Blog

On 19 September, 1991, a group of hikers in the Otztal Alps, on the Austrian-Italian border, came across a mummified corpse. At first, government officials were puzzled by this corpse, but were then astounded to find that radio carbon dating placed the age of the mummy at 5300 years. This individual, referred to as  Otzi, had been preserved in an ice pocket for a very long time.

Further analysis revealed that he was about forty five years old at the time of his death, a rather elderly man by the standards of the time, when the life expectancy was considerably less that it is today. He was also a rather violent man, as there were several deep cuts on one hand, which were just starting to heal. In addition, there was the blood of one other man on his knife, the blood of two other men on his arrowheads, and the blood of a fourth man on his clothes.

It was not until 2001 that a Cat scan revealed an arrow head lodged in his left shoulder. The shaft of the arrow had been removed, so that the wound was originally overlooked. Officials assumed that they had stumbled upon an ancient murder victim.

To this day, officials are puzzled as to the fact that the killer of Otzi left all his weapons and tools with his body. Among other things, he had a chert bladed knife, an unfinished yew long bow and a quiver of arrows, most of which were also not finished. He also had a rare copper axe, very valuable at that time. Most people cannot imagine the reason the killer would leave behind such a valuable item.

The world was a far different place at that time. Otzi was a member of a tribe and it is safe to assume that there was no law against killing a member of a different tribe, and in fact such killings may have been encouraged. On the other hand, the killing of a member of ones own tribe was a very serious matter. The tribe was divided into clans, or gens, and people were born into the clan of their mother. Each and every member of any clan was brother and sister to each other, and any acts of intimacy between clan members was strictly forbidden, as was any acts of violence.  The social bond was very strong, so that an injury to one clan member required a response from all clan members.

With that in mind, we can put together the clues and piece together a reasonable picture of what probably happened, several thousand years ago. The injuries to his hand show that he was in an altercation several days before his death. They were almost certainly defensive wounds. The blood on his clothes could well have come from a buddy he was assisting. The blood of two men on his arrows very likely came from members of a different tribe, as bows and arrows are generally used at a distance. That was certainly allowed at that time, if not encouraged. But then the blood on his knife likely came from a man of his own tribe, as knife fighting is strictly a close combat matter. That would explain the defensive wounds on his hands. As he survived the knife fight, he very likely killed the man he was fighting, a man of his own tribe. That was strictly forbidden by tribal law.

The man Otzi killed was almost certainly a member of a different clan, and the members of that clan insisted that Otzi be killed. Blood for blood, a life for a life, as per tribal law. Accordingly, the clan sent one of their best hunters to kill Otzi.

Otzi knew that he was being hunted, and decided his best chance was to make a run for the mountains. Above the tree line, he could see anyone approaching him. He did not panic, but left the village in a rush. The fact that his long bow was not finished is proof of that, as is the fact that most of his arrows were not finished. He just did not have time to finish those weapons. He could not bring himself to leave his copper axe behind, as it was so valuable. It became an extra weight, which is the one thing a man on the run does not need.

At first, things went according to plan. Otzi managed to get above the tree line and could see for a considerable distance. Then he relaxed, felling safe at the top of the mountain, and sat down in a hollow to rest and have a snack. This gave the hunter the chance he was seeking.

The hunter the opposing clan sent to kill Otzi knew what he was doing. He was a fine assassin and managed to get close to his quarry, despite the open terrain. He too had a long bow, and his bow worked. He placed the arrow under the left shoulder of Otzi, so that it severed the carotid artery. It was the ideal killing shot. Then with Otzi rolling around on the ground, bleeding to death internally, the killer walked up to him, picked up a rock and hit him over the head, making sure he was dead. He then pulled out the arrow, leaving the arrow head in his victim.

The killing of Otzi was not an act of murder, as the killer was merely performing the task to which he had been assigned. Tribal law dictated that Otzi had to die for the crimes he committed.

That same tribal law also dictated that the few belongings of a dead man belonged to his clan. Those belongings included the weapons of the man, which usually went to the closest male relative, generally the biological brother of the deceased.  The man who killed Otzi was aware of this law and respected that law. He left the weapons of Otzi with the body, because they did not belong to him. He probably felt that if the clan of Otzi wanted those weapons, they could jolly well climb up that mountain and pick them up for themselves. He took from Otzi the one and only thing which was his – the arrow in his back.

I hope this clears up the mystery of the reason the killer of Otzi left behind those valuable weapons.

It was rather encouraging to find a political party in America which advocates the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat, which is the American Party of Labor, the APL.

