communist parties you support

[Neon Jack Rabbit]

Communist League [Communist Workers Party]
Workers Party in America

There are a lot of others I follow with genuine interest, but I cannot say I support them necessarily. Speaking of which,...

(28-05-2010 05:19 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Though I am not a member, the political party i most closely identify with would be the Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/). It doesn't beat about the bush and stands for the real thing - a moneyless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism

I think any genuine Marxian communist party stands for that. The differences come in when you get to the question of how we get there.

[Karlos Marxos]

(29-05-2010 04:31 AM)Neon Jack Rabbit Wrote:  Communist League [Communist Workers Party]
Workers Party in America

There are a lot of others I follow with genuine interest, but I cannot say I support them necessarily. Speaking of which,...

(28-05-2010 05:19 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Though I am not a member, the political party i most closely identify with would be the Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/). It doesn't beat about the bush and stands for the real thing - a moneyless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism

I think any genuine Marxian communist party stands for that. The differences come in when you get to the question of how we get there.

While the goal is important, what would it matter if the party in question were tactically inept and principly bankrupt? It's when it gets to this point that parties cease to be anything but Communist in name and form.

[Red Star]

Since my previous post I more or less took my distance from the Dutch SP (and they from me as they kicked me out). I will support it on a tactical basis though, like in elections. The Netherlands will see national elections on 9 June, but I'm not sure I'm going to vote for it yet. The alternative is the Pirate Party which exists in the Netherlands officially since early March. They focus a lot on democratic issues like a free flow of information, privacy for citizens, a completely transparent state, etc. They are not communist in anyway, shape or form, but do have several communist or otherwise far-left members and sympathisers. These people are generally repelled by the sectarian far-left landscape (in as far as the far-left exists anyway) and the top-down culture which exists in many of the groups. That the Pirate Party attracts these people is a clear signal that the far-left is doing something wrong here and focus too much on economistic issues as opposed to political issues, which is the fight for more democracy.

Oh, I also support the Workers Party America.

[Karlos Marxos]

(30-05-2010 10:43 AM)Red Star Wrote:  Since my previous post I more or less took my distance from the Dutch SP (and they from me as they kicked me out). I will support it on a tactical basis though, like in elections. The Netherlands will see national elections on 9 June, but I'm not sure I'm going to vote for it yet. The alternative is the Pirate Party which exists in the Netherlands officially since early March. They focus a lot on democratic issues like a free flow of information, privacy for citizens, a completely transparent state, etc. They are not communist in anyway, shape or form, but do have several communist or otherwise far-left members and sympathisers. These people are generally repelled by the sectarian far-left landscape (in as far as the far-left exists anyway) and the top-down culture which exists in many of the groups. That the Pirate Party attracts these people is a clear signal that the far-left is doing something wrong here and focus too much on economistic issues as opposed to political issues, which is the fight for more democracy.

Cool beans.. I guess..?

(30-05-2010 10:43 AM)Red Star Wrote:  Oh, I also support the Workers Party America.

Thanks for the plug.

[robbo203]

(29-05-2010 07:04 PM)Karlos Marxos Wrote:  

(29-05-2010 04:31 AM)Neon Jack Rabbit Wrote:  Communist League [Communist Workers Party]
Workers Party in America

There are a lot of others I follow with genuine interest, but I cannot say I support them necessarily. Speaking of which,...

(28-05-2010 05:19 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Though I am not a member, the political party i most closely identify with would be the Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/). It doesn't beat about the bush and stands for the real thing - a moneyless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism

I think any genuine Marxian communist party stands for that. The differences come in when you get to the question of how we get there.

While the goal is important, what would it matter if the party in question were tactically inept and principly bankrupt? It's when it gets to this point that parties cease to be anything but communist in name and form.

I am reminded of Bernstein's maxim that the movement is everything and the goal, nothing. The application of this principle and the adoption of a reformist platform sealed the fate of the German SDP and ensured its evolution into a fully fledged capitalist political party.

To me the goal is all important and the means must harmonise with this goal.

