Article from Joe Sims, the Co-Chair of CPUSA.
I can’t believe this guy is allowed the be in the leadership of a “Communist” party
Oh boy, starts out strong by completely misunderstanding the DotP… in the exact way libertarian-minded western “leftists” do. DotP isn’t a “dictatorship” in the usual sense, it’s the complete and utter ownership of the means of production and of the state itself by the proletarian class. I.E. a true democracy, but in direct terms.
Misunderstanding the 1PS. You can’t expect a Socialist state to remain steadfastly married to the revolution, if you can’t expect the Communist party to remain in total control of Communist projects. Western-style democracies have proven this, in that none of them have long-term projects that one could honestly argue as ‘overtly beneficial to the whole of the nation’. Whereas Marxist-Leninist systems have been able to completely revolutionize and “develop” backwater nations in… less than a generation. India with western-style democracy has only drifted into a far-right leaning government and some of the worst poverty in the world. China, which had similar material conditions (though not identical), industrialized in ~30 years, and is a leading economy today. 1PS has proven itself to be a superior system.
I’m not even going to get into the rest… because no. Just… NO.
This is the kind of thing I’d expect from American Communists, and the exact kind of thing that leans comrades towards saying the CPUSA is still infested with feds.
Joe Sims calling the dictatorship of the proletariat “probably the worst phrase uttered by a political theorist ever” is probably the best example of right-wing opportunism. He does not understand the concept, yet he pretentiously dismisses it to appease to the petty-bourgeois and labor aristocracy ideological tendencies.
If CPUSA wants to survive (or be reborn) as a revolutionary party, they must internally fight against opportunism inside the party. Otherwise, having a contingent of revolutionaries with an opportunistic leadership who turn their militants into docile task-followers is close to useless.
Do note, however, that this article was written 13 years ago. A lot has changed since then, and this may not be representative of CPUSA’s current leadership’s position.
I would add: “Marxist” tend to seek for theorical purity, so they tend to defend themselves by rethoric and to be uncritical of present facts.