They make this quite clear in their Program of the American Party of Labor :

”The APL is a Marxist-Leninist Party in the United States of America whose aim, goal and desire is to establish a vanguard party that will build a socialist republic under the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat on the American continent.”

That is precisely what they say in their Program, but then they also have a General Line, a General Strategy and a Platform, each of which say something different.

In their General Line they state: ”The APL comes from and represents the American working class; it has no interests aside from those of the working class and the workers movement as a whole.”

Clearly they expect us to believe that they come from the working class. This is not likely. There is no way members of the working class could come up with something so completely confusing and contradictory. Such a hodge podge of conflicting statements can come only from the minds of frustrated petty bourgeois people, very likely former members of the middle class.

In their Platform alone they put forward no less that 85 demands, some of which are completely ridiculous. It is not clear just whom these demands are being put forward to, unless it is the American government, but then in the preface to their Platform, they state:

”These are our demands at the present time. We understand that to achieve them a socialist revolution must occur. ”

In fact their ”demands” read as a childrens’ wish list at Christmas. After the socialist revolution, there will be no corporations so there will be no need to ”demand an end to corporate welfare and tax breaks”. So why put forward such a demand? The same is true of putting ”all means of production in the hands of working people”. This can happen, and will happen, but only after the successful overthrow of the capitalists, the bourgeoisie, and the creation of scientific socialism, in the form of the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. There are numerous other ”demands” which are only slightly less ridiculous, such as the ”nationalization of the banks and pharmaceutical industries”.

The APL has taken the changes which we can expect to see under socialism, under the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat, and reproduced it as a set of ”demands”. The reason they have done this is not clear. Perhaps they plan to present the American government with this set of ”demands”. Perhaps the politicians would get a good laugh, at APL expense. Perhaps they are deliberately trying to spread confusion. Perhaps they are succeeding rather well.

Under their General Strategy, section 6, they make it clear that there are two major tasks:

a) supporting unity in the revolutionary movement

b) supporting the struggle against revisionism

This begs the question of exactly how we support ”unity in the revolutionary movement”, while at the same time supporting the ”struggle against revisionism”. The APL promptly answers such a question in 7):

”The unity of Marxist-Leninists will occur after we have started what needs to be done; the revisionists will be exposed by refusing to do what needs to be done”.

No doubt the person who wrote that previous sentence did so with a view to sounding profound. Equally without doubt, that same person succeeded in sounding ridiculous. The expression ”what needs to be done” could cover everything from washing dishes to splitting wood. Or it could involve raising the level of awareness of the working class. No one knows.

In fact, the current situation is similar to that which existed in Russia immediately before the revolution of 1905. Then, as now, theoretical confusion was the order of the day. As for those who called for unity, Lenin reminded people that it was Marx, no less, who advised people to come together to satisfy the practical aims of the movement, but not to violate principle.

As Lenin phrased it, in What Is To Be Done?, ”Without a revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement”. He went on to explain the importance of a correct revolutionary theory, in opposition to other, revisionist tendencies which may divert the revolutionary movement onto a harmless path of social reform. That which may at first appear to be a very minor mistake may have very serious repercussions down the road.

It is also a fact that the revolutionary Marxist Leninist movement is an international movement, so that it is absolutely essential to learn from the experience of previous revolutions, the failures as well as the successes. If nothing else, we can avoid their mistakes.

Further, it is the American workers, and in particular the American working women, who are currently in the vanguard of the  international revolutionary movement for scientific socialism. Lenin stressed the fact that the ”role of vanguard can be fulfilled only by a party that is guided by an advanced theory”. (italics by Lenin). He went on to mention that Engels placed three great forms of revolutionary struggle of the working class on the same level, which is to say that the theoretical struggle was placed on the same level as the economic and political struggle.

This stands in stark contrast to the silly little fable of the APL, that of doing ”what needs to be done”, while the ”revisionists will be exposed by refusing to do what needs to be done”. That is not about to happen. The revisionists will be exposed when we point out the fallacy of their revision.

Just as in early twentieth century Russia, a mass revolutionary movement is sweeping America, and indeed the world. This is not to say that the working class is aware of itself as a class and is fighting for scientific socialism, as indeed it is not. The reason for this is quite simple. It is simply not capable of Marxist Leninist consciousness. This consciousness can only be brought to them from outside the working class.

Left to their own devices, the workers, or at least the more advanced workers, may come to realize the necessity of combining in unions, of fighting against the employers for better wages and working conditions, of lobbying their elected leaders, their politicians, for better labor laws and housing conditions, etc. This is fine, as far as it goes, but is only trade union consciousness, which Lenin refers to as Economism. Even the most advanced workers cannot, by their own efforts, go beyond trade union consciousness. We should not hold this against them, as their conditions of life do not allow any further development. It is simply beyond their ability.

