/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain't driving 20 minutes to riot."

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 80.00 MB

Max files: 5

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://www.riot.im/app/#/room/!BnDgjhpLxZoHFVlyFA:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/ Follow the Twitter: https://twitter.com/bunkerchanLP

(358.26 KB 2473x947 Sin título-1.jpg)
Anonymous 01/13/2021 (Wed) 18:59:03 No. 1291478
For people who are from the United States: What is the difference between the Communist Party of the United States and the Party for Socialism and Liberation? I am going to emigrate to the United States in a few months and I would like to know which is the best communist party in the USA.
>>1291478 CPUSA shills Democrats for office, PSL shills their own irrelevant candidates for office. Otherwise I can't really tell a difference.
>>1291478 Honestly its mostly location
>>1291478 They're both irrelevant larper parties so who cares. Support the Green Party or the DSA or both.
>>1291586 You literally telling him to support socdemswho aren't all that different from neolibs
>>1291478 It depends on where you are going live, PSL currently has a huge scandal regarding a rapist in the leading stratum of the party and the CPUSA only shills for the dems because the Cuban envoys begs them to do so, sanctions and all that
>>1291592 It's either support socdems who might get something done or commies who won't get something done.
>>1291598 >i-it's Cuba's fault we're revisionists! Holy cope
>>1291586 t. fed
>>1291615 succdems accomplishments are even more irrelevant
>>1291794 Succdems are responsible for the welfare states in Europe. Maybe they can't overthrow capitalism, but other countries have shown us that succdems can at least give us healthcare.
>>1291793 NOOOOOOO YOU HAVE TO JOIN OUR IRRELEVANT LARPER PARTY AND PRETEND THE REVOLUTION IS COMING
>>1291795 >Succdems mantain the imperialist status quo Wow, truly based...
>>1291795 welfare states funded by the explotaiton of thirld world countries and that end up taking away workers rights as soon as theirs organizations end in the hands of class collaborationists
>>1291826 and is not even like communist parties are completelly against reform but that they do it without sacrificing their revolutionary principles
>>1291821 revolution might no be close but it will never come is join succdem parties and vooote
>>1291829 if all you do is join succdem parties and voot*
>>1291823 >>1291826 Its either imperialism by itself or imperialism + welfare states in rich countries. Bear in mind the United States is the most imperialistic country in the world but has the weakest social safety net of any developed country. Also, socdems are usually less imperialistic than liberals and conservatives. It was under Labour governments that Britain gave independence to a bunch of its colonies. Bernie Sanders has voted for fewer wars than establishment Democrats like Joe Biden have.
>>1291829 >>1291831 Who said that is all we're doing? You can support socdem parties and vote while supporting non-electoral activities like labor organizing. Also, revolution can only really happen under very specific circumstances (like during a war or a severe economic crisis), so it is not wise to put all your eggs in that basket.
>>1291586 >Joins DSA cos anon told me to >Sit down in Conference >No one claps >Everyone starts waving their hands like fucking spastics >Socialism achieved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPLQNUVmq3o
>>1291851 >Socialism is when you follow social norms and the more you follow social norms the more socialister it gets
>>1291615 >It's either support socdems who might get something done or commies who won't get something done. Imagine being this much of a retard Literally every sucdem movement in Europe has either A) collapsed and the conservatives hold complete sway or B) Become neoliberals And as for "getting things done" the only time Capitalist society threw scraps to the workers was in the post Ww2 era where succdem AND conservative parties gave healthcare as a right all across Europe Due to the unique conditions of post war solidarity + USSR existing and armed to the fucking teeth and setting an example on + militant communist orgs all over Europe Social-Democracy is the enemy within. They are full on class collaborators - from Britain where they ran the empire just as well as the tories to Hungary that capitulated so far with the Horthy Facsists they weren't even banned as a party when the Horthy fascists were in power and Hungary was allied with Hitler
>>1291853 >>Socialism is when you follow social norms and the more you follow social norms the more socialister it gets I'm all for revolutionizing social norms, but that implies an improvement.
>>1291847 you can do all this while working to organize within actual communist parties after it is not them who view electoralism and revolution in a dogmatic way like succedms and demsocs do (by completelly rejecting revolution and only choosing electoralism) nor it is them who are calling for a revolution rn without taking in consideration reality if anything it is electoralists who call for vooting when it's so obvious people are tired of it
>>1291856 >And as for "getting things done" the only time Capitalist society threw scraps to the workers was in the post Ww2 era where succdem AND conservative parties gave healthcare as a right all across Europe >Due to the unique conditions of post war solidarity + USSR existing and armed to the fucking teeth and setting an example on + militant communist orgs all over Europe That's not not true. The first universal healthcare system in the world was established in 1883 in Germany. A few other countries followed suit before the end of World War II, such as Japan and New Zealand. There are also some countries that introduced universal healthcare after the fall of the Soviet Union, such as Taiwan, Israel, and Thailand.
