Friday, October 26, 2007

Online Debate against the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade

I want to share with people some of the debate with the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade which is the youth group of the RCP. We've been having this back and foward, people can check out the whole thing at

If you come from an oppressed community, you would know how imperialism-capitalism is affecting you, because people are living it in their day to day struggle. They don't need to read it in a fucking newspaper or have some white dude who's never experienced struggle tell them about it.

Look at the real contradictions that exist in our own communities, and that is where the revolution is based in, not in trying to tell people about what is going on in Lebannon or in Israel, you think that by winning/coverting people into being self-less (or should I say mind-less) followers of the rcp that they will become revolutionaries?

Connecting to oppressed people around the world and seeing how it is connected is part of the process, but the best solidarity we can give to people around the world is to make a revolution here in the u.s. (and that can include learning from struggles around the world -- who for the most part, most of the popular movement around the world aren't statist, there ones where people are building horizontalism, self-sufficiency and autonomy).

People need to become self-sufficient and self-dependent right now, why should we empower an organization that does not come from our communities to do this for us, when we can empower ourselves to do it on our own?

The people who come from oppressed communities aren't even part of your strategy to carry out revolution.

The process of building autonomy, self-determination, the self organization, and the self-defense of oppressed people and oppressed communites, is the process of people distributing power to themselves and collectively owning the revolutionary process and their communities which they run and live in.

This is a society where oppressed people suffer from Imperialism, neo-colonialism, patriarchy, white supremacy and capitalism. If your strategy or "program" doesn't include that (all of those things), how do you expect to end all forms of oppression? Instead of just replacing one form of oppression for another -- where you're not even talking about getting rid of bourgeois democracy (representative democracy). You're talking about implementing another state that the people (oppressed people in particular and humanity in general) have no interest in because it is not any different from the social and power relationships that we have now.


Second Part of the debate:

I apologize for coming off that way. I understand that there are still individuals even within a vertical organization like the rcp, who are probably sincere just caught up in some bull shit. I'm willing to talk to folks who are sincere...

First of all, I think people's social position matters, peoples political positions and ideological positions are influenced mainly by their social position.

Someone who has super-privilege is not going to be the first one to unite with the idea of challenging themselves and their social position to overthrow a system and power structure (white supremacy, patriarchy, imperialism-capitalism), that upholds and maintains their position.

I'm not saying the white middle class people cannot participate in the process, because I feel we cannot carry out a revolutionary process in the us without the participation of white middle class people, but I think their role shouldn't be to lead oppressed people, they should organize in their own communities around their own conditions and support the revolutionary process (that will include lawyers, doctors, etc and other professionals).

A strategy and program has to come through an analysis of the situation and conditions that we are faced with. What are the "fundamental contradictions" as Mao put it. In the u.s., looking at the power structure (or they system's fundamental contradictions) it is based on the history of white settler colonialism and imperialism. So working class people of color, women, queer people are systematically kept out of power (except for those carrying out the interests of white supremacists, and capitalists).

Ofcourse people from oppressed communities are not born as full time revolutionaries, but they hold the potential to bring down the beast through their own organization. This does not imply that we don't leadership, but it brings up the question of what kind of leadership do we need? I'm not trying to come off as I have all the answers either, this is just an analysis.

The leadership and organization that a lot of us (revolutionaries organizing right now from the oppressed) feel is needed is one that is horizontal and that comes from the oppressed communities because their politics would be more genuine once that revolutionary consciousness and organization is built up (we have to train ourselves to lead ourselves right now). We have to start the process of distributing power into the hands of the people, and win allies from privileged communities as well. To build a federation of revolutionary communities.

This brings up many questions I can't get into all at once.

What do I mean about collective ownership of our communities?

It means for people to build liberated communities and autonomous communities they have to see that they're are part of that community and that they're truely not powerless (event though they don't hold state power).

In reality what gives people power is not the state, the state is used to control the interests of a ruling class (whether capitalist-imperialist or socio-imperialist). What gives people power is their self-organization, the decision making institutions, their ability to safeguard and defend themselves, their understanding, their wisdom, and the people themselves. "The power of the people is stronger than the man's technology."

So we don't wait to a "revolutionary vanguard party" takes power, we start this process right now, we build within our communities as bases, we build dual power, and support the people as they recognize and realize the true owners of the neo-colony.

This doesn't mean that we allow ourselves to be massacred by the state. We defend our communites through different means from racist organizations and institutions, and eventually we build liberated zones and connect them through other community councils and liberated zones. (you cannot build community in isolation, that's why we need to connect to other communities doing the same).

Our communities are neo-colonies, and we are being killed every day. One we have to organize to survive, and two we have to set up the structures and train ourselves to replace the system that is killing us for good.