That is where class conscious people come in, Communists. Bear in mind that Marx, Engels and Lenin were members of the bourgeois intelligentsia. As such, they were aware of the scientific theory of socialism, which grew out of the philosophical, historical and economic theories of the educated representatives of the propertied classes, the intellectuals. They then gave these theories a proper revolutionary twist, as the other bourgeois intellectuals were incapable of such a revolutionary insight, and produced the theories which are currently referred to as Marxism Leninism, otherwise known as Communism. As Lenin phrased it, ”the theoretical doctrine of Social Democracy arose quite independently of the spontaneous growth of the labor movement; it arose as a natural and inevitable outcome of the development of ideas among the revolutionary socialist intelligentsia”. (It should be noted that we now refer to Social Democracy as Communism or Marxism Leninism.)

Now it is our task, the task of conscious people, Communists, to divert the working class movement from its spontaneous, trade unionist striving to go under the wing of the bourgeoisie, and to bring it under the wing of revolutionary Communism. This may be not nearly as difficult as it once was. Most workers are literate and many now have personal computers and access to the internet. As well, they now have iphones, ipads, tablets, and God knows what else. (There is a reason my children call me a Caveman.) The precise names of these digital devices are not important. The important thing is that we regard them as communication tools, which is precisely what they are. They were not available at the time of Lenin, but are widespread now, so we would be fools not to use them.

With that in mind, we can encourage workers to download such classic works of Lenin as What Is To Be Done?, State and Revolution, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Left Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder, among others. As well, we can write articles concerning current events, which used to be in the form of leaflets, but can now be placed on the internet and sent to the digital devices of workers. These articles should not be merely ”literature for workers”, such as strikes and lockouts. We can write about the government shut down, the proposed troop with drawls from the war zones, the proposed border wall, the democratic candidates for political office, and so forth. These are issues which interest workers, as they read avidly and watch the news. We can then explain to workers that these are merely features of capitalism, and that even if Trump is removed from office, it would fundamentally change nothing. In short, it is our duty to raise the level of awareness of the workers, especially the most advanced workers to the level of Marxist Leninist. It is the most advanced who lead, while the less advanced will follow. This is not to say that the less advanced should be ignored, as they should not, but more popular literature should be made available for them.

We can compare this to that which the APL has in mind:

”We need to build the Party through leading the masses, not leading the masses through building the Party. The Party will come only after we have gone to the masses to serve the people, learn from them and earn their trust and support. This is the one and only way we will see a revolutionary movement in the country. This is because putting Marxism-Leninism into practice comes before even the creation of the vanguard party.”

This last paragraph is a complete muddle. According to the APL, the Party, which does not exist, will come into existence only after the non existent Party goes ”to the masses to serve the people” and we in turn ”learn from them”. And just what are we to learn from them? As if the working people have the foggiest idea concerning the creation of a Communist Party! Further, what is the point of going ”to the masses” if we have nothing to say to them?

In fact, the working class revolutionary movement always develops separately from the movement for scientific socialism. As Marx and Lenin stressed, the two have to be brought together, to be merged. The current revolutionary movement has to become the movement for scientific socialism, for the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. This is not about to happen by itself, spontaneously. This awareness has to come from an outside source, from intellectuals. It matters not in the slightest if these intellectuals are working class or middle class. The important thing is the message, and that message must be correct.

As mentioned in previous writings, it is my opinion that we are in desperate need of a truly Communist party, one that is based on the principles of scientific socialism. There are several self professed Communist Parties in existence, yet as best I can gather, all are a fraud. All serve the bourgeoisie, with varying degrees of enthusiasm.

This is a serious matter, as the recent uprising of the working class has given rise to the  majority of advanced workers becoming politically active, embracing the idea of socialism, and looking to become active in a political party. As well, the continuing crisis in capitalism is devastating ever more middle class people, forcing them into the ranks of the working class. The women who took part in the Womens’ March of 2017 probably feel betrayed, as the capitalists have taken it over and turned it into a corporation. The women of the Me Too movement are probably also looking for a political party with which they can become involved.

There are a great many other groups, such as Black Lives Matter, which can and should come together, and help to form an American Communist Party, Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Members of various groups should put aside their differences and assist in forming such a Party.

