[This appeal is printed here as it was received by the Party leadership–Ed.]
Last [early 1977], a meeting of the national youth and student commission was held. A meeting where we got into some key questions around the nature of the YCL, particularly its working class youth section. We talked, discussed and struggled over a number of points: from why it’s a necessity to form a YCL; the relationship between the youth and student sections; the name and many other topics. We pointed out a number of times at the meeting that these discussions were hampered by our not having practically set out to build the YCL. We stated that as this political task was taken up in the coming period and made into a material force in our youth work–these various points and struggles would be more living and grounded in the actual contradictions of building the overall struggles of youth and that certainly many new questions and ideas would come forward around it.
Since that time–we have moved ahead the work towards building a YCL and indeed the questions and struggles raised and gone through at that XXX meeting are much more living and rooted. A successful initial organizing meeting was held with over 5 to 1 ratio of working class youth to cadre–with a good deal of political struggle and unity developed over forming a YCL. Cores of working class youth have developed over these last six months–in XXX or XXX cities (we take up the work in around XXX cities). A steering committee-made up of mainly working class youth is leading the RSB and various youth groups towards the founding convention. The Young Red is becoming a regular newsletter–and sales are nearing the 7000 mark. Different forms of studying Marxism-Leninism among youth have been developed and now a centralized means of carrying out this task is being taken up. The work towards African Liberation Day (ALD) was very good among youth–and now a decent program of struggle has been developed for the summer around “Jobs for Youth.” And we confidently look towards a successful national demonstration and activity at Wall Street this August, which will follow with a major conference around the YCL–struggling out the nature of its founding convention and hammering out a last two month strategy on building it.
The point of all this–is not to say the work has moved ahead in a straight line. It certainly hasn’t. New difficulties and problems have arisen and same old ones still haven’t been fully resolved (and we’ll get into these in the course of the appeal). The point is that off the meeting in XXX, the building of a communist youth organization has been taken up. This has brought forward some communist youth who have taken the thing up as their own. More importantly, especially in terms of this paper, it has helped bring about a deepening of our political line–particularly on the nature of a young communist league, what are its political tasks, and how they can be carried out in the years ahead.
As Mao says in On Practice, “the problem of whether theory corresponds to objective reality is not and cannot be, completely solved in the movement of knowledge from the perceptual to the rational mentioned above. The only way to solve this problem completely is to redirect rational knowledge to social practice, apply theory to practice and see whether it can achieve the objectives one has in mind.”
This is important to emphasize because behind a great deal of our views around the name is the deeper understanding of the tasks and necessity of a YCL and a beginning grip on how it can carry them out. These points, which we’ve taken up, discussed, struggled over, and deepened have gone on throughout the student and youth sections of the party as we’ve taken up the building of the YCL. And none of these points are spoken to or referred to at all in the national bulletin. Rather it just speaks to points raised and discussed at a meeting in XXX–before we had really got the machinery going on building the YCL, before we had still taken up consistent work among working class youth in a number of cities.
Now, at this point off of six months of work, the main character of struggle and development of line on the commission around the YCL is not around why to form it, why it’s necessary, etc.–but rather, how it can carry out its various essential tasks and how can we move ahead to build it. We say “main” and not “only” because it would be politically naive to say that the “YIA line” is still not held by some comrades–and is unfortunately being strengthened and bolstered by the “RCY” proposal. But overall in the main, comrades have seen from building struggle among youth that a YCL is an organizational form that correctly corresponds to the material situation and contradictions youth face and the key vehicle to leading youth to carry out its revolutionary tasks as laid out in the Programme and MPR.
So we want to stress there’s a good deal of unity among comrades on the commission around forming a YCL–unity build [sic] off the practice and summation of the past period’s work since the January meeting. And it’s in the context of moving ahead to build the YCL that we oppose the proposed name.
We state this not to score high points on a ”sincere-ometer” or to purify ourselves from the “YIA line” by announcements and proclamations. We state this to stress that over the last 6 months a good deal has been learned on the necessity to form a YCL–and how it can go ahead and best carry out its tasks. And that these views and summations must be looked into and popularized throughout the party–especially the youth and student sections. And we stress this to hopefully avoid the vulgarization of some of the struggle around the name to simply those who want to build a YCL and those who do not. That if you really want a YCL, then you’ll want “Communist” in its name–and if not, then you don’t want one.
This vulgarization, could lead to major problems for 1) it will fail to unite with the great many comrades in the youth and student work who see the necessity of the YCL–the necessity of popularizing socialism and communism, and training new young communists– but oppose the name RCY because it’s a fetter in carrying out these tasks; 2) even more importantly it will lead to a failure to deepen our line on the political purposes of forming a YCL, its tasks, and how it can go about accomplishing them in the best possible manner– which is further going on now off the controversy and disagreement around the name.
We here on the student and youth commission unanimously (other than its chair) feel that the proposed name will be a serious and major setback for our work among working class youth–and a more modest step backward for the party’s student work. [As is now clear, this paper was inspired in large part by this “chair”–Ed.] We feel that it’s a proposal that reflects a mistaken view on the character of the YCL–a mass communist organization or an advanced mass organization–and not a junior part A proposal that will fail to allow the YCL to openly lead the struggles of youth but will bring on what Lenin once said about the phrasemakers– “the riot of phrase-making and the timidity of deed.” As it will lead to second level organizations being the main forms of organizations that will lead the struggles of youth–“Jobs for Youth” committees, police repression committees. A proposal that will lead to the failure of offering the other road of socialism and truly popularize communism among the broad masses of youth–which will in turn spill over into the broad section of the American people. And a proposal that will fail to allow the YCL to bring forward new youth into its organization-to whom socialism will be a whole new outlook and view–where they could come in and learn what communism is all about.
In short, we see the proposal of RCY as a fetter to the YCL carrying out its critical tasks. A fetter on its ability to openly lead the struggle of youth. A fetter on its ability to offer and popularize socialism and communism. And a fetter to its critical tasks of bringing forward and training new communists.
We do not make these statements lightly. At this student and youth commission are the leaders of the student and youth work in every area that it is taken up (save XXX and XXX that are absent). Many of us have put long years into taking up the party’s task of building communist organization among students, recruitment into the party, etc. and more recently in carrying out similar tasks among youth. And we have, over the years, found the particular guidance of the center to the student and youth work extremely helpful and correct as well as, of course, in its overall leadership of the party. But we do feel a serious mistake is being made.
We feel there are two fundamental questions involved. The first is the nature of the Young Communist League as an organization. What are its tasks? What is meant by advanced mass organization? Why a Young communist organization must have these two aspects to correctly speak to the material contradictions and problems of youth? Why there will be big problems if our youth organization takes on only one of these aspects? The second point is how this organization which is strategically necessary can carry out its tasks–of openly leading struggle, offering and popularizing the road of socialism and communism and bringing forward new communists–to the sons and daughters of the working class that have been without socialism for twenty or thirty years.
These two major points, and they have a number of facets and aspects to them–will be what this paper will focus on. We are XXX comrades who have been asked by the student and youth commission to sum up the points of the commission meeting–and we too have further discussed and deepened the points made at the meeting. We are hoping to help deepen and develop the points made at the meeting. We are hoping to help deepen and develop the whole party’s understanding of the tasks and necessity of a YCL, inform the leadership of a number of lessons learned around the critical points mentioned above, and to get the name “RCY” reconsidered, further investigated and changed.
As one can easily see, this paper goes on for quite a while–it’ll probably go 15 pages before it’s through. We know that leading comrades are busy and wading through long papers can certainly be a pain in the ass. We’ve tried to keep this paper as short as possible–and we discussed taking sections out. But we are sure that this name proposal is a mistake, will mean a big loss in getting the YCL off the ground, hurt the struggle of the working class and its party–that we felt it was important to get a number of points out deeply and seriously.
We are also focusing this paper mainly on the working class youth section of the YCL. This is the section that we feel will most seriously be affected by the RCY proposal. The student section will not nearly be so affected for reasons that we’ll get into–though we do feel it will be somewhat held back from carrying out its tasks (and we’ll explain that too).
