Like all correct views, the line targetting rectification of the general line of the communist movement as the key to party re-establishment developed in opposition to various erroneous lines. Mainly, the line has been sharpened and clarified in opposition to the fusion line, but it also embraces a critique of the party building approach of the left opportunists and evolved in struggle against their line as well.
For some period of time since the emergence of the anti-revisionist, anti-left opportunist trend in 1976, a number of forces have offered criticisms of the fusion line. Many forces put forward the view that instead of fusion, it is the theoretical task of determining a correct general line for the communist movement that is the essence of party building. Not all the forces that advanced this view, however, did so based on a sound Marxist-Leninist orientation.
It is evident now, for example, that even though the majority of the staff of the Guardian newspaper united with an advanced line when they launched the Guardian Clubs in 1977, the reason for this was opportunism rather than a genuine concern for party building. For the Guardian majority, a correct critique of fusion was principally an excuse to maintain the independence of the Guardian newspaper rather than principally a step in the direction of building a single genuine party that would supercede all existing Marxist-Leninist formations including the Guardian itself. This anti-party, sectarian opportunism was revealed in the struggle over the Guardian staff’s “State of the Party Building Movement” paper published in October 1978. In this paper the sectarian formulations of the existence of “right and left trends” within the anti-revisionist anti-left opportunist trend and the organizational scheme of placing the Guardian at the center of an all-sided communist organization were advanced. The Guardian’s sectarianism and opportunism was decisively repudiated by the majority of members of the Guardian Clubs (from which developed the NNMLC) and by the Marxist-Leninist movement as a whole.
The formulation that the central task of US Marxist-Leninists is the rectification of the general line of the US communist movement and the re-establishment of its party builds on the positive achievements of earlier critiques of the fusion line, including that of the Guardian and Guardian Clubs, and discards the sectarian schemes associated with some forces who embraced that critique for their own opportunist reasons. It is now advanced by the NNMLC (as well as by a number of other forces in the communist movement) as a leading line which can point the way forward to the successful re-establishment of a genuine communist vanguard in the US.
This line is rooted in a grasp of the key concepts of “general line” and “rectification”.
General line is the overall ideological, political and organizational line that guides communists in the carrying out of their central task. For US communists this will be the task of the seizure of state power in the US–thus the general line must provide guidance as to how this task can be carried out.
To provide this guidance, a general line must be based on the universal principles of Marxism-Leninism. A mere re-assertion of these principles, however, will not do. The universal principles of Marxism-Leninism must be re-confirmed, must be shown to still apply to the present conditions, time and place. Still further, a general line must develop a concrete application–independent elaboration–of the universal laws of Marxism-Leninism to the particular conditions of the US.
The general line must be rooted in an analysis of the history of the working class and communist movement in the US. It must analyze the political economy of the country, and develop a sound class analysis on that basis.
Based on its analysis of history, political economy, and class structure, the general line of a party in the US must make a concrete analysis of the principal class forces and objective conditions which the working class must address in pursuit of its aims. The actual position of all social classes – workers, farmers, petty bourgeoisie, intermediate bourgeoisie, monopoly capitalist bourgeoisie–and all strata within these classes must be analyzed and understood. A similar analysis must be made of different social sectors, most importantly of the national and racial minorities and of women. A political appraisal of major organizational forms of the people’s movements–the trade unions, minority and women’s organizations, etc.–must be made. The principal social movements of the country must be identified and a political analysis of them must be made. The objective of this process is to answer the question, “Who are our friends and who are our enemies?” It is on this basis that the working class can determine the nature and extent of its alliances with other classes and sectors.