As just one example, I can mention the fact that many people are passionately pro choice, while there are also a great many people who are, with an equal passion, pro life. I can only suggest that such people put aside their differences, at least temporarily, and come together in proletarian solidarity. We have a common enemy, the class of parasites called the capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie. As long as we are fighting each other, we are not fighting them. They are deeply entrenched, determined to hold on to their wealth and power. Yet at the moment, they are also deeply divided, fighting among themselves, unable to rule in the old way. Now is the time to strike, when they are at their weakest.

At the same time, the working class is now roused to a fury. Even the much less advanced members of the working class are now politically active, demanding change, taking an interest in politics. I repeat, now is the time to strike, when the enemy, the bourgeoisie, is vulnerable, and we, the working class, the proletariat, are at our strongest.

We can unite in opposition to the capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie. There is no other way to defeat those human parasites, the bourgeoisie. We can respect each other, while respecting our differences.  We can march under the same red banner. Women can wear red pussy hats and men can wear red scarves. We can together carry signs which proclaim:

Dictatorship of the Proletariat!

Workers of the World, Unite!

Scientific Socialism!

In the year 1898, in Czarist Russia, a small group of young, middle class intellectuals, Marxist revolutionaries, one and all, got together and formed the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, the RSDLP. One of those people was a fellow by the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, later to become famous under the name of Lenin.

It is safe to say that at that time, no one paid a great deal of attention to this assortment of young revolutionaries. The only exception was the secret police of the Czar, and they promptly rounded up the whole lot and threw them in jail. Lenin, among others, was sent to Siberia, and the secret police thought that was the end of the matter. They could not possibly have been more mistaken.

In 1902, the members of the Party came together once again and produced the political platform of the RSDLP. This was mainly written by Lenin, and of course was concerned with the situation which existed in Russia at that time. Parts of that document can be used as a basis for the creation of a Communist Party of America.

For the benefit of those who have only recently become politically active, I should mention that the RSDLP later changed its name to Bolshevik and then Communist.

There are several key passages within the Draft Program of the RSDLP which are just as important now as at the time they were written:

VII The emancipation of the workers must be the act of the working class itself.

VIII This proletarian revolution will completely abolish the division of society into classes and consequently any and all political inequality arising from that division.

IX To effect this social revolution the proletariat must win political power, which will make it master of the situation and enable it to remove all obstacles along the road to its great goal. In this sense the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat is an essential political condition of the social revolution.

These passages are just as valid today as at the time they were first written, and are just as completely unacceptable to the bourgeoisie. We can use these passages to assist in the formation of a political platform of a new Communist Party of America. We can also expect the supporters of the bourgeoisie, belly crawling boot lickers, including those who claim to be Marxists, to oppose these key passages. By contrast, those who are true Marxists, and not mere revisionists or social reformers, will embrace such passages.

I say that we can expect this because the capitalists are quite predictable. We can expect them to attempt that which they have attempted before. One of their favourite tricks is to send their agents into a revolutionary Communist party and to divert their policy onto a harmless policy of revision, of social reform. Such reforms are no threat to the rule of the bourgeoisie and are quite acceptable.

It was precisely on such differences that the RSDLP broke into two factions, a majority, or Bolshevik, led by Lenin, and a minority, or Menshevik, revisionist faction. The Mensheviks were in favour of social reform, of patching up capitalism, of working within the system, of ”changing it from within”. They denied the necessity of revolution and the subsequent Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. They claimed to be Marxists while at the same time maintaining that the theories of Marx had to be revised.

Lenin waged a merciless struggle against these revisionists, whom he referred to as Economists or Trade Unionists. He dealt with them at length in his excellent book, What Is To Be Done? Yet to this day there are people who peddle this same rubbish, and in the name of Marx and Lenin, no less!

One of the more clear cut examples is that of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist – Leninist) or CPC (ML). In their latest weekly newspaper, dated January 19, 2019, the headlines proclaim:

In 2019, Let Everyone Take Up Politics of Social Responsibility and Speak in Their Own Name

All Out to Humanize the Social and Natural Environment!

Affirm the Rights of All!

Make Canada a Zone for Peace!

It is only natural to wonder just what they mean by this, and in fact the lead article takes up the ”politics of social responsibility and speak in their own name…this includes first and foremost the work for political renewal which will focus on defining the modern democratic personality and politics of social responsibility. It includes the work to make sure the working people are able to speak in their own name and do not get silenced or criminalized by the measures put in place to marginalize and dismiss their concerns. The Party also joins efforts which contribute to humanizing the social and natural environment…”

It is difficult to imagine terms which are more vague than ”social responsibility”, ”political renewal”, ”modern democratic personality”, ”humanizing the social and natural environment”, ”working people are able to speak in their own name”. This is nothing more that a miscellaneous assortment of words, random verbiage which is grouped together so that they have absolutely no meaning, sheer gobbledegook. Yet this gibberish is put forward in the name of Marx and Lenin!