>>1291853 <Erm point of personal privilege - can we please keep the text writing to a minimum. I'm prone to sensory overload and there's a lot of text in here making it difficult to focus. It's affecting my ability to focus thank you.
>>1291864 >you can do all this while working to organize within actual communist parties Yeah that's true >it is not them who view electoralism and revolution in a dogmatic way like succedms and demsocs do (by completelly rejecting revolution and only choosing electoralism) I don't think socdems and demsocs reject revolution so much as they don't think about it at all, or at least not in the sense communists and anarchists do. To them, revolution just means big changes, not so much the overthrow of the government. >if anything it is electoralists who call for vooting when it's so obvious people are tired of it Where do you get the idea people are tired of voting? Americans hate their politicians, but I don't see any signs that people are getting sick of voting, especially when we had our highest turnout election since 1900 recently.
>>1291888 >I don't think socdems and demsocs reject revolution so much as they don't think about it at all no thats literally the key difference between them and communists that either because they don't think it's possible or desirable they reject revolution >Where do you get the idea people are tired of voting? it is quite evident ameriburgers don't trust liberal democracy no more the 2020 vooting is more of a sign of the strenght of a non electoral movement than it is of the strength of the actual 2 party system
>>1292073 >a non electoral movement What do you mean by that?
(412.63 KB 500x506 472387942389468237468723.png)
If you want to join a party that aims to overthrow the government then you can join those right-wing militia tards and plan your grand adventure from behind bars. The U.S. government is not going to allow you to do that. Maybe in the future. But not right now. I saved you a lot of trouble in the future. Thanks. Have a great week everybody.
>>1291478 Utterly irrelevant, completely useless, and full of larp. Green party is literally pseudo science hippies, don't bother with them. Parties in the us are generally shit.
>>1292087 t. fed
>>1292076 the burgerkrieg although qtards are also distancing from Trump since he a bitch
>>1292107 >the burgerkrieg The BLM protestors?
>>1292109 yeah but there where also other protests
>>1292121 I don't know as much about those other protests, but I wouldn't necessarily describe BLM as a "non-electoral" movement, as they engaged in a lot of electoral activity. I went to some BLM rallies in my town and they frequently talked about the need for voting, especially in local elections. At least one of them even had a voter registration drive. There were also a lot of criminal justice reformers who got elected this last election cycle, most notably district attorney George Gascón in Los Angeles County.
>>1291615 NOTHING will EVER happen, no matter who you stan
>>1291478 Don't say you're a communist if you are going to emigrate. They will ship you back unironically. They ask you if you're a communist. It's still illegal here.
>>1292127 >They ask you if you're a communist. Source?
>>1292130 NTA, but it’s on one of the immigration forms. It’s also on the naturalization forms. Technically it asks if you’re a member of the Communist Party.
>>1292130 Look up "communist and us immigration"
>>1291478 Op why would you move to the US
>>1292140 Also curious. This place is a shithole
>>1292135 Hmm, there seems to be a complex relationship between political affiliations and citizenship eligibility: >Several ideological requirements for naturalization remain under U.S. law. First is the requirement that the applicant be "attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same."[34] This is essentially a political test,[35] though it "should be construed ... in accord with the theory and practice of our government in relation to freedom of conscience."[36] The statutory requirement is elaborated in the Code of Federal Regulations, which provides: "Attachment implies a depth of conviction which would lead to active support of the Constitution. Attachment and favorable disposition relate to mental attitude, and contemplate the exclusion from citizenship of applicants who are hostile to the basic form of government of the United States, or who disbelieve in the principles of the Constitution."[37] Even still, the ideological requirement is "nebulous";[38] it begs the questions of what the "basic form of government of the United States" is and what the key "principles of the Constitution" are to which the applicant must subscribe. >In Schneiderman v. United States (regarding deportation of CPUSA California state party leader William Schneiderman), the case to develop the attachment requirement in the most detail, the court evaluated the circumstances of a young man whose naturalization was allegedly fraudulent for his failure to satisfy the attachment requirement. The man had been a member of two communist organizations at the time of his naturalization.[39] Upon questioning, he stated that he "subscribed 'to the philosophy and principles of Socialism as manifested in the writings of Lenin'" but "denied that he ... advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States by force" and "considered membership in the Party compatible with the obligations of American citizenship, believing that "socialism could be achieved here by democratic processes."[40] >The court held that the government had not proved that the man failed to satisfy the attachment requirement. The opinion's broad language emphasized the compatibility of dissident political views with attachment to the constitution. "The constitutional fathers, fresh from a revolution, did not forge a political strait-jacket for the generations to come", wrote Justice Frank Murphy.