We are confident that this paper and struggle will deepen all of our understanding in how to build struggle and organization among youth–as well as more broad points and questions of Marxism. We are confident that a correct decision will be reached. Our unanimous proposal for a name is Revolutionary Youth Brigade.
One of the key points behind the struggle around the name–is the very nature of the YCL as an organization. Around this question there has already been a good deal of struggle–particularly in terms of its description as an “advanced mass organization”–a description that the student and youth commission unites around. Some say that they don’t understand this question and the relationship of these two aspects in one organization. Others are more openly metaphysical and say it’s impossible to have an organization with these two aspects. And finally there’s some who say “Yes, you can have these two aspects, but that’s not what a YCL is about.”
So let’s get it all straightened out. What do we mean by an advanced mass organization or a communist mass organization? We mean that the YCL stands for socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat, links this up to the many struggles that it builds, openly applies Marxism-Leninism to the struggle and takes up the study of Marxism. It stands with and supports the RCP–who politically leads it. These are the characteristics that define its communist character and are the principal aspect of its political and organizational existence, mark its differences with other mass organizations the party builds and mark similarities to the party. On the other hand, the YCL is the main form of organization which is to lead the struggles of youth (though it will certainly form fronts and mass organizations from time to time mainly around particular battles), and it is the organization that we call on advanced people to immediately join–open to all who want to work with it, generally agree with its program, pay dues, carry out consistent work, etc. It is an organization where the new advanced come in to “learn communism” and most are not even communist when they join. Both these aspects differ from those of the party–the main form to lead the mass struggle, the main form to bring new forces into, and the level of their political development upon joining, this defines its mass character.
Now of course, these are not the only qualities and aspects of a YCL–only very simple things are made up of two aspects. There is also the contradiction of communist and youth which the CC Report speaks to–and we have to take that up in terms of the cultural and social front, the character of its study and meetings, its role of leading youth to be a single spark to all of society etc. And we will speak to these different aspects in the paper–particularly the task of leading youth to be a single spark and what that has to do with the task of popularizing socialism and communism.
Historically there has been a great deal of struggle around this point of advanced mass or mass communist, and a trace of history of different YCL’s and the Young Communist International–will see quite a few flips around these two aspects. Breaking through the middle has not historically been the easiest task. For the concept of “advanced mass organization” did not originate in the student and youth commission of the RCP. It was developed by the Comintern in the late 20’s and early 30’s when the various YCLs and the Comintern are continually speaking to the tendency of the YCLs to be junior parties–refusing to go out and lead the struggles of youth, and demanding people to be full-blown communists to join an organization, which is to give people the opportunity to “learn communism.” As we said the struggle to develop this form of organization runs throughout the history of the Young Communist International–to the mid-thirties. It’s particularly sharp after its 2nd Congress in 1923 and the reports of its executive committee–as this was the key period for formulating the YCL’s political and organizational unity–off of a few years of consistent worldwide experience.
But the following are different quotes from 6 different YCI Congresses–bringing out how this was not a line of the particular period, but ran throughout the building of Young Communist Leagues. They are 6 quotes out of many hundreds that could be picked out of YCI or individual YCL’s materials that go into this point.
These comrades who made fun of the slogan of to the masses were the very ones who were the farthest from the young workers; they tried to shut themselves up in little debating clubs as ’pure’ revolutionaries, afraid to lose their ’communist clarity’ by coming in contact with the noncommunist youth workers. They discussed and discussed their problems but have never grasped the real meaning of a mass organization, of the necessity of taking an active part in the daily struggles of young workers .. .
A mass organization means that we gather into our ranks the largest number of class conscious or partially class conscious young workers and that, furthermore, we exert a steady influence on the broad mass of young workers who for some reason or other we don’t get into our ranks. It also means that all our work must be such as to stir us on to take part in all phases of the life of the young workers. 1922
The Italian comrades were criticized because their League had not thrown open widely, its doors to the masses of young workers. The tendency had been to band by themselves. Hereafter the Italian League was instructed to strive to become a mass organization and not to fear ’contamination’ by the not yet fully communist Youth. 1924
In drawing up the Economic Program, the Young Communist International lays one of its most important stones which will result, first, in greater work of the Leagues directly on the industrial field–in the shops, mills, unions, etc., secondly, in attracting thus the mass of young workers to the Young Communist League of Workers Leagues, and hence realizing the aim of the Young Communist International–to become mass organizations. 1925
The Young Communist Leagues must become Mass Organizations–this the task set before the Young Communist International and the Leagues. To become mass bodies of the young workers, the Leagues must throw open their ranks to the young workers, class conscious and not, break with sectarianism and enter into all the activities and lives of the young workers. By waging the struggle for the bettering of the economic conditions of the youth, by fighting capitalist militarism, by striving for their education and physical upbuilding, by seeking to bring the wage-slave, peasantry, and the children of the workers into the Young Communist Organizations and into their activities–by becoming organizations for Militant Education of the youth, only thus could the slogan of the Second World Congress, ’To the Masses’ be realized. 1928
The Chinese also stressed the relationship of these two aspects to the student trip that went over there over two years ago–where they did investigation of the YCL. And it has been on this principal of “advanced mass organization”–with advanced or communist being principal–that the RSB has been consciously built. It has been in its internal newsletter a number of times describing its political and organizational unity and was a key discussion point put out to the Brigade in the August 1975 newsletter–that set the discussion up on the YCL–at the founding convention in November 1975.
Now, why do we form organizations like this among the strata of youth. This is a question that is often asked and while we’ve hammered this out at a number of commission meetings–it’s never been fully summed up why YCLs are a strategically important weapon for the working class victory in the class war.
It’s not simply because it’s a good “idea” to have one and that they’ve been built since the turn of the century. Not simply because large quick doses of Marxism are needed to consolidate advanced youth. Not because someone decided it was the historic task of youth to turn around the broad masses of peoples’ views of communism. And not because there’s a need to create an insurance policy against rightism in the youth work.
No, for with all the varying degrees of merit to these points, they miss the mark as to what’s the basis for forming them. The basis, of course, is the material contradictions that the broad millions of youth face which create the necessity for an organization that is “advanced mass.” Contradictions that provide the basis and necessity for an organization that will not only take up and lead the many immediate battles of youth but also offer another road and future for youth to take up as they face a certain crossroads of their life. And contradictions that demand an organization for youth provide a vehicle and opportunity for youth to serve the proletariat–using their skills and energy for the class war–and not what the schools and society generally do–train them to be the slaves and servants of the bourgeoisie.
Let’s go through what those actual contradictions and conditions are–then we’ll talk about why it’s crucial to have an organization that develops the relationship of advanced and mass.
We know the many immediate hardships that youth face–both as youth and as part of the overall American people–unemployment, drugs, neighborhoods rotting, hardships and difficulties. On top of this millions of youth are also facing the burning question of what the hell they are going to do with their lives.
For years they have been trained to be the future wage slaves of the bourgeoisie. Now, as they are becoming so, they are not only trying to avoid the pitfalls of unemployment, the army, drugs, crime, etc., as they’re also looking for one way or another to start off and develop a decent life, to find a way they can use their skills, make a contribution to society, etc.
Lenin, in all his writings on youth, points out that the bourgeoisie is constantly offering its hundred different futures to youth–all of which are the road to hell. And that the proletariat in turn should offer its future to youth.
The Programme also speaks to this point in the section under youth starting, “But the most basic problem the masses of young people face is the fact that imperialism is unable to offer them a life with a purpose.” The youth need an organization that will not only lead them in fighting around different issues– but takes up this question which is the sharpest one of all that youth face.
This is the fundamental reason why young communist leagues have been developed throughout the 20th century and why we must be “advanced mass” to openly lead and develop the struggles of youth, to help create another pole–another road and future for the broad millions of youth, and give the youth a chance while they’re checking out what the hell they’re going to do with their lives–to take up Marxism-Leninism and give them a vehicle to use their energy and skills and ability to serve the working class.
