Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Communist League

Negro National Colonial Question


The State of the United States of North America

The state of the United States of North America is the basic organ of violence and repression in the hands of the Anglo-American imperialist bourgeoisie. This state arose from and was based on the consolidation of the original separate 13 states. Today, this State is a powerful omnipotent multi-national state that exercises hegemony over the Anglo-American nation, the colonial Negro Nation and the colonial nation of Puerto Rico. In addition this State exercises its dictatorship over a number of peoples, including the Mexican national minority, the Indian people, the Alaskan Eskimos, the Aluet and Hawaii peoples. It is properly referred to as the U.S.N.A. to differentiate it from the United States of Mexico or United States of Brazil etc.


The primary basis of culture in the Anglo-American nation is English. In the development of the history of the nation, successive waves of non-English, European peoples populated the U.S.N.A. On a primary level these non-English peoples were compelled to adopt the Anglo culture. In this process, the melting pot concept emerged. The various European peoples injected certain aspects of their national culture in the process of assimilating the Anglo. Thus specific aspects of the Anglo-American culture evolved, chemically as well as mechanically, mixing the aspects of the European, African and the Indian cultures.

The other aspect of the development of Anglo-America was the concrete specific conditions that faced these English and Europeans upon their arrival in the U.S.N.A. Whereas they came from relatively developed nations especially the English, they are met in North America with a relatively low level of the productive forces and vast open land. In their struggle of conquest against the Indian peoples and the harshness and isolation of frontier life a specific national culture was developed on the Anglo-European base - thus it became not merely Anglo-European, but Anglo-American.

The territorial frontiers of the Anglo-American nation are generally the Canadian frontier to the north to the Atlantic sea coast on the East; proceeding from the Canadian frontier south to the beginnings of the area associated with the plantation belt in Delaware. The border then proceeds west along the northern edge of the area associated with the plantation system. This line proceeds generally west and south in an inverted arc into Texas and south into the Gulf of Mexico. The western frontier proceeds south from the Canadian border a-long the Pacific Coast to the area generally associated with the struggles of the Mexican national minority. The border then proceeds in a north-easterly direction to the north of Denver connecting to the Gulf of Mexico to the east of San Antonio, Texas. Within this national territory, there are numerous autonomous areas that belong to the Indian people whose economic, territorial and political rights have yet to be restored.

The exact delineation of the frontier must be set by economic and population factors that cannot be known today.

Basically, the Americas can be divided into the general categories of Anglo and Hispanic America. These general areas represent a base of Anglo or Hispanic cultures for the emergence of national cultures that were conditioned by the evolution of history in each specific country.

Although the total of the Western Hemisphere is referred to as the Americas, the United States of North America is the only country that defines itself as America in reference to nationality. Other nations refer to themselves first by national definition such as Argentinian, Brazilian, Canadian, Dominican, etc. and only in the most general sense as American.

To a great degree such concepts arose because of the overwhelming presence and determining power of U.S.N.A. imperialism. The peoples of the Americas correctly see the chauvinism in referring to the U.S.N.A. as “America”.

The situation is further complicated by the obvious fact that the Canadians are just as much Anglo-American as the peoples of the U.S.N.A. The only difference in definition being that the Canadians designate themselves as Canadians, whereas the peoples of the U.S.N.A. use the national designation as American. Thus the term is used in two senses – Hemispheric and national.

American Exceptionalism

American exceptionalism is the shallow revisionist ’theory’ that the United States of North America is an exception to Marxist economic and social laws.

This “theory” was introduced into the communist movement by Jay Lovestone as General Secretary of the CPUSA, by Earl Browder as General Secretary of the CPUSA and by William Z. Foster while he was Chairman of the CPUSA. The material base for this “theory” was the fact that the economic cyclical crisis was not as severe, widespread nor lengthy in the U.S.N.A. as in Europe. The obvious reason for this was the fact that each crisis was marked by a further expansion of the Western frontier and by the homesteading of public lands. The unemployed proletariat and the ruined business men “went West” to start over, thus relieving the population pressure creating a market and mitigating the effects of crisis. The theory of American exceptionalism was disproved by the great depression of 1929 when there was very little public land left and the full and severe effects of the crisis were felt from 1929 to the beginning of the Second World War.