Neon Jack Rabbit- you say any genuine Marxian communist party stands for a monyeless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism but how many actually state this upfront and mean it. Precious few in my opinion. Though I have my differences with the SPGB one thing I fully agree with them about is the absoilutely crucial importance of fostering both the mass understanding and the desire for such an alternative. You cannot have communism without it. How you get to do that without actually talking about communism and arguing for it, beats me

Whatever else a revolutionary organisation one thing it cannot NOT do it is advocate a genuine communist alternative while claiming to be a genuine communist party. Would you not agree?

[Red Star]

(30-05-2010 11:36 AM)Karlos Marxos Wrote:  Cool beans.. I guess..?

I'm not entirely sure what that is supposed to mean?

(30-05-2010 04:05 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Whatever else a revolutionary organisation one thing it cannot NOT do it is advocate a genuine communist alternative while claiming to be a genuine communist party. Would you not agree?

That bit didn't really compute with me. Could you rephrase?

[robbo203]

(31-05-2010 01:46 AM)Red Star Wrote:  

(30-05-2010 11:36 AM)Karlos Marxos Wrote:  Cool beans.. I guess..?

I'm not entirely sure what that is supposed to mean?

(30-05-2010 04:05 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Whatever else a revolutionary organisation one thing it cannot NOT do it is advocate a genuine communist alternative while claiming to be a genuine communist party. Would you not agree?

That bit didn't really compute with me. Could you rephrase?

It means that the organisation must explicitly argue for a genuine woneyless wageless stateless communist alternative to capitalism - not tuck away this goal as some long term ultimate destination which it will eventually get round to considering. Communism is the cornerstone of what any genuine communst organisation is about

[RedNovember1917]

I absolutely share your sentiments, robbo203. However, I must state that a genuinely Communist organisation would have to be realistic about the way they should establish a moneyless society in the event that they are successful and the reason why I say that is because it may be so that a moneyless society cannot be instituted in the immediate aftermath of a revolutionary situation that has become victorious and, unfortunately, the usage of currency and the wage system would most likely have to be continued until a system that would enable this type of society to initially function effectively in the greater context of international Capitalism* and that would enable this type of society to completely meet the needs of those who reside within it without relying on monetary mechanisms could be established.

---

* I pointed this out with the use of the star symbol specifically because the first successful working class revolution would most likely occur in the context of a single country that would, initially-speaking, have to effectively utilise the mechanisms of Capitalism in the context of international trade due to the continuation of this system in every other country in the world.

[Karlos Marxos]

(30-05-2010 04:05 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  I am reminded of Bernstein's maxim that the movement is everything and the goal, nothing. The application of this principle and the adoption of a reformist platform sealed the fate of the German SDP and ensured its evolution into a fully fledged capitalist political party.

To me the goal is all important and the means must harmonise with this goal.

No one, least of all Neon Jack Rabbit, is promoting such flagrant opportunism. Perhaps you got the notion from the curtness of my reply, but no where did anyone insist that the goal is nothing. As you've noted yourself in your posts on RevLeft, the change in society must be consciously effected, and without conscious comprehension and acceptance of that goal by the working masses, the change cannot be effected. Moreover, sound working class tactics and principles cannot serve any other purpose than such a modest goal as communism, because, just as the goal; they are shaped by their class interests. But the only thing that I ever maintained was that without them, the "workers' movement" will be rendered impotent and morally bankrupt, and if it be a genuine workers' movement, it won't remain so for long after such tactics and principles have been abandoned. In a word, the goal and the movement are two essential parts of the same whole.

(30-05-2010 04:05 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Neon Jack Rabbit- you say any genuine Marxian communist party stands for a monyeless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism but how many actually state this upfront and mean it. Precious few in my opinion. Though I have my differences with the SPGB one thing I fully agree with them about is the absoilutely crucial importance of fostering both the mass understanding and the desire for such an alternative. You cannot have communism without it. How you get to do that without actually talking about communism and arguing for it, beats me

Whatever else a revolutionary organisation one thing it cannot NOT do it is advocate a genuine communist alternative while claiming to be a genuine communist party. Would you not agree?