A number of questions will be of particular importance in developing the general line of the US communist movement. Among them are:
a. The actual state of the working class; its different sectors; the character and role of the trade union movement and the union bureaucracy; the level of political consciousness in the working class; racism within the working class and the strategy needed to combat it and build working class unity; the new political and social questions posed by the mass entry of women into the work force and the strategy needed to combat both the practice and ideology of male supremacy in the working class movement.
b. The political character and objectives of the struggles of the nationally and racially oppressed peoples in the US. What are the special demands of minority peoples in the US in the present period? What is the strategic significance of the struggle against racism and around what questions does it particularly come to the fore?
c. The political character and objectives of the struggle for women’s emancipation; the material basis for the democratic women’s movement; significance of the struggle against sexist ideology; particular social questions coming to the fore around this question: abortion rights, the family, child care, rights of homosexuals; the particular demands of working class and minority women.
d. Principal contradictions within the exploiting classes recognizing that these contradictions are objectively a key strategic reserve of the revolution.
e. The principal political, theoretical and ideological questions before the world communist movement: in particular, an appraisal of the class character and political role of the Soviet Union; summations of modern revisionism and left opportunism internationally; new developments in the struggle against colonialism and neo-colonialism; state of the working class movement in the other advanced capitalist countries; analysis and critique of new tendencies in the communist movement such as Eurocommunism, the development of the “three worlds theory,” etc.
It is on the basis of a developed analysis of these questions, that the party must formulate its actual program and strategy for the seizure of state power.
This general line, as any line, is drawn from and ultimately based on the real world, on social practice. Yet this line requires a synthesis of the broadest historical experience of the US working class and communist movement and the international workers and communist movement as a whole. A synthesis of only the recent experiences of US communists, of only the social practice of a few years, will be inadequate. Thus, while the experience of the present communist movement in its intervention in the class struggle will form a part of the “raw material” that will be analyzed to develop a general line, it will provide only a part, and in fact a relatively small part, compared with the rich historical experience of communists in the US and worldwide.
The concept of rectification locates our struggle for a general line in its concrete historical circumstances. The U.S. communist movement once had a genuine party and a principally correct (even if flawed) general line. This was the line of the CPUSA until the mid-1950’s. Our movement must look back at this general line, analyze its strengths and weaknesses, develop a critique of its achievements and its shortcomings–all in the context of seeing it in the concrete historical circumstances in which it developed. Rectification does not mean adopting uncritically a previous line, it means taking what is positive from earlier achievements arid building on that aspect while criticizing the negative. Further, in our historical view, we must secondarily take up the various political positions current in the movement over the past 20 years, including the proposed general lines of the various organizations which tried unsuccessfully to re-establish a party since 1956-57, and critique their strengths and weaknesses as well.
But rectification does not mean only looking backwards. Part and parcel of rectification is looking at present conditions and in fact looking toward the future. Building on the breakthroughs of previous communist efforts, we must examine the concrete conditions today, the new questions posed by new phenomena, and the trends of historical development we can see emerging. Analyzing these things and incorporating that analysis into our rectification process is a key aspect of developing a correct general line. Thus the concept of rectification is grounded in an historical perspective and yet directed toward the future tasks of the communist movement.
Noting that the rectification of the general line is the crucial pre-condition for the actual re-establishment of the party means adherence to the Marxist-Leninist concept that ideological and political line decide everything. With a correct line, the party will be able to develop from weak to strong and will be able to carry out its central task. Without such a line, a party would flounder and fail to live up to the responsibility of a communist vanguard.
The formulation that the rectification of the general line is the crucial precondition for party re-establishment makes clear that in this period theoretical tasks are principal over practical tasks. Further, it highlights correctly that the main focus must be on generating a line through struggle among the communists based on a full summation of the historical experience of the US and world working class movements, rather than placing the main focus on the relationship between the present communist forces and the existing spontaneous movement. In these ways it gives the proper weight to the subjective factor, recognizing that a party is the crystallization of the subjective factor and that to build a party is essentially to develop the subjective factor.
To concretely carry out the rectification of the general line of the US communist movement a broad rectification movement embracing the entire Marxist-Leninist movement is required. Such a movement must address the host of particular questions which face the communists as components of a general line, and eventually the movement’s leading forces must synthesize these various particulars into a general line.
Such an all-sided synthesis will not happen in the first stages of the rectification movement, but rather requires some advanced experiences in particular aspects of rectification first. This is the Marxist-Leninist process of the development of knowledge and the development of line, from shallow to deep, from one-sided to all-sided.