No organization taking up the struggles of youth can possibly fully speak to the qualities and needs of youth if it does not–in addition to getting out and fighting for the needs of the people–speak to this major contradiction and problems facing millions of youth, offering them a future and a road where they put their lives to the best possible use. No better example of this is some of the strengths of the BPP [Black Panther Party] –who mobilized a large number of youth–and popularized among Black youth that they should devote their lives to being liberators and freedom fighters. Now all this, of course, must come out as the YCLs take up the many facets of life that affect youth–from the overall way society’s going, the major political and social questions of the day, economic hardships and attacks, to cultural and social questions that particularly affect youth. As one comrade said, the YCL has to take this out as it covers everything from “Africa to acne.” Once again we’d like to add Africa and building struggle is principal.
Now of course, none of this will happen overnight-that youth will see this other pole–this other way of going with their lives than the 100 dead ends that the bourgeoisie offers. It will only occur as the YCL ties in with and leads repeated struggles on different fronts and links it up with the different aspects and needs of youth. And the broad masses of youth make continual comparisons with other roads that are out there. Along with, of course, as the CC report points out, changes in the objective conditions. The important thing here, is the necessity of openly offering its road to youth and developing a pole around this major contradiction that youth face and seeing this as a critical task for our youth work–and a major responsibility for the YCL. This is why the YCL should be developed–as best and as much as is possible–to become the open leading force taking up the big battles of youth and the American people.
This question is particularly important given the name proposal. For when comrades have raised how the name RCY will be a fetter on our ability to openly lead struggle, popularize socialism, etc., we suddenly get told of the wonders of second level organizations, mass committees and coalitions . . . and how these forms of organization will be much more “in” during the future and the importance of the YCL openly leading struggle is downplayed. Despite this defying any experience on the campuses and neighborhoods over the last couple of years, we ask the center–who is to speak to the major contradiction that youth face–what the hell are they going to do with their life and what the future holds if we don’t strive for the YCL to do this. Who the hell are we supposed to be raising socialism to–the people in the mass committee. Is someone seriously going to suggest we can do this mainly through propaganda while we do our work through second level organizations. How is this turning the broad millions of people’s views around about socialism and communism. Why not strive to make the YCL the main form of organization to lead struggle among the youth? Why leave the major contradiction that the millions of youth face out there only for the bourgeoisie to speak to?
So far we’ve only spoken to the aspect of the YCL concerning leading struggle–now we must focus in on the aspect which requires some deeper summations–its task of training young communists and becoming a center for youth to “learn communism.” Providing a vehicle for young people–who are looking for a place to use and develop their skills, lead productive lives, contribute to society, etc.–to do just that, by learning Marxism and fighting for the working class. As talked about before–the necessity for an organization to do that flows from the contradictions youth face. Being trained as the future wage slaves, the youth look one place after another often quickly changing their minds over what the hell they are going to do with themselves. The YCL has to speak to this contradiction and bring forward those who check out fighting the bourgeoisie or a particular attack–so that they will start to learn what this world is about, their class interests and future lie, etc.
Mainly, this is a question of developing the youth politically and ideologically to see the need to use their life to fight the bourgeoisie as they take up and lead the fight against the bourgeoisie. It also means tapping the various skills youth develop–whether cultural, mechanical, studies, sports, etc., and using them to aid the fight against the capitalists!
Now in handling this task the YCL has an important and difficult contradiction to work out around the relationship of “advanced mass”–one that the YCL will live or die on over whether it is to become a true training ground for young communists. For the YCL must have the ability to open its doors for new young activists–who know little to nothing about communism– but want to lead youth to fight the bourgeoisie and study and learn communism (and this is where the overwhelming majority of new “advanced youth” will be at). While at the same time it must weld within its own ranks firm political unity around a Marxist line and continuing to move forward and train the youth in Marxism-Leninism. Let’s go through some of the major points that go along with this: the relationship of advanced and mass; why advanced or communist must be principle; why one-sidedness around this relationship is the road to hell.
Throughout the history of the Brigade and now in some ways our youth work there has been both positive and negative experience in working out this relationship and avoiding one-sidedness.
One-sidedness in terms of advanced or communist leads to our developing the contradiction of communist and youth or student into an antagonistic one. One-sidedness in terms of mass leads to a failure to train the advanced communist membership, and the new forces as well–which over a period of time will often lead them to dropping out so you lose the mass character as well. Here, we are going to point out a few ways this stuff can come out. The next section will speak to how we can break through.
In the Brigade from time to time and this will differ in degree from one area to another there’s been big struggles on closing the door off from new activists getting involved, building struggle, learning Marxism, allowing the new forces to come in and learn communism, etc. This will come out in a great many ways from the character of the regular meetings: demanding one to be well schooled in Marxism to even get a sense of what’s going on; the feeling you got to put 40 hours a week into the revolution and no longer be a student; lack of teaching new forces fundamentals of Marxism as they come forward. The most sharply the above comes out is that the new forces coming forward see an antagonistic contradiction between being a student and a communist–which is death for a communist youth organization.
This has been a continual battle waged in the Brigade (and we have made good progress on this point). At this meeting we’ve also seen some of the same tendencies come up in some of our best youth groups, Philadelphia and the Bay Area. Part of this is due to the fact that in the recent period there’s been a lot of struggle around raising people’s understanding and unity around Marxism and the YCL, and also because there’s a tendency in doing this to raise people’s rational understanding of the laws of this system, why revolution not reform, but not to return this to revolutionary practice to take up and resolve the many particular contradictions that exist.
This did set off a tendency where the youth groups were demanding that new forces be full-blown communists to join–rather than seeing the groups as key vehicles to sweep the new activists through the OHIO. And where new people were going demanded to be full-time revolutionaries to get involved, move to new neighborhoods, etc. Once begun this resulted in many of the youth stating they saw becoming a communist antagonistically with still being a youth–where they had to immediately give up all the things they had been doing for years and years–whether it was where they hung out and lived, spend some of their time and being out with friends, etc. In both these cities the groups tended to stagnate and isolate themselves from the youth. And the worst of both worlds was developing as we were getting nowhere with “advanced” or “mass.” The advanced were not developing as communists because having had their understanding of M-L raised it was being developed as a guide to return to revolutionary practice and bringing new forces forward–it was becoming a barrier to taking up revolutionary practice and bringing new forces forward. And of course no new members came around and the mass character of the groups floundered.
However, a one-sided war against making our communist organization “mass” does not help a thing. The greater error in the youth work has been towards only mass and not advanced. Over the past year the greater struggle has been to move people through the OHIO and not into the first O. In a number of cities there have been different points where some youth have come forward only to lose them. Through the first 6 months as we’ve more systematically struggled to sum up and handle this contradiction we’ve managed to make some decent breakthroughs and consolidate cores of youth in a number of cities. Key here, is grasping that the YCL as a training ground must continue to move the youth forward through the OHIO as rapidly as possible– as it develops the YCL as a firm communist organization that’s politically united. This is both possible and necessary because of the characteristics of youth talked to in the national bulletin about going through quick political and ideological changes and that if we fail to do this how we’ll lose the advanced youth. Though we should not isolate this “relatively quicker to change” from the overall social motion going on in society. As we’ll get into for most Brigade members it’s usually a period of 6 weeks to 2 months when people leap to taking up the stand, viewpoint and method of Marxism–if the Brigade is functioning well. And it looks about the same in terms of the youth as well.
This is sharpened up as we get a grip on those working class youth who are right now taking up the YCL. For instance, right now we are launching discussions and summations over the nature of the working class youth who are developing as the foundation of the YCL. At this point it appears that we are mainly attracting working class youth–who are trying to pull themselves up, develop a skill, education, etc.,–very possibly get out of the working class. These youth are coming out of the heart of working class neighborhoods but they tend to be the ones going to skill centers, community colleges, etc. (once again we want to point out that this is very preliminary and that we don’t have a grip as yet on the relationship of our line and this social base).