This stands in stark contrast to the political platform put forward by Lenin, in which he refers to proletarian revolution and the subsequent Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

The rest of the newspaper is put forward in the same manner. The capitalist class is not even referred to as the bourgeoise, but as the ”ruling elites”. Class conflict is glossed over. There is no mention of revolution or of the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

I have deliberately chosen this newspaper as it is a very clear cut example of a party which claims to be Communist and Marxist Leninist and yet is merely straight forward revisionist. There are other parties which claim to be socialist but have a less clearly defined ideology, assuming they have any ideology at all.

This is a rather serious matter. As a result of the revolutionary movement, a great many people, mainly working class but also middle class, are now politically active. Most of them have previously been apathetic, and are now fed up with the main stream political parties and are looking for a socialist alternative. It is only natural that they should approach a Communist Party and very quickly become very confused. It may take them a while to realize that the only difference between the main stream parties and the leftist parties is that one is more hypocritical than the other. Sadly, it is those who claim to be Communist who are more hypocritical.

The natural result of this is to divert the revolutionary movement onto some harmless path of social reform, as the bourgeois ideology reasserts itself. This must be opposed, and that is where a true Communist Party comes into play. We must first form and then stress that we are a revolutionary Communist Party, dedicated to the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. We must educate workers to the existence of classes, raise their level of awareness using such terms as proletariat and bourgeoisie. These words must be explained, sometimes in very popular literature, for the sake of workers who are somewhat less advanced. For those who are more advanced, less popular literature can be used. Repetition is also useful, as we all learned the alphabet through repetition. We must drive home the point that our class interests are diametrically opposed, the proletariat versus the bourgeoisie, using examples of current events, such as the lies and deception of Trump, the government shutdown and the national debt ceiling. From such examples, which we can use as mere particulars, we can move onto the general point of class conflict, of the necessity of revolution and the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. Otherwise we run the risk of becoming mere babblers.

That is our task, the task of conscious people, those of us who are well aware of that which is happening. This stands in stark contrast to the working people who are taking part in the revolution, even though they are not aware of their actions. They need direction, their level of awareness must be raised, to the level of Marxists. At least, the most advanced workers must become revolutionary Marxists, aware of the necessity of the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. The less advanced will follow the more advanced workers.

That is where we come in. It is up to us, conscious people, Marxists, to provide the working people with that level of awareness, to lead the revolutionary movement onto a proper path of scientific socialism. Otherwise, the bourgeoisie will divert it onto some path of harmless social reform.

That is the reason we need a party, in order to give that direction. It must be a proper Communist Party, which is the reason I suggest the name of American Communist Party, Dictatorship of the Proletariat, or ACP,DOP.

The need for a revolutionary Communist Party is urgent, as time is not on our side. The revolution is not about to wait for us. That is the reason I call upon conscious people, Marxists, to come together to form a proper Communist Party.

In that spirit, I can once again stress the need to provide the rudiments of class consciousness to all working people, in the form of slogans:

Workers of the World, Unite!

Scientific Socialism!

Dictatorship Of the Proletariat!

The partial American government shutdown is finally over, but it is very likely that a new one will soon begin. Trump and the Speaker of the House, the Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, have come to an agreement. The deal is to allow the government workers to return to work, with pay, at least until February 15. It is significant that Trump did not get one dime for his precious border wall.

As for the workers who were forced to work without pay, throughout the shut down, Trump swears they will be paid for the days they worked, very soon. As Trump is a habitual liar, it is very likely they will never get paid, at least if Trump has his way.

It is now up to conscious people, Marxists, Communists, to explain to the working people that we have just won our first big battle with Trump and the capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie. Trump did not get any money for his wall with Mexico, and was forced to ”blink”, to back down. Not that he has given up, but this proves that Trump and the capitalists, the bourgeoisie, can be beaten. This should serve as an inspiration for all working people.

Now Trump and Pelosi have just under three weeks to come to an agreement on ”border security”, as they now refer to it. If an agreement cannot be reached, then Trump is threatening to once again shut down the government or declare a state of national emergency. Trump is still determined to secure money for his border wall and raise the national debt, while Pelosi is equally determined not to give money for the border wall or raise the national debt.

At least, that is very likely the case, for if she gives in to Trump on either issue, she may face a revolt within the Democratic Party and lose her position as Speaker of the House. The new members of the House are determined to enact change, and that includes standing up to Trump and ensuring fiscal responsibility. In other words, no money for the wall and no increase to the national debt.