Lenin defined it like this: “1) the concentration of production, capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; 2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “financial capital” of a financial oligarchy; 3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; 4) the formulation of international monopolist combines which share the world among themselves; 5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism in that stage of development in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.” (Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. Foreign Language Press, Peking, 1965, pg. 106)

Primitive Accumulation

“The accumulation of capital pre-supposes surplus-value, surplus value pre-supposes capitalist production, capitalist production presupposes the pre-existence of considerable masses of capital and of labor power in the hands of producers of commodities. The whole movement therefore seems to turn in a vicious circle out of which can only get by supposing a primitive accumulation preceeding capitalist accumulation, an accumulation not the result of the capitalist mode of production, but its starting point.” Further, “The so-called primitive accumulation therefore is nothing else than the historical process of divorcing the producer from the means of production. It appears as primitive, because it forms the pre-historic stage of capital and of the mode of production corresponding with it.” And finally, ”In the history of primitive accumulation, all revolutions are epoch-making that act as levers for the capitalist class in course of formation, but above all, those moments when great masses of men are suddenly and forcibly torn from their means of subsistence and hurled as free and “unattached” proletarians on the labor market, the expropriation of the agricultural producer, of the peasant, from the soil is the basis of the whole process.” (Marx, Capital. Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1965, p. 713, pp. 714-715, p. 716) Along with the robbery of the peasant, was the brutal slave trade and the wholesale murder of the Indians which all contributed to primitive accumulation.


Revisionism is a doctrine hostile to Marxism within Marxism. Lenin says that what happened to Marx happened to all revolutionary thinkers that is, “After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons to canonize them so to say, and to surround their names with a certain halo for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time emasculating the essence of the revolutionary teaching, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it. At “the present time, the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the working class movement concur in this “doctoring” of Marxism. They omit, obliterate and distort the revolutionary side of his teaching, its revolutionary soul. They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie.”

Further, “Revisionism” or “revision” of Marxism is today one of the chief, if not the chief manifestation of bourgeois influence on the proletariat and bourgeois corruption of the workers.” (Lenin, Lenin on the Struggle Against Revisionism, Foreign Language Press, Peking 1960, p. 3, p. 1) Today here in the U.S.N.A., the revisionists are best exemplified by the CPUSA who as agents of the bourgeoisie inject their revisionism into the working class and channel the revolutionary aspirations of the workers into reformist programs leading them always to defeat and into the hands of the bourgeoisie. Revisionism does not arise from the working class, but rather is injected into the class by the bourgeois intellectuals, trade union officials and their co-partners the CPUSA.


Neo-colonialism is the indirect control of the semi-colonial countries through the control of their economic structure. This control is exercised through the comprador bourgeoisie in alliance with the feudal landlords whose interests coincide with the interests of imperialism. Thieu in Vietnam, Mobuto in the Congo and the Puerto Rican authorities; Nixon’s policy of having Asians fight Asians is an example of neo-colonialism.

White Supremacy

White supremacy is a form of racism that defends white racial privileges over the colored peoples. White supremacy grew with Anglo-American expansionism. So long as there was no real economic use for white supremacy in the U.S.N.A. or rather in the English colonies, it did not develop. It was only with the need to clear the western parts of the original colonies that the concept of white supremacy arose. With the development of chattel slavery in the South, a new rationale other than bringing the Africans here to make Christians of them was needed; then the concept of a racial superiority slowly emerged.


This term refers to those peoples who are of English or European descent. Some of these peoples immigrated or were forced to immigrate. Some came to the Negro Nation as slaves or indentured servants and most those who came to the Anglo-American nation were unskilled laborers.