For youth such as these-youth with the bigger than the normal youth’s aspirations–the question of political and ideological development and consolidation is absolutely critical. For over a period of time or a wave of activity–the question of revolution, what you’re going to do with your life, etc. comes into contradiction with–graduating from nursing school and having the chance to be a nurse, becoming a mechanic, the life of a worker under capitalism. Youth In Action does not provide this alternative. Clearly the YCL must be developed so that it does and this will be a critical task confronting it–particularly at its early stages of development as it struggles to further build up its working class foundation. To both bring the people into the first O-and through the OHIO. Now, we’re going to get into a few points to help point out how this relationship is developed and why one-sidedness will cause us a big pain in the ass.
Back in 1921 Lenin speaking to the Young Communist International stated that Young Communist Leagues are centers for young people to come and “learn communism.” It differs from the Party in the sense of how Party members go through a leap upon joining to taking up the stand, viewpoint and method of Marxism (though we all know no one stands still at that point). The YCL members, when they first join, are still in the quantity stage moving towards Marxism.
Most will come forward and check out the YCL because they dug the way it took up a particular struggle, social or political question, etc. Some will come forward because of its overall stand on turning things upside down. Some will come forward because of friends, brothers and hopefully if we can get the thing ripping someday, social momentum, etc. People will come forward and check the thing out for many of these reasons -for some it will be 1 or 2, for others there will be more interpenetration. For all these people will be in motion towards Marxism–but certainly not communists when they join. A statement by the 5th Congress of the YCI talks to this–during the late 20’s when the Comintern was in its “left” period–about when the YCL’s got their work going well. And the quotes run down earlier also speak to this point.
It will draw into its ranks not only those youth who consider themselves communists or sympathizers, but also those more progressive and radical youth who are becoming class conscious, who are ready to learn about, study, and fight for socialism, who are willing to unite with us in building non-party communist youth leagues. (YCI, 5th Congress)
The experience of the RSB has certainly borne this out. Our experience is that when the RSB is going well–say like when it was building African Liberation Day–and new members are coming forward, maybe only 70% of the membership fully considers itself communist. Usually, in this period, it’s after about 6 weeks to 2 months of constant work in the Brigade do members consciously start to look at themselves as communists. The people certainly are in motion towards it, checking it out, studying it, seeing how it can be a material force in changing the world–but they haven’t taken up communism yet and are not ready to call themselves communists–though they’ll say they’re in the Brigade and what it’s about.
Anyone who thinks this isn’t true we would have to call an idealist, a candidate for an award once offered to some of us for proposing the building of a YCL (the Hegel award), denies quantity leads to qualitative changes and vulgarizes to the point of absurdity how youth will take things up quickly. Not only that–we think that it’s a good thing when stuff like what was going on during African Liberation Day is happening. Where the Brigade’s going out as a communist organization and taking up the big battles among the people– and bringing forward new advanced fighters who want to learn some new things and brought into the Brigade where they can learn communism. This is what a mass communist youth organization is all about!
However, there are some critically important points here that must be gone into. For a vulgar interpretation of above would lead to major errors–and in developing the Brigade as a mass communist organization the student and youth commission has had a great deal of struggle and a certain amount of development and deepening of line and basically come down to what’s principal, advanced or mass, communist or mass. An eclectic view on this would be death–just like a metaphysical one.
For the task of developing the organization as “advanced mass” or “mass communist,” a place for new forces to learn Marxism, cannot mean that the functioning of the organization can be geared mainly to the relatively backward–the new forces checking out Marxism, seeing what the organization is about, etc. This was a major struggle in our commission that went on last winter and up and down the student branches– what should regular Brigade chapter meetings and the organization as a whole be geared to–the questions and view of the new forces coming forward, or the political tasks of the Brigade as a communist organization. The former led to nothing but big problems. Chapter meetings time and again getting caught up only in discussion of human nature, the working class, China, Russia, etc. While the political struggles on the campuses, major social questions of the day, were not taken up at all. Once again we have nothing but the worst of both worlds–the new advanced “masses” do not mainly learn Marxism through meeting one week after another on China, human nature, etc. And never seeing how the political line of Marxism can be a material force to change the world. And the organization as a whole breaks down as Well–as it never struggles and develops line for the struggles it’s engaged in, the present political situation, etc. All this then has to go on outside the regular organization (Brigade or youth) mainly by Party members–with no ones initiative getting released at all and a host of other problems. The whole group breaks down and becomes a training ground for no one.
How did we break through and move forward? By gearing the regular chapter meetings–mainly made up of the general communist membership but with the new advanced forces who should and must come to check it out–to the political tasks of the Brigade. Making them centers to struggle and develop political line on the immediate struggles involved, the major political and social questions of the day, our political tasks and plans and policies on how to carry this out. This of course should be developed so the new forces know what’s happening and can actually add their experiences –building off their strength of being “fresh” from the masses. Then the general members–along with the advanced–go out and make their political fine and ideas a material force to change the world–then further sum it up, etc. As people start to see and learn how to use Marxism to grasp necessity and then use this understanding as a material force.
It was in carrying out these principles developed last XXX [time of meeting referred to earlier] in building the Brigade as a mass communist organization that the RSB consolidated itself as strong communist cores at the chapter level better than ever before, as well as showed its best growth since the Party formed and for the first time became a multinational organization beyond one area of the country. On top of this we’ve developed political education for the general membership around popular questions of the day–Africa, international situation and 3 worlds, national question, unemployment, etc. As well as points like the CC report, forming the IWO, etc. All this is done up and down the Brigade and we ask the Center to investigate any area to check it out. It’s all directed so that the general membership bringing along the new forces come forward and are around us, want and are able to take up the Brigade and Marxism as their own as the vehicle and means to leading social change both in terms of the immediate social abuses and in terms of turning this whole world upside down.
Related to all this is a recent summation by the theoretical team in student work that formulated the task of both teaching new forces the ABC’s of Marxism and moving the general membership of the Brigade on a theoretical escalator. That in the Brigade we have to much more take on the task of moving people beyond the initial leap to Marxism over that 6 week to 2 month period talked to before. In other words in addition to schooling the new forces in the ABC’s of Marxism, we also have to start developing people’s understanding of the DEF’s and LMN’s of Marxism. And of course those grounded in the LMN’s will be better able to push forward the overall work of the Brigade and provide new forces to teach the ABC’s. Much of this has been launched over the summer and is off to a good start. We again ask those to investigate who feel that we don’t want the Brigade or youth to function as a communist organization.
The key through all this training as communists is to make advanced principal–develop the YCL as a communist organization to carry out ’its tasks to change the world, but do this in a way where new forces openly called on and developed to come forward, learn what M-L is about and see it as a vehicle to change the world. This doesn’t mean you don’t have specific activities toward the new forces at any one time–you certainly do. But we’re talking about the general way the group should function and bring forward new communists-while training those already in the YCL.
You can’t close the door and not allow people to come forward. As Mao says, “We want people to join the revolution.” The YCL must open its doors to the advanced–give the young advanced fighters a chance to fight the bourgeoisie, learn about communism and become Marxist-Leninists. But it must do this as it actually functions as a communist organization, struggles to develop political line and unity, takes on political education, theory, etc. and continues to move the advanced forward. In our work in the Brigade we have found a correct relationship between these two aspects with advanced as principal–leads to the best of both worlds. One-sidedness on either of these aspects leads to the worst of both worlds.
All these points are much more developed in our student work than our youth work because of uneven development–and the fact that the Brigade has existed as a communist organization for the last 2 years. But many of these points and principles are being applied to the youth work, with more consistency over the summer and as the groups take up the jobs campaign and head towards the convention. And we can see that off the campaign around Wall St. came the consolidation of cores of new communist youth in 3 or 4 cities. This came off 1) struggling to develop the youth groups as centers for the development of political line around the unemployment campaign and other social and political questions (Humboldt Park, neutron bombs, etc.); 2) the promotion of communist ideals as to what young people should do with their lives–serve the people, etc. and speak to their aspirations of wanting to contribute to society, the people, etc.; 3) taking up the study of Marxism-Leninism in a popular way–which we’ve organized on a national basis. Again we’d like the Center to sum this up–communist cores have been developed in a number of cities–by applying the principles spoken to above.