The agreement to negotiate until February 15 may sound a little strange, as it was announced that the government was expected to run out of money on February 8, 2019. That was first postponed until March 1, and now the officials of the Treasury Department think they can drag it out until September, using ”cash on hand and extraordinary measures”. Those officials are doing everything they can to avoid asking the Congress, which is to say the House of Representatives, to raise the national debt ceiling.

In fact, this is just one more example of the executive branch of the government, led by President Trump, of taking over the duties performed by the legislative branch of the government, which is to say the Senate and the House of Representatives.

For example, the constitution makes it quite clear that only the Senate can declare war. Yet, the last time the Senate declared war was back in 1941. Since that time, America has gone to war on numerous occasions, strictly at the discretion of the president. At no time has the Senate held the president accountable. In effect, the Senate has abdicated their authority.

By the same token, Congress controls the money. Only the Congress can raise the national debt limit, and only the Congress can decide where the money is spent. That is spelled out quite clearly in the constitution. And yet, since the end of the second world war, the executive branch of the government, which is to say the president and his ”administration”, have been allowed to spend tax payer money as they see fit. They have also been allowed to raise the debt limit to the huge levels that it is now, so that a great deal of tax payer money merely goes towards the interest payments. Further, if Trump has his way, the debt ceiling will be raised much higher.

But now the situation has changed dramatically, as a result of the working class revolutionary movement. There are a great many new members of Congress, commonly referred to as ”freshmen”, or ”back benchers”. Until very recently, they were expected to sit quietly and do as they were told. The party bosses issued the orders, and the new ”recruits” voted precisely the way they were told. In turn, those who were solid, reliable, faithful servants were allowed to gather seniority and were rewarded with more important posts. This is referred to as ”climbing the ladder of success”.

That was then and this is now, and those ”good old days” are a dim and distant memory, at least from the standpoint of the capitalists. Many of the ”old guard” have given up, or been forced from their posts, told by their lords and masters, the billionaires, the capitalists, the bourgeoisie, to walk away. As they can no longer control the legislative branch of government, the Senate and House of Representatives, the bourgeoisie will just have to determine a different method of rule.

Now we have several new members of the Senate, and a great many new members of the House. For the most part, these new members are a mixture of people who are rather young, progressive, female and members of minority groups. There are already cracks appearing in the Senate. In a recent vote, six members of the Republican party broke ranks and voted with the democrats on a particular bill. As there are only one hundred members of the Senate, and as it is was formerly unheard of for any Republican to defy the party bosses, this is significant.

The new members of the House have already made an impression. They first voted in Nancy Pelosi as their leader, the new Speaker of the House. She in turn refused to back down from Trump and the partial government shut down ended without any money allocated for his precious border wall. Negotiations are proceeding for the next couple of weeks, between Trump and the Democrats, but it is doubtful that Trump will get what he wants.

It is important to remember that Trump wants more than just money for his border wall. He also wants to dramatically raise the national debt. He is equally determined to ensure that the members of his class, the bourgeoisie, continue to pay almost no taxes. He is well aware that the new members of Congress are opposed to an increase to the national debt and favour an increase to the tax rate of billionaires and corporations. Trump would sooner crawl on his belly over broken glass, rather that consent to an increase to the tax rate of members of his class.

This is the reason that Trump and his belly crawling boot lickers, the so called members of his administration, have decided upon a policy of spending ”cash on hand and extraordinary measures”, instead of getting the approval of Congress. It is an attempt to circumvent the constitution, to bypass the House, raise the national debt and spend taxpayer money as they see fit. It remains to be seen if the House will allow them to do this, as past members of the House have done so.

Trump may yet declare a state of emergency, which is a form of martial law, appropriate tax payer money which has been set aside by congress for national emergencies, such as forest fire or floods, and use that money to build his border wall.

It is clear that the bourgeoisie can no longer rule in the old way and have to change their method of rule. It is not clear just what shape that new method of rule will become. We just know that it will not be progressive, for as Lenin states, ”imperialism is reaction right down the line”.

It is our duty, as Communists, to raise the level of awareness of the working class to that of Marxists. The best way to do this is to use current events as examples, such as the fact that our democratic rights are being trampled, not so much by Trump but by members of his class, the bourgeoisie. We can also point out that the new Democratic members of Congress are opposing this, and we should support them in this noble pursuit. At the same time we should point out that Trump is not the problem, merely the most visible member of his class, the bourgeoisie. It is that class of capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie, which has to be overthrown. That can only be accomplished through revolution, and then their resistance – which will be increased ten fold after they lose power – must be crushed through the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

That is our task, the task of Communists, and that task is largely being ignored. I have scoured the newspapers and party platforms of numerous organizations which claim to be Communist or Socialist or Marxist Leninist and have found only one which advocates the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat, and that one is in Burkina Faso.