Of course we would agree. But that an ostensibly Communist Party genuinely advocates communism may to a certain extent be taken for granted in our elaborations since this is a thread about Communist Parties.

And there are more "communist" organizations than you can shake a clenched fist at which claim to advocate communism as it is here defined, but I doubt you or I would support them. And without sound tactics and strong working class principles, they won't have much luck instilling class consciousness, mass understanding of, and desire for the goal (not to imply that the SPGB lacks them; I don't know enough about them to say). Certainly, the fact that your list has only one organization, foresaking all others, is a testament to this fact, if it is taken seriously.

A Communist Party founded upon decidedly anti-working class tactics and principles can state and support the goal upfront and say what it means and mean what it says all it wants, but if you ask me, it's at this point when communism first becomes a meaningless buzzword, and conversely, the movement genuinely becomes nothing, and the goal everything. Do not the various Leninist sects, infamous for reducing mass movements to mindless activism and electioneering, claim to support communism, not in the sense of so-called "Communist States," but in the same sense herein?

And where has that gotten us?

[Neon Jack Rabbit]

(30-05-2010 04:05 PM)robbo203 Wrote:  Neon Jack Rabbit- you say any genuine Marxian communist party stands for a monyeless wageless stateless alternative to capitalism but how many actually state this upfront and mean it. Precious few in my opinion. Though I have my differences with the SPGB one thing I fully agree with them about is the absolutely crucial importance of fostering both the mass understanding and the desire for such an alternative. You cannot have communism without it. How you get to do that without actually talking about communism and arguing for it, beats me

Whatever else a revolutionary organisation one thing it cannot NOT do it is advocate a genuine communist alternative while claiming to be a genuine communist party. Would you not agree?

I do agree. Most self-described socialists and communists talk very little -- if at all -- about the abolition of money, wages or the state. For the most part, I think this is because their definition of "socialism" is modeled (whether they'll admit it or not) on Stalin's definition of "socialism": from each according to their ability, to each according to their work. That formulation not only implies the continued existence of wages, money (in some form or another) and a state (to arbitrate the amount received for the work), but also implies a permanent management class overseeing the enforcement of work for wages ... and "armed bodies of men" to enforce "order".

One thing I'm particularly proud of with the League and Party is that both have emphasized these points from the beginning -- that our goal is a world communist society, without wages or wage-slavery, without money, without classes or class antagonism, and without a state. The workers' republic (proletarian dictatorship) is merely the transition for getting there.

[Red Star]

To go back to my post on the Pirate Party, which hoped would have some more political responses, let me put the matter more clearly: How do others think on the question of democracy? Should the fight for having a say in our lives be the predominant question for a communist party? Is it worthwile to support a party with such a programme even if it isn't communist?

[Karlos Marxos]

(02-06-2010 02:59 AM)Red Star Wrote:  To go back to my post on the Pirate Party, which hoped would have some more political responses, let me put the matter more clearly: How do others think on the question of democracy? Should the fight for having a say in our lives be the predominant question for a communist party? Is it worthwile to support a party with such a programme even if it isn't communist?

As long as their platform is in keeping with the general line of immediate social progress, I see no problem with maintaining cordial relations between such a party and the Revolutionary Workers' Party/Movement. If such a party is rather progressive and garners a good deal of support, perhaps even a great deal of collaboration and cooperation would be constructive and commendable. Especially if it renders considerable advances in the position of working people and gives them the breathing room to develop consciousness and prepare for the next hurdle.

However, such a party is clearly petty bourgeois, as its immediate demands make clear. The relationship between such a party and the Workers' Party must necessarily be a tentatively conditional one, the differences between them must be emphasized, and a serious violation of the conditions of such a relationship, such as a serious conflict of interests, principles or tactics, will likely mean voluntary termination of that relationship on the part of the Workers' Party. Also its development and how it is affected by political success and acquisition of power must be carefully assessed, as well.