[41] The Court observed that Article V of the United States Constitution provides an amendment process without specifying a limit on the scope of amendments and that "the many important and far-reaching changes made in the Constitution since 1787 refute the idea that attachment to any particular provision or provisions is essential, or that one who advocates radical changes is necessarily not attached to the Constitution."[41] It further cautioned that "sincerity of desires to improve the constitution should not be judged by conformity to prevailing thought", because the freedom of thought is the utmost Constitutional value.[42] >Beyond the general attachment provision, there are several supplementary specific ideological bars.[43] These exclusions affect anarchists,[44] communists,[45] totalitarians,[45] and advocates of assassination,[46] government overthrow by force,[46] destruction of property,[46] and sabotage.[46] The bars apply only to applicants who espoused forbidden views or were members of forbidden groups in the 10 years prior to applying for naturalization; earlier beliefs or membership are not disqualifying.[47] Other exemptions from the bar include involuntary membership, membership without awareness of the group's aims, membership under the age of 16, and membership for the purpose of the obtaining food rations or other essentials of living.[48] >The nature of the conduct or belief that invokes the bar differs among these ideologies. For communists and totalitarians, the prohibited activities are membership and affiliation with relevant organizations,[49] the advocacy of relevant doctrines,[50] the publishing of relevant doctrines,[51] and the association with organizations that advocate or publish relevant doctrines.[52] The bar on communism forbids the advocacy of the establishment of communism in the United States, whereas the bar on totalitarianism forbids the advocacy of the establishment of totalitarianism anywhere in the world.[43][53] For advocates of assassination, government overthrow by force, destruction of property, and sabotage, the prohibited activities are advocacy,[54] writing and publishing materials that advocate,[51] and membership in an organization that publishes such materials.[55] >For any membership-related bar to come into operation, a court must find that the membership was a "meaningful association".[56][57][58][59] Simply putting one's name on party rolls is insufficient.[60] The individual must have affiliated with the party for primarily political reasons, and his activities in the party must evidence the individual's "awareness of the Party's political aspect".[57][60] Courts have found a lack of meaningful association in cases where members of trade unions or political movements are unaware the organizations are dominated by the communist party,[61][62] and even in cases where communist party members attended party meetings, paid dues, or ran the party's bookstore.[57][60] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_restrictions_on_naturalization_in_U.S._law#Current_ideological_restrictions_on_naturalization
>>1292140 >>1292143 Not OP, but you do realize Americans have a higher standard of living than most of the world right? Maybe not as high as, say, Sweden, but definitely higher than, say, Guatemala.
>>1292146 Yes but there is more to life than being able to afford a Mcmansion. Europe is better in pretty much every way.
>>1292147 America is also closer for a lot of people, especially Latin Americans. Besides, if you're from a third world country, the difference in living standards between America and Europe is not that big.
>>1292149 If you have no choice obviously but again there is more than just living standards. I wish I could leave but it's too hard for an American to move to Europe.
DSA is the largest organized socialist movement in the USA, and if you're not part of it you're irrelevant. DSA has many tendencies, including communist tendencies that you could join if you want.
>>1291478 >What is the difference between the Communist Party of the United States and the Party for Socialism and Liberation? Despite being a Marxist-Leninist party, PSL has never quite been able to shrug off their origins in the Workers World Party. It's an old saying that all of the Trotskyists who were influenced by Sam Marcy's ideas became neoconservatives by the 1980s and 1990s, and this came to a head in 2004. Chapters are mostly confined to major cities (and have sometimes been referred to as cults on account of the sheer number of youth organizers and resulting allegations of sexual abuse, as well as the party's education program spending organizational resources on social media "like" policing), but they've been slowly expanding into the hinterland. They are the second largest left wing party that are able to participate in elections (first being the Greens). AFAIK dues are the most expensive of any party in the US. I'd say that with PSL you either go hard or go home, but most of those dues probably go into Gloria La Riva's farcical presidential campaigns. They've been pretty good at organizing protests locally, however; two organizers in Colorado got v& last year which is unfortunate. CPUSA on the other hand are the OG party full of boomer communists. They are participating members of the IMCWP, which means they ostensibly have working relationships with AES states like Cuba, Vietnam, and China. Some of the oldest anti-communist legislation in the US still applies to them, barring members from re-entering the country and running candidates on virtually any level of government. Despite this I hear they're pretty comfy and normie. PCUSA split from them in 2016 because they weren't on the soviet larp bandwagon. Since the Trump-era they've tentatively aligned themselves with DSA/Justice Democrats; the loudest voices in the party seem to be Browderites (look into CPUSA's "Popular Front" strategy during the Great Depression, "Communism is 20th Century Americanism" type stuff), but without any of the mass organizations they had 80+ years ago. This didn't stop them from publicly showing support for Biden (awful!). They reestablished the Young Communist League as of last year, and I hear they're looking to challenge the laws barring them from running candidates again, which sounds nice.