On various particular questions, such as the class character of the USSR, the race/national question, the woman question, etc. the communist movement can already place making some concrete breakthroughs on our horizon. In taking up these particular questions we can develop hypotheses to prove or disprove in our study and investigation. As breakthroughs are made, we will develop not only specific views on particular questions, but advanced experiences in the methodology of taking up complex theoretical tasks. These advanced experiences can serve as guides for communists to take up further particular questions, and eventually the complex problem of synthesizing all our theoretical work into a single general line. This process of theoretical development will require sharp struggle in the spirit of unity-struggle-unity over political and ideological line. In addition to developing key positions on various political questions, the overall theoretical training of cadre is a key aspect of the rectification movement. Popularizing the study of Marxism-Leninism, raising the general theoretical level of the movement, are crucial to developing the general line and to participating in the party once it is re-established.
The variety of tasks that must be taken up by the rectification movement calls for communists to develop a multiplicity of organizational forms to carry out these tasks. No single organizational form can encompass all the tasks of the rectification movement. Thus, such forms as study projects bringing together advanced Marxist-Leninists nationally, basic study groups, national networks of Marxist-Leninists with particular tasks, various forms to organize and guide intervention in the day-to-day class struggle, theoretical journals, etc. must all be developed to make contributions to the rectification movement. As long as each form grasps the general task of rectification correctly and understands its particular role and its particular limitations, multiplicity of organization can only enhance the work of communists, giving greater play to initiative. Still, it is crucial to recognize that while these different organizational forms will push forward the movement, all organizational forms are transitory and “tactical” in a pre-party period. All must eventually give way to a single party. Thus no form short of a party can guide the work of its cadre all-sidedly, for only the general line of a party is the political basis for all-sided guidance. If such all-sided guidance is attempted prematurely, it can only fetter the ideological and political struggle that must take place in the movement as a whole to rectify the general line.
As the rectification movement proceeds, we can expect leadership to come forward as leading comrades take initiative and lead around various aspects of the future general line. Consistent with communist principles, we expect leadership to assert itself and try to win a following based on its line. Strong, assertive leadership is a good thing, a necessary thing, to push the rectification movement forward. Leadership must be judged and held accountable on the basis of the line it puts forward. Given the inevitability of uneven development within our ranks as well as within the working class as a whole, we can expect that certain more experienced and developed cadres will lead more consistently around advanced views, and all ultra-democratic and anti-theoretical prejudices that hold back the development and recognition of such leadership must be combatted.
The rectification movement will be pushed forward through line struggle, multiplicity of organization, and the assertion of leadership. It is not an aimless movement, however, with no concrete goal in mind. Its goal is the synthesis of a leading general line and the development of a single leading ideological, political, and organizational center on the basis of that line. Once the rectification movement has reached a certain stage (we cannot now predict when this will be) it will be possible for the leading comrades in the movement to attempt a synthesis of all our theoretical work into a single general line. It is when this synthesis is developed and a number of leading comrades have united around it, that we can say that a general leading ideological, political and organizational center or party core is built. At that point, this center must assert itself, attempt to win other Marxist-Leninists to the synthesis it has developed, and develop the actual organizational process of party re-establishment–building in the communist fashion from the center outwards.
The actual seeds for this re-establishment process begin already from the early stages of the rectification movement. In the process of thorough and principled ideological and political struggle in the rectification movement, Marxist-Leninists must build relations of unity-struggle-unity and mutual accountability with each other. Holding one another accountable for their views and positions, struggling to win one another over to different positions through political argument rather than organizational manipulation, Marxist-Leninists will develop the kind of confidence in one another that corresponds to a true party spirit. Thus the building of such “party relations” even in a pre-party period are the building blocks of the future formal re-establishment process. These relations must be built not only among the leading comrades in our movement who must forge a future center, but among all Marxist-Leninists, those who will make up the future party membership. This process of building “party relations” is a requirement for a successful organizational re-establishment after the leading line has been synthesized. If these relations have been built carefully and properly in the period of the rectification movement, the future center will have fertile soil upon which to build the party from itself outwards. Thus, while the re-establishment process begins in a certain sense even within the center of the rectification movement, it is not identical to the line struggle of that rectification movement.
