade. Sharp dispute over the conjoined issues of "democracy" and "imperialism" were the fault line that split first the European socialist movement, and then the world's, between social-democrats and communists.

Today, Europe is largely governed on an openly imperial and capitalist program by the decedents of Kautsky, while the heterodox movement that became known as communism is only now recovering from the body blows of restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union (1956) and China (1976).

This is all prologue... and I'm just thinking out loud.

Today the conjoined issues are with us again. From the European hypocrisy over the chauvinism of  Danish racists to the spectacle of the purple finger in Iraq's occupation elections -- a revolutionary communist analysis of elections, the nature of the state and the role of communists in both countries with liberal democratic norms and those still casting off the legacies of feudalism and despotism.

Some readings: Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez says US will run a proxy candidate in upcoming elections || Nepal vote may only deepen discontent || Mexico's Marco discusses the Other Campaign outside the electoral system || If the people are not in power, there will be no change: a report from the Caracas World Social Forum || AND... In an article I've wrestled with for several years, RCP Chairman Bob Avakian argues with the fetishization of democratic formalism as the determinating factor in how oppressed people exercise political power: Democracy: More than ever we can and must do better than that.

CPN(M): On Imperialism and Proletarian Revolution

Red Flags writes: The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has released their first substantial information bulletin since the end of the ceasefire and the resulting civil-military nation-wide offensive. The following article On Imperialism and Proletarian Revolution is the lead article The entirety of Maoist Information Bulletin No. 11 is available online. The translation is a little choppy in places, but this is the official translation -- so that's what's going up.

[In other news, the photograph below is taken from El Universal, a Venezuelan daily, and their coverage of the World Social Forum currently being held for the Americas in Caracas. According to the original caption, there was a Revolutionary Internationalist Movement presence.]