One last point to help clarify the relationship of advanced and mass and the nature of the YCL. Often the RCY proponents state that all the members of the YCL should move on to the Party. We think that if this occurs the Party is making a mistake in building organization among youth. A well functioning YCL will have its members go mainly three ways as they get older and more fully enter society on their own. The best will be recruited into the Party–and we of course have to bring as many forward as possible to do so. Others will continue in certain revolutionary activity-most probably in fits and starts, often depending on the objective conditions. And certainly a number will drop out at least temporarily of activity completely– hopefully a little better off in terms of knowledge and experience for the days ahead when the class struggle will be more intense. Again, we don’t think that’s a bad thing–that’s a good thing that speaks to the character and nature of the group. Of course, we want to maximize through our work–that as much as possible given the objective conditions–the first of the above results occur. But if the YCL does its work well–all three different roads will get taken–even when we’re under socialism.
One last point while we’re talking about the nature of the organization to lead the working class youth. We’ve all been through the various material and social reasons why youth are rebellious, tend to take things up quickly and more boisterously than others, capable of making quicker leaps, etc. The task of the YCL as the mass organization to lead the youth is to openly tap that quality. This is both in terms of waging general mass struggle–and youth playing their role as single spark to all society. The role Mao speaks to in May 4th Movement. The role youth are now playing in Soweto. The role youth and students played in the anti-war movement and the Black Liberation struggle.
And as has been pointed out to us–and is often one of the main arguments for the name “RCY” it will be an important task of the youth and students to raise the banners of socialism and communism to the broad masses of people. We totally agree. The question is how –and we’ve got to get into that in this next section.
Okay, so over these last few pages we’ve struggled to put straight out what a YCL is about, what are the critical tasks it must carry out and why must it develop as an “advanced mass” or mass communist organization. And that its failure to do so will be a failure to speak to the contradictions and problems youth face.
Now let’s talk about how we can have this organization carry out these tasks, and what the name’s got to do with it. So we can see why young Communist Leagues [sic] have been built by communist parties since the turn of the century, and how they flow from the material contradictions that capitalism creates. Our task is to build one here in the United States in 1977– an organization that leads the youth to fight the big battles, offers the future of the working class and socialism to youth, becomes a training ground for young. Marxists–takes up the various social and cultural questions of youth, leads youth to play their role of single spark to all of society whether around a particular struggle, advanced idea, etc.
First we’d like to make a few points about names in general. Now of course someone could argue that a name is not that key and what’s crucial is how you apply the mass line, build struggle, unite the advanced, etc. Of course there’s a lot of truth to this point and in the final analysis the name ain’t going to mean shit if these things aren’t carried out well. But a name can help or hurt a group’s work–in what it immediately throws off, the image it projects, etc.
On the other side it’s important to watch for the flip side of this line–that the name means everything. And that the name becomes a dividing line on whether or not a group is genuinely communist or is going to popularize communism or not. This simply defies experience. The RSB has been successful at proving this the case. It has become a well known communist force on many campuses. Even recognized by the Trots as the leading “socialist” group on the campuses today. It brings communist ideas to hundreds of thousands of students during the course of a school year. It popularizes Marxism and offers to students who are fed up with capitalism a whole new way to go. It’s been a consistent source of recruitment for years. And it always leads or is part of–a lot of struggle on the campuses. Calling itself revolutionary has not held it down from those tasks–as we’ll get into later–we think it’s helped it. There’s many other examples we could go into from this country and internationally–SDS, Vietnamese Workers Party, Albanian Party of Labor, and dozens of YCL’s–that have not had the name communist.
So in approaching the name we can’t look at it from a) it doesn’t matter as long as you practice the mass line or b) do you really want this to be a communist organization or not. We have to approach it from the point of view of which name will best put forward the group–what it’s about, and enable it to carry out its tasks–including popularizing socialism and communism.
One last thing while we’re on the subject of names. Despite the common belief, “Young Communist League” is not the “sacred cow” of names for the YCL’s. The main period that the YCL’s were named this was from [19] 25 to 36, and even then there were at least a dozen Young Workers Leagues in the Young Communist International. And many YCL’s had different names at different points. For instance, in China the YCL was launched in 1928 and was called the Communist Youth League. In 1935 it was changed to the New Democratic Youth Cores [sic], while still remaining the communist youth organization of the party “for all youth who wanted to learn and apply Marxism-Leninism and build the class struggle on the political, economic, social and cultural front.”
While there’s no clear overall summation as to why the change in name, the different scraps we’ve pulled together from New China Quarterlys, Belden’s “[China] Shake [s] the World” and a few other readings point out that the name change was part of the overall summations of the three left lines in the party in the prior period. Its name was changed back to communist Youth League [sic] in 1949 after the seizure of state power.
Our line on this overall period in the U.S. was developed and deepened a great deal by the CC report. It’s since been further deepened as we’ve used it as a guide in our political work, in discussions with the advanced, in further publications like the UWO pamphlet, and in many other ways.
The beginning of the breakdown of bourgeoisification of the working class–a period of growing economic and political attacks. A period no longer of rising expectations of the working class but anger and concern over when the hell all this is going to stop. As the CC report characterized “It is a period marked by struggle, including growing working class resistance, especially to attacks on living standards, but of scattered struggles and a great deal of confusion.”
And this is all borne out clearly when we look at the situation and struggles of working class youth. Entering into a situation of stiffening and worsening conditions. A far cry from the Happy Days image of the 50’s and early 60’s–with no room to even enter the Working class and become wage slaves as the economy stagnates–with 20, 30, and 40% unemployment in different towns. The cities and neighborhoods rot as youth wonder not only where the hell they’re going to work in the future–where the hell are they going to live, drugs, military, we could goon and on. It’s very clear–working class youth, especially minorities are entering into a very rough situation.
Right now, in the face of all this, most youth are somehow trying to pick up a skill, get a job and squeeze through a decent life. The community colleges, skill centers, and nursing schools are at a record high. Military enlistments are also at a record high. “Hustle” is taken up by those who have no “normal means” of eking out a decent life. There’s a tremendous amount of confusion among youth as to what the hell they’re going to do with their lives, what society is all about, etc. With aspirations relatively lower than those of the 60’s–more now in terms of how it is possible to somehow get a decent life.
Now it’s clear that many of these things will hit a brick wall (trying to pick up skills, etc.), they already are somewhat–and this leads to even greater frustration and anger. And of course there will continue to be struggle such as Humboldt Park and responses to various police murders around the country brought out. The point we are trying to briefly make is that the situation of youth cannot be separated from our overall summation of the period–both what we sum up in the CC report and what we sum up in the IWO pamphlet.
But this is not just a question of struggle–how much have people fought over the last year or two. And then deciding what our name should be. For as the CC report brings out, while the general overall motion will be to worsening conditions, greater struggles and confrontation–this does not go in a straight line–but rather in a spiral which twists and turns.
The point is to grasp the overall period. Bourgeoisification beginning to break down. A period of growing but scattered struggle–and confusion. And most importantly–particularly in terms of developing a young communist organization–the working class is entering this period having been without socialism for 20 or 30 years.
Let’s remember what Engels said about England– when bourgeoisification was beginning to break down– a quote that is often used when talking about the situation in the U.S.
The truth is this: during the period of England’s industrial monopoly the English working class has to an extent shared the benefits of that monopoly. These benefits were very unequally parcelled out among them; the privileged minority pocketed most, but even the great mass had a temporary share now and then. And that is the reason since the dying out of Owenism there has been no socialism in England. With the breakdown of that monopoly the English working class will lose that privileged position; it will find itself generally–the privileged and leading minority excepted–on a level with its fellow workers abroad. And that is the reason why there will be socialism again in England. (Engels, “England in 1845 and in 1885”)
For the past 20 to 30 years the bourgeoisie, off its material base as the top capitalist power, has been beating the shit out of socialism and communism. It has been aided in this process by the degeneration and fascist activity of the Soviet Union and the lack of a proletarian party and class conscious section of workers. There has been no need for our bourgeoisie to rule or lead the people through any other political parties other than the 2 clear cut bourgeois parties. This of course is a marked difference from most capitalist countries–where the working class is more class conscious and has a long history of independent political movements, and various sorts of socialists and communists leading them.