It may seem entirely unpractical or cumbersome to be so conditional, but it is absolutely essential for the health of the Working People's Movement.

[Neon Jack Rabbit]

(02-06-2010 02:59 AM)Red Star Wrote:  To go back to my post on the Pirate Party, which hoped would have some more political responses, let me put the matter more clearly: How do others think on the question of democracy? Should the fight for having a say in our lives be the predominant question for a communist party? Is it worthwhile to support a party with such a programme even if it isn't communist?

I don't know if the Pirate Party has any materials in English. If they do, I'd be interested in reading them. It would help with getting a better grasp on that party and its views. Generally speaking, though, I think KM more or less explained the principle of dealing with them: where demands and interests coincide, it's not unprincipled to work with them as a united front, but with the understanding that there is to be full freedom of opinion and platform -- that the politics of the proletarian party/parties will not be subordinated or suppressed.

As far as supporting democratic demands, there is still a fundamental importance to it, even in the Great Power imperialist countries. Contrary to the mantra of most of the 20th century's self-described socialists and communists, all of the outstanding democratic tasks in these countries have not been resolved. On the contrary, with the rise of corporatism, many democratic gains have been rolled back, either in the name of "globalization" or "fighting terrorism". However, if the 20th century has taught us anything, it is that no class other than the working class is going to fight consistently for such demands, and only the working class taking power can insure they are fulfilled.

This gets into the question of supporting a party like this electorally. Personally, I would want to know more about the structure and functioning of the party, as well as the relationship between the party's expressed principles and those of its candidates. I say this because, from what I know of the Pirate Parties, their politics are little more than open-source liberalism. They are not opposed to capitalism as a mode of production, only the most monopolistic and egregious manifestations of capitalism. For the most part, though, this is more backhanded support than anything else, due to the parties' silence on the capitalist system itself.

One could make a principled argument in favor of critical support to specific and individual candidates if the Pirate Party allowed those standing in election to politically exceed the stated principles -- that is, did not take against against a Pirate candidate that linked the party's demands for information freedom and transparent government to defeating capitalist rule and the establishment of a workers' republic. In such a case, it could be argued that the candidate is running as a communist on the Pirate ballot line, and not simply as a Pirate candidate. Here in the U.S., socialists and communists often share a ballot line with the Green Party on this basis, since ballot access is often impossible to achieve for a small organization.

Just some points to consider as part of the discussion.

[kjk2.1]

(30-05-2010 10:43 AM)Red Star Wrote:  Since my previous post I more or less took my distance from the Dutch SP (and they from me as they kicked me out).

That's the second member on this board who got booted from the Dutch SP!!!

[APL_Serpov]

* Benin, Parti communiste du Bénin
* Brazil, Partido Comunista Revolucionário
* Burkina Faso, Parti communiste révolutionnaire voltaïque
* Chile, Partido Comunista Chileno (Acción Proletaria)
* Colombia, Partido Comunista de Colombia (Marxista-Leninista)
* Côte d'Ivoire, Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire de Côte d'Ivoire
* Denmark, Arbejderpartiet Kommunisterne
* Dominican Republic, Partido Comunista del Trabajo
* Ecuador, Partido Comunista Marxista-Leninista de Ecuador
* France, Parti communiste des ouvriers de France
* Germany, Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (Roter Morgen)
* Greece, Κίνηση για Ανασύνταξη του ΚΚΕ 1918-55
* Iran, Hezb-e Kar-e Iran
* Italy, Circolo Lenin
* Mexico, Partido Comunista de México (Marxista-Leninista)
* Norway, ML-gruppa Revolusjon
* Spain, Partido Comunista de España (marxista-leninista)
* Tunisia, Parti communiste des ouvriers tunisiens
* Turkey, Türkiye Devrimci Komünist Partisi
* Venezuela, Partido Comunista Marxista-Leninista de Venezuela

And in the United States, the American Party of Labor which is the only party not affiliated with International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations (Unity and Struggle).

[CornetJoyce]

This may help to expand imaginations.

http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/PartyLink.htm