White Chauvinism

Because of the specific role of racism in the history of the U.S.N.A., the most aggressive and brutal specific form of national chauvinism is white chauvinism. It provides the excuse for the brutal exploitation of the colored nations and peoples of the world; it is a form that the social bribery takes to the Anglo-American people that prevents the unity of the working class; it is the principal ideology of aggressive U.S.N.A. fascism.

National Chauvinism

It is the ideology that states that one nation is superior to others and thus maintains the domination of one nation over another. Chauvinism is a concept that does away with class outlooks and substitutes the national imperialist outlook.

W.Z. Foster

One time leader of the CPUSA. Author and theoretician; he was a leading international syndicalist and revisionist. One of his best known theoretical works is that of his theory of “American Exceptionalism” in the realm of the national question. He claimed that the Negro Nation was a “nation within a nation”. By doing this, he absolves himself and the party from defining territorial boundaries and thus plays into the hands of the imperialists by allowing the continuation of the enslavement of the nation; for without boundaries, “where is the nation?”

Dred Scott Case

Dred Scott, a Negro was held a slave in Missouri. In 1834 he was taken to Fort Snelling in free territory, and he remained there, on free soil, for four years. In 1838, Scott was returned to Missouri and again held as a slave. He sued for his freedom and it went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney declared that Scott was not a citizen, but a slave. He ruled that Negroes were inferior to Anglo-Americans, that they could be justly reduced to slavery for their own benefit; that they “had no rights which a white man was bound to respect”, and that they were not, and could not become part of the Anglo-American people, even when accorded the right to vote. (Foster, The Negro People in American History, International Publishers, New York, 1954, p. 174)

Amendment #13

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the part shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Amendment #14

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Amendment #15

1. The right of the citizens of the United States, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce the provisions of this article by appropriate legislation.


The word Negro is used in different contexts and means different concepts depending on history and place.

Shortly after the discovery of the Americas, the Portuguese and Spanish probing down the coast of Africa became involved in the already developed slave trade in Africa. At that time the word Negro meant only “black” which is the literal translation from the Spanish. Centuries later, as slavery became a major industry in the United States of North America, the word Negro began to have a different meaning in fact. The slaves in the U.S.N.A. had been drawn from a variety of peoples in Africa, injected into and amongst the African slaves were a number of Indian peoples and of course, tens of thousands of slaves of partial African and partial Anglo-European descent. However the slavers lash soon did away with any distinction between the descendant of the Congo and the light skinned illegitimate son of the driver man. Based on the specific conditions of slavery in the U.S.N.A., there arose the Negro people – A historically evolved people, socially and culturally developed from the framework of slavery.

By the end of the 19th century, the word Negro again began to change its meaning in fact. Owing to the specifics of the rise of U.S.N.A. imperialism and the history of the Black Belt of the South, there arose a nation, oppressed by U.S.N.A. imperialism, whose social root and base was the afore mentioned Negro People. The term Negro developed to include a national meaning. The confusion around the term arises, because nations are not extensions of tribes and are not based on color etc., but on history. So now, on the one hand, we speak of the historically evolved community of Negro people whose common history was slavery. But on the other hand, when referring to the nation we use the term Negro and mean national and not color. In the same manner when one speaks of the French, we do not differentiate between the members of the French nation who are Basque, Lombardi or Goths – or the basic root of the nation – the Frankish peoples. We can only ask the reader to be a dialectician and differentiate when we write Negro as a historically evolved people who were slaves, or on the other hand, when we say Negro meaning national – there we refer to all the people residing in the historically evolved community of territory that we call the Negro Nation. In the sense of national, the Negroes are the Anglo-American national minority as well as the Negro peoples majority.

Negro Nation

The Negro Nation is that historically evolved stable community of Negro people, along with the historically developed Anglo-American national minority who live in the Black Belt and the economically dependent area of the Southern U.S.N.A. This nation, which evolved from the specifics of slavery is a historically evolved stable community of people formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture.

The nation is referred to as the Negro Nation because the base of that nation is the Negro people who evolved as a people prior to the evolution of the Negro Nation.