This is not to speak to this question statically or one-sidedly. For already the process Engels tells about is underway. Certainly there is great cynicism and distrust in our government and leaders since the 1930’s. Certainly people are seeing things going to hell–getting angered and frustrated and wondering when it’s going to stop. And certainly there is already a growing amount of struggle and the party is increasingly becoming a part of them–directing them at the enemy, deepening people’s understanding and organization, bringing forward new communists and preparing ourselves and the masses as best we can–for the battles ahead as the conditions worsen.
But as we pointed out a number of times summing up July 4th, the Battle of the Bicentennial was the first time in 20 years the working class was taking up a major political struggle–independent of the bourgeoisie and its agents. For 20 or 30 years the working class has been without socialism. For one, this comes out in youth in terms of a tremendous amount of ignorance about socialism–for instance many of us were surprised when after leaf letting about Mao we found the great majority of youth didn’t even know who he was. But it’s not just a question of “blank slate.” For because of the bourgeoisie, its material situation in the U.S. in the last 20 years, the Soviet Union and the lack of a party, among the broad sections of the working class anti-communism is a sharp contradiction among the people and is looked at as fascism, on a par with Nazis, dictatorship, anti-God, etc.
Now we say this not to wallow over it. Not to say nothing can be done. We struggle to formulate and understand the different contradictions so we can resolve them. We must always seek to strive for victory, create new things and make the maximum advances possible, but this must be in accordance with the objective conditions that exist and in the laws governing their development. The CC runs this out well. “To take stock of this is not to say ’not much can be done, wait till conditions are more favorable’ but to lay the basis for determining how to make conditions and the actual laws of development.” “We must start from the actual conditions and break through the actual contradictions to advance toward the revolutionary goal, not in isolation from, but together with ever greater sections of the working class, ever broader ranks of the masses.”
Certainly the task of turning people’s views on socialism and communism around is critical. Certainly youth still need another road offered–they’re still facing a future life of hell under capitalism and want a way out. Clearly we should develop our youth work to help break through on this contradiction and play its role of “certain sense vanguard”–that will take an advanced stand to the broad masses of workers. And clearly we should get on the case of this right away and move this forward as much as possible.
But the question comes down to–what basis do our youth groups start to bring out communism to the sons and daughters of the working class who have been without it for 30 years. On what basis are we going to let them turn this stuff around. Does making the red flag the immediate terms of the battle really start to popularize communism and turn this stuff around?
Do we give the various youth groups–which will number 8,10 or 12 in size–the chance to go out and popularize socialism and communism as it takes up the big battles–or not. Do we give the various youth groups– who certainly in the next few years will be mainly (in overall strategic sense) trying to build themselves up, expand to new neighborhoods, continue to develop ties, learn the situation and struggles and deepen our line on youth work–the chance to popularize communism and socialism as part of the struggle or not. Are we going to give the youth groups the chance to bring out that they stood for socialism and communism just as it stood and fought against the many rotten conditions throughout society–the police terror, unemployment, etc. And are we truly going to let the youth groups take on anti-communism and raise the red flag of socialism as part of the contradiction against the bourgeoisie and not mainly a contradiction among the people.
We all know there will be a good deal of controversy and frankly hostility when the youth groups go out there with the YCL. Anyone who thinks not or says ”big deal–everything divides into two,” should get out of their office and deal a little with the particulars of moving class struggle forward. For the question is on what terms do the groups start to popularize socialism and communism and take on anti-communism to a working class that has been without it for 20 years. Do we make it the immediate terms of the battle by having the word communist in the name? So that a great deal of popularizing socialism and communism is in struggling out contradictions among the people–why you guys support dictatorship, what about God, and which holds you back from taking it up as a part of the fight against the bourgeoisie, etc. Or do we take up popularizing socialism and communism and of course take on anti-communism as we fight against the bourgeoisie. We ask the center–what does it mean the working class has been without socialism for 20 or 30 years? How does it gone [sic] when communism becomes the immediate terms of the battle? Has this been the best way that we’ve started to popularize socialism. Certainly the Party Center must sum this up in developing its overall line and please while taking up the qualities of youth let’s not isolate them from society as a whole. We say this makes all the difference in the world as to whether the YCL will be able to carry out its tasks–and develop into the youth arm of the party, or becomes a small, isolated, almost trotskyite sect. Putting out its pure line, unable to unite or lead struggle, only hoping for the day when objective conditions are “right” and people will see that we’ve been correct. Not at all the way to build the YCL.
We do not feel that by having the name “revolutionary”–not “communist” that this will be a panacea to combatting anti-communism. Hell, we’ve seen two youth groups get slammed up and down by anti-communism in the last six months, XXX and XXX, and they were named Youth in Action. Both groups got hit very hard with anti-communism from school heads, police and press. In both places it went very rough–and these were examples of it clearly coming out from the authorities! In both places the groups had a rough time of dealing with through [sic] applying the “If the authorities line ...” as laid out in the CC Report. The going was rough because of the low level of political development of the group (yes, they take up Marxism– but their experience in leading struggle is very low) which is a fact we’ll have to deal with in the initial years of the organization. Because the bourgeoisie’s forces were extremely well organized, hitting people in homes, schools, on press. It was rough, because the anti-communism the bourgeoisie has put out has a base among the masses because the working class has been without it for 20 or 30 years (bourgeoisification, Soviet Union, no proletarian pole and independent political movement) and this came out in a tremendous amount of pressure and isolation from friends and families. And it was rough because it was practically hard to unfold due to the relative low level of struggle of the working class, etc. In both these places it led to problems with the groups and their functioning.
And with the name revolutionary it’s not like there will be no contradictions among the people around communism and it won’t come purely from the bourgeois authorities. Last year in XXX the youth group built a struggle around cut backs in a job program. And in the course of it there was a lot of putting out of socialism and communism and what’s the only road and future for youth. On top of this the poverty pimps and agencies came whirling through the neighborhoods telling parents and all there were commies hanging out with their kids, they wanted to tear the neighborhoods apart, etc.
Throughout the neighborhood as the struggle around jobs built and even as it started to die the people were talking about the communists. Many sharp contradictions came up from the people–particularly parents– as will always come up as we take up battles in the neighborhoods. It became very sharp with parents and some youth and a lot of struggle around god [sic], Russia, Martin Luther King, Black people’s struggles, working class, etc.
Here we were able to make it a very good thing though there were certain losses–because our forces could take up this contradiction–even though it was mainly coming out among the people–as they fought for issues concerning the people. Here we were raising it and taking on opposition to it as part of developing class struggle. If the name had been RCY–it would have been the immediate issue of struggle and would have been much more difficult to struggle over and turn into a good thing. This is what the youth and student commission is asking the center–to let the YCL fight for the Red flag as part of developing the class struggle. Let’s have the battle around it move the class struggle forward–not hold us back from getting out of the starting blocks.
Now we’re not saying–please let’s stop all this stuff about communism, let’s avoid controversy and contradictions among the people, let’s just keep nice and safe “YIA.” Hell, we need the YCL to carry out the tasks talked earlier about and start to stop this shit around communism and turn it into a good thing. And, as we said, the controversy and contradictions among the people around the Red Flag can be a very good thing–so that people start seeing what communism is all about, what it’s got to do with the struggle, what class it stands with and serves, what class stands opposed to it and attacks it.
But, while grasping the importance of this task, let’s grasp the contradictions that go with it–and give our forces the basis to overcome them. The basis is the class struggle and we’re asking that the youth groups popularize socialism and communism as they become the social force that moves the class struggle for youth forward.