The current situation is explosive and in fact a revolution could break out any day. The working class is not about to wait until we are prepared, and the bourgeoisie could force the workers to revolt, especially if they declare martial law.

With that in mind, I think it best to give the advice of Lenin, as expressed in Left Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder:

”The fundamental law of revolution, which has been confirmed by all revolutions and especially by all three Russian revolutions in the twentieth century, is as follows: for a revolution to take place it is not enough for the exploited and oppressed masses to realize the impossibility of living in the old way, and demand changes; for a revolution to take place it is essential that the exploiters should not be able to live and rule in the old way. It is only when the ‘lower classes’ do not want to live in the old way and the ‘upper classes’ cannot carry on in the old way that the revolution can triumph. This truth can be expressed in other words: revolution is impossible without a nation – wide crisis (affecting both the exploited and the exploiters). It follows that, for a revolution to take place, it is essential, first, that a majority of the workers ( or at least a majority of the class-conscious, thinking, and politically active workers) should fully realize that revolution is necessary, and that they should be prepared to die for it; second, that the ruling classes should be going through a governmental crisis, which draws even the most backward masses into politics (symptomatic of every genuine revolution is a rapid ten fold and even hundred fold increase in the size of the working and oppressed masses – hitherto apathetic -who are capable of waging the political struggle), weakens the government and makes it possible for the revolutionaries to rapidly overthrow it.” (all italics and parenthesis by Lenin)

I have quoted this paragraph in full because it is of such importance. The article was written in 1920, and Lenin gave particular attention to the revolutionary situation which at that time existed in Britain. He made reference to Henderson and Snowden, members of the Labor Party, and Churchill and Lloyd George, members of the Liberal Party. In modern terms, it may help to think of the Labor Party as the equivalent of the Democratic Party, and Churchill and Lloyd George as the equivalent of the Republican Party. At least, when I read the following paragraphs with that in mind, the article made complete sense. So for what it is worth, with name changes in parenthesis which are mine; all other parentheses and italics are by Lenin:

”Both conditions for a successful proletarian revolution are clearly maturing in (America). The errors of the Left Communists are particularly dangerous at present, because revolutionaries are not displaying a sufficiently thoughtful, sufficiently attentive, sufficiently intelligent and sufficiently shrewd attitude toward each of these conditions. If we are the party of the revolutionary class, and not merely a revolutionary group, and if we want the masses to follow us (and unless we achieve that, we stand the risk of remaining mere wind bags), we must first help the  (Democrats) to defeat the (Republicans) or rather compel the (Democrats) to defeat the (Republicans), because the (Democrats) are afraid of their victory!); second, we must help the majority of the working people to be convinced by their own experience that we are right, that is, the (Democrats) are absolutely good for nothing, that they are petty bourgeois and treacherous by nature, and that their bankruptcy is inevitable; third, we must bring forward the moment when, on the basis of the disappointment of most of the workers in the (Democrats), it will be possible, with serious chance of success, to overthrow the government of the (Democrats) at once; because if the most astute and solid (Trump), that big and not petty bourgeois, is displaying consternation and is more and more weakening himself (and the bourgeoisie as a whole) by his ”friction” with the (Democrats), how much greater will be the consternation of a (Democratic) government!”

It is clear that these conditions exist and equally clear that conscious people, Communists, are not rising to the occasion. We are not explaining to the working people that revolution is necessary and about to happen, that the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat is also necessary. Until the revolution takes place, it is necessary to support the newly elected progressive Democratic members of Congress, so that the workers will learn from their own experience that the Democrats also are loyal servants of the bourgeoisie. Even if a few members try to change the system, the bourgeoise will remain in charge. Nothing of substance will change.

I can also suggest that all Americans be encouraged to join the two mainstream political parties, Democratic and Republican, as card carrying members, and not just as registered members. As party bosses, they will determine the candidates to run for any and all political offices. That includes the presidency.

I can only hope that this little article inspires people to read that magnificent article by Lenin:

Left Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the third year in a row, women are once again marching in Washington and around the world. Apparently, the day of January 20, 2017, the day Donald Trump took the oath of office to become president of the United States, is now a day of mourning, at least for so many women of the world.

The first march of 2017 was largely spontaneous, and the turnout was huge, with millions marching around the world. Most of the people taking part in those marches were women, and most of those women were wearing pink knitted hats, referred to as ”pussy hats”, for reasons which I will not elaborate. Let us just say that it is a none too subtle reference to the male chauvinist sentiments expressed by Trump.