This is something closer to a strategy than empty slogans thrown out by your organization.

The analysis that we develop needs to come from each other, our experience and our collective study, not just a newspaper.

Leadership cannot be imposed, it comes from the people, Bob Avakian does not understand people's conditions, he has a limited understanding based on the books he's read or the the one or two working class people of color friends he might have had in h.s. or in college.

This comes from being in an imperialist country and being the beneficiary of white supremacy, patriarchy and capitalism.


Third part of the Debate:

I want to continue some of the debate and also clear some things up,

Luna through out, "...not something that is purely borne out of oppressed conditions, it is something that is synthesized from our collective human experience and analysis of that the root problem is and what the solution is to the fundamental problem is and is NOT JUST A LINE TO GET REVENGE on people who grew up with privilege."

My question is, synthesized from what human experience? Is this "human experienced" that is synthesized relevant to people in the u.s.?

By saying this you're not taking into account that oppresive social relatiionships exist within this society, and you're not even willing to name this fact, or strategize to change the oppressive social relationships.

Lets get things straight, why were the revolutions in Russia and China defeated, were not just because of the external contradictions and being surrounded by imperialist countries, but the internal contradictions -- where oppressive social relationships and power relations were not challenged strategically and systematically by the people.

Who is really being idealist here? Your position is not even challenging the power structue: white supremacy, patriarchy, imperialism-capitalism.

I think Pablo, Luna, and other YB members are coming from very liberal politics, where you are just reacting to what is superficial and you you are reacting to what is immediate or the hot issue. Bush is not the problem, he is just a mouthpiece, but you use this to build a base amongst the middle class not the working class, people of color, women, queer etc.

In reality the situation today is no different for us, for the oppressed we have been suffering from this system since the founding and expansion of what is the united states. This country is build on the backs of people of color, working class, women, etc. It might be a little different in the sense that the u.s. is now openly trying to geopolitically and economically dominate the world and hope to reallign regional powers in their favor. It's still imperialism, and it's still what their empire was founded on -- manifest destiny (the belief that white male protestants are the chosen people of god and that they're destine to rule).

It has systematically and historically killed us and kept us in an enslaved position.

This is reality, I'm not making it up. This does not mean, and I've never said that we should just take revenge on thos who have privilege or who have benefited someway by this system -- this won't begin to end the root cause of the problem. In fact people with privilege have more to gain from getting rid of this system and creating a strategic alliance with the oppressed here and around the world.

With that though I want to use a quote (that I've posted already) by George Jackson:

"Our insistence on military action, defensive and retaliatory, has nothing to do with romanticism or precipitous idealist fervor. We want to be effective. We want to live. Our history teaches us that the successful liberation struggles require an armed people, actively participating in the struggle for their liberty!"

-George Jackson (Blood in My Eye)

My priority has never been to get revenge, it is to win freedom, self-determination, autonomy, and organize in federated liberated zones as the overall process and a tactic in the liberation of humanity.

Pablo (as well as the rcp in general) puts the priority on getting rid of religious fundamentalism -- not that we should be trainning ourselves, and really getting into some revolutionary organizing.

The rcp's goals are to polarize the middle class in their direction, not the proletariat's but their sectarian group. The rcp claims to be fighting fascism but they use similar tactics to that of the facists, to create some strong cult of personality around their leader and build a popular base with the middle classes.

Also is your way of winning people over is to make shit up? When did I ever say that my strategy involved simply getting revenge on those with privilege? Or how am I rewording "what I learned in the rcp)?

Also I don't just want to build in MY community, but CONNECT THE STRUGGLE of my community with other communities, other regions, and to other people who are fighting internationally (to learn from them, support them, build solidarity, and do our part to fight in our own communities because we know our own conditions better than they do -- they're not going to come into our communities and fight for us, that is our job -- we also hold a responsibility to the people of the world, because u.s. imperialism is responsible for the suffering of the majority of people in the world).

And who is really dogmatic here?

Who is romanticizing history in China, and quoting mediocre works by your leader like if it was the gospel?

A collection of empty slogans does not equate a thought out and tested strategy in building a revolutionary movement.

Horizontalism is building collective leadership, empowering people to become organizers and coordinators. Leadership and its definition changes depending on where it is coming from -- to petty bourgeois and bourgeois leaders it means to call the shots and to the oppressed it means taking responsibility.

So this is what I mean when I speak of leadership, it means taking responsibility, usually the people who get the credit for things are not really the ones taking responsibility or doing the work, but the ones who impose themselves. I'm not saying leadership is not imposed, but what we're trying to build is something that does not rely on this sort of leadership that is imposed, but one that come from the collective responsibility of the people.

10:38 PM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove

1 comment:

cwm said...

Joaquin, you do great stuff. Keep up the good work!