There are other examples we can go into. There are the people in Humboldt Park who would not allow us to work with them if we used the word communist– though they liked us leading the mass organization and said we could spread our views and ideas. As the struggle around Humboldt Park went on over the 2 and 3 weeks–and our forces took on the task of turning this stuff around–some decent advances occurred. And the guy who was so opposed to us as “communists” is not helping to build the UWO and recognizes us as “communists.” This is what we mean by letting the groups into the ballpark–so they can start to turn this stuff around. It’s very much in accordance with Mao’s statement, “All work done for the masses must start from their needs, and not from the desire of any individual, however well intentioned. It often happens that objectively the masses need a certain change, but subjectively they are not yet conscious of the need, not yet willing or determined to make the change. In such cases, we should wait patiently. We should not make change until, through our work, most of the masses have become conscious of the need and are willing and determined to carry it out.” United Front in Cultural Work, Vol. 3, p. 186.
We are saying, build the YCL and let it carry out its, tasks. We are not saying don’t raise the banner of socialism and communism, let’s avoid anti-communism. But let’s proceed on this task from where things are actually at–and give the groups the ability to raise the Red Flag as it takes up the class struggle–not make the terms of the battle the red flag, so that the struggle mainly becomes one among the people.
Is this backdooring of Youth In Action? We don’t think so. It’s taking the step beyond rationally drawing out the need for a YCL from the contradictions capitalism creates–and is “shooting the arrow at the target” and struggling to find the ways that the YCL can carry out its tasks. Making the red flag, the main immediate issue of the struggle does not enable us to carry out these tasks. Engels spoke on a similar point at a similar time in England about the dogmatic English social democrats who during this period insisted on making the red flag the terms of the battle.
The English Social Democratic Federation is, and acts, only like a small sect. It is an exclusive body. It has not understood how to take the lead of the working class movement generally, and to direct towards socialism. It has turned it into an orthodoxy. Thus it insisted upon John Burns unfurling the red flag at the dock strike, where such an act would have driven them back into the arms of the capitalist. We don’t do this. Yet our program is a purely socialist one. Our first plank is the socialization of all the means and instruments of production. (Our emphasis) Engels, Daily Chronicle, 1893.
Around 5 years later, the English social democrats did grow a little bit–during a labor upsurge–only to lose its forces a year later and they eventually become [sic] social chauvinists and sold out the working class during the war.
We don’t think this should simply be written off by saying “Well, that’s the working class–we don’t do our work like that in the working class.” Certainly that’s true. And we’re not calling for a UWO or a UWOC for the youth either. We’re calling for a communist youth organization–because of the needs and contradictions youth face. But still these overall conditions and contradictions exist in society and affect the way this communist youth organization should take on its work and we develop the battle and popularization of the Red Flag.
What will happen if the groups take the name RCY. For one we may try and lead this or that struggle going out as RCY. It will cause a good deal of immediate contradictions among the people–struggling over God, the Soviet Union, dictatorship, the Nazis, etc. isolated from the class struggle. Rather than one being able to take up this stuff and put out what communism truly stands for–we will be getting bogged down in these discussions and battles–having a hard time rooting them in the class struggle, the particular battles we are engaged in. We ask the Center–how does it go when we have to struggle ideologically over communism–as the first thing we’re about. We’ve found it doesn’t go well at all, and is not the way to win people to see what communism is all about. Due to all the contradictions laid out before (working class without socialism, material position of U.S. capitalists, lack of practical movement, etc.) the groups are going to have a very hard time getting involved in developing struggles and a certain amount of demoralization may set in.
From our experiences in taking out the YCL broadly in agitation, slide shows, etc. this has what has mainly occurred (as almost all our agitation and propaganda over the last six months has built the YCL as a young communist organization).
Those who support the RCY line claim that the “shock” or electricity of “communist” will jolt people out of their traditional ways. Comparisons with the Panthers and their raising the gun, and other means of moving people out of their set, normal ways are given. We’d like to go along with this–it’s the most alluring of the RCY arguments. However, an argument like that must be grounded in the real world. For arguments like these can be used for any action or activity that’s “ahead” of where the people are at. Our experience is that at this point–the shock value of “communist” does not drag people out of their normal ways. The Panthers raising the gun was advanced activity that was at the crest of the wave of the social movement of Black people where the question of how to respond to the repression of the state was at the fore. We feel that if the center feels our being RCY somewhat comparable to the Panthers raising the gun–there must be some overall summation of our experience in taking this stuff up. It’s our unanimous experience that such action right now–leads to isolation rather than spark to further activity. And not that this means we shouldn’t raise the Red Flag and communism–but that we should be well aware of the contradictions that will develop around it–so we can better resolve them. Simple calls for boldness and bravado in taking the line out, stating that it will spark further activity – without summing up the overall conditions and past experience–has been the basis for one “left” line after another in the international communist movement.
But worse than any demoralization will be that communism will get pitted against leading the mass struggle. We already talked about one way this would come out–the groups developing tike a trotskyite sect. Putting out its pure line, as unable to unite or lead struggle only hoping for one day that objective conditions will change and people will see that they were right all along. More likely things will go the other way, the YCL will stop being the main form developed to lead the struggle. The primary contradiction talked about earlier that faces youth–what the hell the future holds–will not get spoken to nearly as fully or well. The advanced will mainly come into different fronts. And the organizational tieups of having to consistently build two organizations, second level ones and the YCL, will cause a tremendous amount of trouble due to the level of our forces both in terms of quantity and quality.
On top of that the breach between theory and practice among the young communist membership will become extremely sharp. A breach which Lenin points out in “Youth Leagues” is particularly sharp among youth because of the general spirit of mental and manual labor under capitalism and the drill sergeant method of teaching in bourgeois schools–that youth spontaneously rebel against by avoiding reading, studying, etc. Now the advanced youth will take up communism in small discussion groups, wage periodic ideological struggle among broader sections of youth, and spend the major portion of their mass work building one mass organization after another.
On top of that this whole new wave for 2nd level organizations and mass committees is like a damn thunderbolt out of the sky. For years, we have struggled to develop the Brigade (and would with the youth section as possible) to become the open leading force of the struggle. And we have seen in dozens of cases that this is possible and has made the Brigade–student organization of the party–very clearly the revolutionary organization on the campuses now in this country. Some are saying that we should retreat on this stance, the future holds more mass committees and coalitions– so don’t worry about openly leading mass struggle. Sure, if there’s big moves to war or fascism this is true. But let’s not throw what’s beginning to develop out the window. Let’s not throw out that a beginning layer of students–many of whom are not communists–see the Brigade as the open revolutionary force on the campuses–the face to check out if you want to know about social change. Now the push is to start to hide this and tell us of the wonders of 2nd level groups.
We ask: who’s about popularizing socialism and the red flag if the main form to lead struggle is 2nd level groups? Why are people putting a brake on one of the best developments of the party’s work–its student organization seen by thousands as the force that stands for social change? And on what basis is this summation developing–that the future holds more second level work, other than arguments that the RCY can openly lead struggle have hit a brick wall amongst the comrades in the work?
The left-right punch going on is astounding–the advanced tucked away–of ”uncontaminated” by non-communist youth as the old YCI would call it having their little discussions, selling of propaganda, waging ideological struggle among the people. And what form leads the youth in struggle–one mass committee after another. Is this raising the red flag and making it a battle among the people.
By using the name RCY we are pitting communism against building the mass struggle. And this is what the advanced who are helping to build the YCL are always struggling about at the meetings going toward the YCL. They are not saying, “No, don’t build the YCL. No, don’t turn people [sic] views around about communism. No, don’t train people in communism.” But they are saying that you don’t do that by making the Red Flag the immediate terms of the battle–which is what they consistently say will occur. We ask the center to go investigate this among the working class youth who are helping to build the YCL. They are not afflicted with lingering anti-communism. They fear us pitting the advanced against the mass. They are really saying in very perceptual terms, what Lenin said about the phrasemongerers who in the name of preparing people to defend socialism from invasion–were actually hurting its attempt. “We must fight against the revolutionary phrase, we have to fight it, we absolutely must fight it, so that at some future time, people will not say of us the bitter truth that, ’a revolutionary phrase about revolutionary war ruined the revolution.’” (Lenin, The Revolutionary Phrase) Let the YCL fight for the Red Flag, fight over the controversial questions among the people and turn it into a good thing-but let the YCL do this as it takes up the class struggle against the bourgeoisie.