The latest march, that of January 2019, was far less impressive. There have been suggestions of anti semitism within the organization. Numerous local groups have disbanded or are working with varying degrees of activity. Others hold ”activism fairs and town halls engaging in electoral work”.

According to their Mission Statement of Women’s March, it is to ”harness the political power of diverse women and their communities to create transformative social change…committed to dismantling the system of oppression through non violent resistance”.

There are various pacifist religious groups which could most emphatically agree with this. It is not clear whether this organization is vying for membership in the Democratic party or the Peace Corp.

The goal of the annual marches is to ”advocate legislation and policies regarding human rights and other issues, including women’s rights, immigration reform, reproductive rights, the environment, LGBTQ rights, racial inequality, freedom of religion, workers rights and tolerance”.

Then there is the Power to the Polls rally, which aims to ”launch a national voter registration and mobilization tour. The goal is to register more women to vote, and to elect more women and progressive candidates to office”.

Such starry eyed optimism is deeply touching. Faced with this sort of tender sentimental persuasion, no doubt the imperialists will shed tears of remorse and mend their ways. Ha!

It should be noted that each and every one of these statements is absolutely acceptable to the bourgeoisie. There is nothing revolutionary here, no threat to their power. Their class is in power and they fully intend to remain in power. We live under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and it is clear that the people who are in charge of these organizations find that quite acceptable.

Without doubt there are a great many people who took part in the marches of 2017 and are now disenchanted with the organization, as it is now little more than an appendage of the Democratic Party. They very likely feel betrayed. We must reach out to these people and offer them an alternative to imperialism, which is the highest stage of capitalism. Such people can well assist us in setting up a Communist Party, based on the revolutionary doctrine of Marx and Lenin, including the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

We must stress to such people that no change of faces, no matter how sincere, whether in the Senate, House of Representatives, White House, any state or local government agency, will change the fact that the bourgeoisie are in charge and fully intend to remain in charge.

It is clear that the original march of 2017 was quite spontaneous, predominantly female and left leaning. Since that time several of the lead organizers have created a Women’s March Inc., which is to say they have created a corporation. If there is one thing for which people on the left have absolutely no use, it is a corporation. By the same token, if there is one thing for which capitalists have absolutely no use, it is a Communist and the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

As I have maintained for quite some time now, it is clear that the Americans are in the vanguard of the world revolutionary working class movement, and in particular by American women. It is also clear that the capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie, agree with that assessment. They have therefore decided to hijack the current women’s revolutionary movement and bring it under the wing of the capitalists, to divert that revolutionary movement onto some harmless path of social reform.

Not only have they decided to hijack the movement, they have also decided to make some money off of it. That is the reason for the creation of a corporation. So now women can pay for the honour and privilege of marching for and demanding social reform. No doubt they expect all local groups to contribute to their cause, which includes making a profit, as that is the reason for the existence of a corporation.

Among the people who have been taking part in that movement, there are many well meaning individuals. They are trying to get some of their own people elected to office, and to an extent, are succeeding. The best these elected leaders can hope to achieve is a few paltry reforms.  American workers are not satisfied with this and demand more. They are demanding political power, and that can only be achieved through the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. It is worth noting that such a dictatorship is the worst nightmare of every billionaire.

There are various splinter groups which have broken off from the original organization. I am sure Communists can support at least some of these groups, even encouraging people to vote for the candidates they put forward, while at the same time expressing our scientific belief that the only real way forward is through revolution and the subsequent Dictatorship Of the Proletariat. Assuming the best case scenario, sincere candidates will run for office, be elected, and be unable to enact any meaningful change. In this way working people will be convinced, through their own experience.

At the same time that we support these candidates for office, we must make it clear that it is a class struggle, the working class, the proletariat, against the capitalists, the billionaires, the bourgeoisie. It is not a gender struggle, as to replace male capitalists with female capitalists will achieve nothing. If anything, female capitalists tend to be more cunning.

Just as the female demonstrators tend to wear pink ”pussy hats”, we can suggest the males wear red neck scarves, so as to be identified with the revolution. It would be even better if everyone wore red, so as to let the capitalists know that the workers are united, men and women, in a common goal of revolution and the Dictatorship Of the Proletariat.

These are mere suggestions, and it remains to be seen if working people choose to take such advice.

In this way, the revolutionary motion of 2017 will flare up once again, but this time finer and stronger. We will know we are getting our message through to the working class when the banners proclaim:

Workers of the World, Unite!

Scientific Socialism!

Dictatorship of the Proletariat!