>>1291478 >I am going to emigrate to the United States in a few months Why?
>>1292363 It doesn't matter whether you are in a "communist" caucus within the DSA, you still end up sheepdogging people back into the Democratic Party because that's the platform they're running on, a right-wing bourgeois party.
>>1292694 Don't listen to this guy. Join the DSA but help them create a path towards an independent party.
>>1292985 Why not just join an independent party instead if appealing to an organization inside the Democratic Party?
>>1293011 All the independent parties are pretty irrelevant in American politics. The only one that is kinda relevant is the Green Party. The DSA already has a decent membership (although less than the Green Party) and has a lots of elected officials, including a few in Congress (the Green Party can't boast this). What I think needs to happen is for their to be a conference of left-wing organizations to discuss the formation of a big-tent left-wing party that can challenge the two major parties. Here are some organizations that I think should be involved: -Democratic Socialists of America -Green Party of the United States -Movement for a People's Party -Our Revolution -Sunrise Movement -AFL–CIO -Change to Win Federation -Industrial Workers of the World -Extinction Rebellion -Anti-fascists -Communist Party USA -Party for Socialism and Liberation -Socialist Alternative (Kshama Sawant's party) Once a new party has been formed with the backing of a number of existing left-wing organizations, there are two primary ways for the party to gain traction: -Pull progressive politicians out of the Democratic Party and into this new party. This can be done either by asking nicely or through coercion. Coercion would involve left-wing organizations threatening to withhold support for progressive politicians if they refuse to leave the Democratic Party and join the new party. -Run new candidates in uncompetitive elections. These can either be single-candidate elections (common at the local level) or elections in heavily Democratic districts where the spoiler effect isn't an issue. The only major hole I can think of in my plan is presidential elections. I have outlined ways the spoiler effect can be avoided in local, state, and congressional elections, but not in presidential elections. Before the new party is big enough to really challenge the Democrats, I am not sure if they should a) run presidential candidates in their own party, b) run presidential candidates through the Democratic party, or c) not run any presidential candidates at all.
Check out FRSO, they actually organize workers
>>1291478 >What is the difference between the Communist Party of the United States and the Party for Socialism and Liberation? different FBI field offices mostly :^)
>>1291478 join socialist alternative
>>1293080 Examples? >>1293208 They're just as irrelevant as all the other American Marxist parties and, worse, they're Trots.
>>1293214 >They're just as irrelevant as all the other American Marxist parties and, worse, they're Trots. They have someone in public office, Kshama Sawant. That is more than 99% of Marxist orgs in the US can say.
>>1292363 succdems
>>1293035 >electoralism lulz
>>1293379 >Another edgelord who thinks he's super kool because he doesn't vote I've said it before and I'll say it again. Supporting electoralism does not mean supporting only electoralism. You can combine electoralism with strikes and civil disobedience and other extra-electoral activities. Voting is but one part of a broader strategy to achieve social change.
>>1293301 he's just using "lol trots!" to dismiss SA i mean yeah american trotskyism has a fucking awful track record but any amount of good faith engagement with SA will reveal that it does not exhibit the same kind of pathologies typical of trotskyist orgs keeping kshama in office in fucking seattle, waging the successful minimum wage and tax amazon struggles, etc. would not have been possible otherwise
I don't really get the muh irrelevancy meme anyways I mean obviously succdem scum will only choose a communist party if it's already big and powerful enough to win their precious elections but why wouldn't actual principled communists join communist parties while they are still small and weak to help make the org grow stronger? I mean is not even like you can't join both class collaborating parties AND communist ones so why wouldn't you?
>>1293386 >Supporting electoralism does not mean supporting only electoralism. yeah but you voooting obssesed fuckers are the kind of people who will ideate some form of unification of all this political forces just for what? some liberal election where every other form of struggle is an afterthought? thats how you can see what they really care about
>>1293395 Because they don't wanna work towards having a good socialist party! They just wanna feel good about winning the war without having to do any of that boring administration and community work!
>>1293386 To add to this participating in electoralism does not equal support for it
>>1293395 > why wouldn't actual principled communists join communist parties while they are still small and weak to help make the org grow stronger? Because the bigger socdem parties are in a better starting position and thus have more potential > mean is not even like you can't join both class collaborating parties AND communist ones so why wouldn't you? That is an option
>>1291478 Check out the RCP revcom.org
>>1293633 Literal cult, worse than every other American org combined
Figured I'd mention that we're interested in running more candidates. Currently we have two local offices. Dunno if any PSL candidates have won elections or not. Anyways if any of y'all got questions about our party, feel free to ask.

Delete
Report

no cookies?
__divBanCaptcha_location__