We feel that if the name of the YCL is Revolutionary Youth Brigade there will be a much better basis to do just that. First of all, the name clearly takes a stand on what should get done in this society–calling for it getting turned upside down and the overthrow of the bourgeoisie. It’s not a bad word to popularize, as a matter of fact, at the start of Red Papers 6 we attributed a number of damn good qualities to that word. It offers another road to youth (as much as one word can) and defines the organization as one not pissed about just one abuse or another–but wants to fight all manifestations of imperialism and get rid of it altogether.
While the name has these qualities, it also gives the groups the freedom to go out: united with youth; take up the mass struggles; become a fighting political force among youth; and raise the Red Flag of socialism among youth in a way so that the Red Flag will be popularized and seen as part of the war against the bourgeoisie.
The name allows the group to become a force that will mainly lead the various struggles of youth–while offering the road of socialism and popularizing communism. The name RYB allows the groups to implement the line of the CC on taking on anti-communism–bringing out that, “If the authorities don’t like it–there must be something to it” by letting the youth groups raise the red banner and fight anti-communism as it fights the bourgeoisie (the authorities) and not take this on mainly in fights among the people. We ask the Center to let the YCL fight the authorities. Let the YCL be attacked by the authorities. The name RYB will also give the YCL the ability to bring in new advanced fighters–people who dig the YCL for one reason or another, want to check it out, work with it, learn about Marxism–but don’t consider themselves communists, do have a certain amount of anti-communism or at least hesitations about it because it’s a whole new thing that ain’t been around for 20 years and won’t work with a group named RCY. (Will get into this point later on over how the name proposal will affect the YCL’s task of training communists.)
Well we get asked, do you really want a communist organization if you want the name to be RYB? Yes, we answer–we wanted the RSB to be communist and especially in the last year we’ve developed it that way “revolutionary” and all. Suppose someone is leafletting for the RYB, we get asked, and they are asked if their group is communist, do they answer yes or no? Yes, we answer, we think that the members should clearly stand for socialism and communism, though we should cast away illusion that this is really raising the Red Flag. Discussions about “what you are about” usually go on with maybe 5 per 100 when leafletting. Should the leaflets explain the RYB is a communist organization and won’t this make the immediate terms of the battle communism? Yes, the leaflets should say it’s a communist organization and with a small amount of people will create controversy which is fine.
Then we get asked what about over a 4 or 5 month period of the RYB doing consistent work in a neighborhood. Won’t it get known as a communist organization, won’t it have to face all sorts of anti-communism. If so then why don’t we get it right out there at the start and say it’s communist! Yes and no we answer. The first point is true and will be a good thing–a very good thing indeed. For as the groups take up the struggle against the bourgeoisie–around cop terror, unemployment, major political and social questions, etc., we will raise the Red Flag and no doubt get attacked for it by the bourgeoisie and certainly cause a damn big stir among the masses. Raising the Red Flag in this context can lead to some damn good things happening and the popularizing of socialism we want. Communism is right out there in relation to fighting the bourgeoisie and fighting for the people. That’s not the case when it’s the immediate terms of the battle–again we ask the center to sum up experience around this point and not metaphysically isolate building struggle among youth–because they have certain qualities distinct from other classes and sections of society. By raising the Red Flag in this context–and not making it the immediate battle-we feel we are carrying on in the spirit of Mao’s quote around changing conditions through our work. Taking into account what those conditions are and setting the basis so that people will see communism [sic] But let’s not metaphysically isolate the struggles of youth from the overall struggles in American society. For some have argued that if our only concern was to develop the revolutionary struggles of youth they’d agree with us for sure–but they get more confused around it when they put the struggle of youth in its overall context and the role of youth. Okay, so let’s go into that one.
The task of developing the youth to raise the banner of socialism to the American people is indeed critical. But this can’t be separated from developing the struggles of youth and students. This goes back to the bulletin off the very first student commission of the RU–where national leadership criticized the tendency at the meeting to pit the task of building the student movement as a force in itself to strike blows at imperialism against the task of raising important political issues, ideas, to the class and broader sections of society. One must build the youth and student movement as a powerful force as possible against imperialism applying the mass line and using revolutionary theory to help us guide ourselves around the important political issues of the day not just for youth, but for the working class and society as a whole. Because of the actual contradictions youth face we see the necessity to offer and popularize the road and future of socialism among them. As the youth take up this banner it spills over and is seen by the society as a whole.
What good is having communist in the name if it holds back our youth groups from becoming a fighting political force to lead the youth? How can the youth popularize socialism and communism if the only ones raising it are groups of 8 and 10 isolated from the struggle? How much can Jobs for Youth Committees spill over socialism? Or only once or twice it gets raised when struggles develop so intense and sharp people’s anger is so directed at the bourgeoisie that you can get out there and lead the struggle no matter who you are.
The main way that the youth will raise socialism and communism to the broad masses is the same way they raise all advanced issues to the American people–a spillover as the youth and student struggle develops, unless someone is going to say the main thing a YCL should do. [sic] As the struggle youth builds around the many contradictions they face–both as youth and as part of the American people–the banner of socialism will be raised as the only future for youth and what youth should take. This should be seen by the YCL not as a byproduct of the many immediate struggles of youth, but as part of speaking to the overall contradictions youth face under capitalism spoken to before, along with tapping youth’s rebelliousness, etc. But this task cannot be separated from building the struggle of youth unless we’re talking about building some trotskyite thing where–socialism, the working class, etc. is used as a club on youth and someone weirdly thinks this is raising communism to the broad millions of people.
The name RCY will also be a tremendous obstacle and fetter for the YCL to carry ogt its other crucial task–training and developing new young communists. As we noted earlier, when a YCL is doing its work well-many young people will join it who will be somewhat class conscious, developing towards Marxism, etc., but not yet communists. The people are into motion towards it, checking it out, studying it, and seeing how it can be a material force in changing the world–but they haven’t fully taken up communism yet and are not ready to call themselves communists–though they’ll say they’re in the YCL.
We’re saying let’s open the door for these forces to come into the YCL and learn what communism is all about. The name Revolutionary Youth Brigade gives the new advanced–those when they are first coming in–the room to breathe. To do exactly what we said earlier–check it out, study it, see how it can be a material force in changing the world as they work with the groups, etc. As we mentioned before when the Brigade is going well maybe 70% of its membership will clearly look at itself as communist. The same we have no doubt, will hold for our youth groups–if we built it on the same principles.
By naming the group RCY we will be cutting ourselves off from the immediate sense hundreds of working class youth who would come into the YCL. Hundreds of youth who will check out Marxism–move into Marxism–but are not ready at first to openly work under that name. One working class youth after another who is building the YCL will tell you this–in one city after another. Could there not be some truth in what they say? Why are we going to cut ourselves off from training hundreds of working class youth in Marxism?
Some say they have no understanding how this can be. How can someone work with a communist organization, but not say openly they are a communist. How could someone only work with a communist group if “communist” is not in its name.
If one looks at the situation as a materialist and dialetically they should not have this problem. As a materialist by grasping the overall period in the U.S.–the fact the working class has been without socialism for 20 years and that this comes out with real contradictions. Including a certain amount of struggle and hesitancy around taking up communism–particularly when it’s the first organization you’re ever joining-going out among your friends, families and neighbors.
As a dialectician by seeing that people go through motion and there’s a struggle between a number of views and ideas about communism people dig as opposed to things stemming from society that hold people back. Just making the general statement youth can change politically and ideologically won’t do. This has to be rooted in the experience of 1977. We are saying that is not quick enough that the advanced will come forward and immediately join the RCY. Revolutionary Youth Brigade does open this door– so we can get on with the task of training young communists, move through the rest of the OHIO.
OK! We’ve laid it out as best we can. We’ve formulated off our experiences of building struggle among youth and students–why the YCL is the correct vehicle for struggle; its tasks and how it can best go out and accomplish them. Our position stems from looking at the way the YCL can best accomplish its tasks of leading struggle, popularizing socialism and consolidating and training communist cores. The name RYB we feel will enable us to take up this task much better than RCY.