Given this overall perspective, it can be noted that ultimately all Marxist-Leninists participate as individuals in the rectification and re-establishment process, assuming responsibility for their views, forging a future center, or joining a future party as individuals. Though organizations, in fact a multiplicity of organizations, must be developed to push forward the party building process, all such forms are transitory and must be subordinated to the goal of a united party. Thus the party and the future center are not formed as mergers of organizations, but as the coming together of individual Marxist-Leninists on a qualitatively new basis–the basis of a correct general line for the US revolution.
It is the ideological, political and organizational struggle among communists that is decisive in re-establishing a genuine party. But attempting to develop a communist relationship to the masses through direct intervention in the day-to-day class struggle also contributes in important ways to our central task. Without a general line and party, this work has serious inherent limitations. Yet it challenges the Marxist-Leninists to take up fully even in the pre-party period, the question of what constitutes communist leadership of the masses. Revisionism has tampered with the very essence of what it means to be a communist, and rectifying our notion of communist leadership is a key aspect of the rectification movement. Developing a correct conception of communist leadership and developing communist cadre capable of providing such leadership is a crucial aspect of party building.
Of course, intervention in class struggle will only train cadre in a correct conception if we strive to take up such work even today as communists. The Marxist-Leninists must pose tasks similar to what a party would pose if the day-to-day work is to train people as communists and not just “narrow practical workers.” Thus, bold tasks such as overturning the Bakke decision, getting the US out of Southern Africa, capturing dominant influence in a particular trade union, must characterize the goals of our practical work even in this period without a party. In pursuit of such aims, communists must gain experience both at leading the mass struggle toward specific goals and of putting forward the independent line of the communists. If we pose tasks based only on what we can already do, we will never develop; we must pose tasks based on what needs to be done, and by struggling to accomplish these bold tasks learn what it will actually take to change the world.
Further, direct intervention in the class struggle will give the Marxist-Leninists more experience to synthesize into the party’s general line. Though direct practice in the mass movement does not define our theoretical tasks as the fusion line would have it, the mass movement as it exists today does pose new questions for communists to address and settle. Such phenomena as the “reverse discrimination” attacks on the working class, the “taxpayers’ revolt,” the rise of a movement for greater rank-and-file democracy in the trade unions, etc. come to the fore for communist attention as we take up work among the masses. Taking up and solving theoretical questions posed by these phenomena is one of the key aspects of the rectification movement.
Also direct intervention in the class struggle provides a key arena for communists to work with one another, conduct struggles over line, and build relations of unity-struggle-unity and mutual accountability. Often it is in the course of common work among the masses that communists will be able to conduct the sharpest and clearest struggles for unity on line.
In addition, intervention in the class struggle will attract more workers and more people generally to Marxism-Leninism. It will draw new elements into the ranks of the communist movement, thus bringing more subjective forces to bear on our rectification tasks.
Finally, communists’ intervention in the mass struggle will undoubtedly advance the unity, fighting capacity, and political consciousness of the masses. Yet it requires a party to consolidate these advances and integrate them into a coherent strategy for the seizure of state power. This is precisely the reason why building a party is now our central task. Still, these advances will provide a more favorable climate for the party’s work among the masses once the party is re-established.
The forms to organize and guide this intervention in class struggle, like the forms to conduct struggle among communists, will be many and varied. Local Marxist-Leninist organizations, collectives, left caucuses in various campaigns, etc. all can play a role. As long as no fetish is placed on organization and the question of political line consistently takes precedence over organizational affiliation, communists will certainly be able to deal with any organizational problems that arise, and use their multiplicity of organizations to strengthen their intervention in the class struggle as it strengthens the struggle among communists.
Despite these positive features of our intervention in class struggle, we must never fall victim to the notion that we will find our line or re-establish our party principally through going to the mass movement. Only the struggle for line among communists, and the forging of a core of leading communists will lead to party re-establishment.