USA : Maoist Communist Group – The Organization of a Struggle Committee in a Housing Complex

The Maoist Communist Group has published the following summation of a protracted sequence of mass work on the worker and housing fronts as a contribution to fulfilling the central task that marks the current step in the revolutionary process in the US: to construct a Maoist Party of a new type.

How does summing up mass work relate to the question of the Party?

Today, there are a great and growing number of organizations operating in the US under the banner of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This is not a matter of ‘sectarianism.’ This is the class reality of the current moment, and we cannot extricate ourselves from that reality with pious and sentimental tears for unity.

Engels wrote:

A party proves itself a victorious party by the fact that it splits and can stand the split. The movement of the proletariat necessarily passes through different stages of development; at every stage one section of people lags behind and does not join in the further advance; and this alone explains why it is that actually the ‘solidarity of the proletariat’ is everywhere realized in different party groupings which carry on life and death feuds with one another, as the Christian sects in the Roman Empire did amidst the worst persecutions.

While groups in the US today have certain ideological references in common, it would be a mistake to conclude from this that they practice a common politics.  

Politics is not anything and everything: it is the question of power and the state in relation to the principal contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. For Maoists today, politics involves leading the masses to take power over specific points in concrete class situations in order to work for the revolutionary autonomy of the proletariat, for the constitution of its own political project. Unity between Maoist organizations must fundamentally be a political unity.

The vanguard party, bearer of a revolutionary state project, must be both built in the mass movement and organized between groups of Maoist militants. The second requirement depends on the first. This means that unity between organizations can only be achieved on the basis of ideological struggle over summations of mass work – struggle that precisely determines points of agreement, ambiguous points, and points of divergence.

Ideological struggle between organizations represents the struggle between true and false ideas in the current moment.

It cannot be emphasized enough: living Maoism demands that we pursue unity on the basis of concretely analyzing our own work as organizers of movements among the broad masses. The ‘Maoism’ of abstract principles divorced from current reality – thus, without an objective basis for their own dialectical transformation – can form the basis for the construction of a sterile apparatus, or perhaps a church, but it will not allow us to advance a single step in the construction of a Maoist Party, vanguard detachment of the working class and leading core of the whole people.

(Note: there seems to be an issue on browsers with certain plug-ins installed. If the text is garbled, please finish loading the document and then refresh it.)

C. Kistler

Also editor of Nouvelle Turquie.