Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Wichita Communist Cell

Announcement of a Multilateral Conference (MULC) on Party Building

Issued: February 14, 1979.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.

For some time now, several circles have expressed interest in a multilateral meeting or conference to struggle mainly around party building. The developing conditions in our party building movement make such a conference necessary and possible within the next few months. Over the last eight months or so, there has been increased communication, struggle, and work among circles and individuals who oppose the “theory of the three worlds” and look to the PLA as the leading ML party in the world, and who have opposed, to varying degrees, MLOC’s efforts to pull them into their “party.” There has been some joint theoretical and practical work, bilateral meetings, and the recent Denver Forum on the International Situation, where several circles and individuals struggled against the “theory of the three worlds” and COReS and LPR who attempted to defend this social-chauvinist theory and practice. An important part of the recent past was the struggle Demarcation organized around the government of China’s decision to cut off all aid to socialist Albania, which resulted in unity among several circles and took the form of the “Joint Statement in Opposition. . .” Such forms of struggle have facilitated the development of the content and unity in our party building movement, and while they should be continued, we should recognize that they have taken us about as far as they can. In order to develop this essentially positive motion to a higher level, systematic struggle in an organized way needs to take place, new forms of struggle need to be developed. In this regard, at the Denver Forum, several circles met and discussed specific plans for a multilateral meeting or conference. General agreement was reached, although not necessarily on all the particularities.

What follows then, is a brief history of the struggle for a multilateral meeting or conference, purpose of the planned multilateral conference (MULC), criteria for attendance, content for the MULC, preparation for the MULC, method of the conference, tentative agenda, logistics and timetable. Certainly to be a success, the MULC must be a collective effort, and the circles and individuals that attend, will need to devote a major portion of their time and effort to the MULC. Comrades are encouraged to develop criticisms, positive and negative, and propose changes. In the immediate future, in the opinion of the WCC, the study and struggle leading to, and at the MULC, is the main form for advancing party building.


In their June (1978) letter, the MLC comrades proposed a multilateral meeting which they thought would lead to a multilateral committee that would mainly organize ideological and political struggle through joint theoretical and practical work, thus laying the basis for an Organizing Committee, and after that, the founding Congress. This plan flowed from several positions: MLOC’s line and programme were essentially ML, thus implying that MLOC was a genuine center, although it was recognized that MLOC’s leadership was basically opportunist, careerist, and sectarian, and that certain aspects of MLOC’s party building plan were wrong; a genuine trend existed, although due to sectarianism and small-circle spirit, which were perceived as the main obstacle in party building, there was a possibility of two genuine centers existing in the near future. All of these views were criticized, in one way or another, by several circles and individuals, i.e. CC, Demarcation, KCFK (merged into KCRWC)-KCRWC-WCC, Some Comrades in the Bay Area. Some of these criticisms put forward that the ideological basis for MLC’s “plan” was bowing to spontaneity, that is, belittling the pressing theoretical tasks, particularly party building, which must be correctly answered in order to guide the transformation of the present state of affairs. MLC said they agreed with all of these criticisms except the views that: MLOC was an opportunist organization; MLOC is essentially a right opportunist, economist organization. MLC also proposed a method of rectification and said they believed that “the foremost task facing our movement is to develop and deepen a common line on party building and a common plan for building the party.” (Nov. 11, 1978 letter, p. 5) In criticizing MLC for leaping ahead of conditions in their call for a multilateral committee leading to an organizing committee, etc., KCRWC-WCC put forward an alternative which they felt would be the best beginning form to move party building forward a multilateral meeting. The main task of the multilateral meeting was “to seriously begin to struggle to unite around the M-L party building line, and based on our unity around line, develop and bring into being the appropriate organizational forms to put this into practice.” (KCRWC-WCC joint response to MLC’s June letter) A secondary task was to struggle around MLOC.

Since the multilateral meeting on party building was suggested, there have been several positive responses, and through struggle, development of line. WCC developed its views more in a letter to Demarcation and KCRWC, responses being general agreement with a few specific comments on the particularities. At the Denver Forum, there was good struggle among several circles and forces (KCRWC, MLC, RWP, Some Comrades, WCC) around the multilateral meeting. The discussion centered around two complementary documents: “WCC’s Basic Proposal to Organize a Multilateral Meeting on Party Building”; “Notes on a Conference of Marxist-Leninists” by Some Comrades in the Bay Area. What emerged was a synthesis of these two documents, although there was not consensus on every point.


The purpose of the MULC is to provide an organized framework so that ideological struggle can take place in a systematic way on how to advance party building, and based on principled unity, an agreed upon party building plan (or plans) would be put into practice.

Ideally, the MULC will result in a common party building plan that will be put into practice. For our part, we are prepared to put such a commonly agreed party building plan into practice, even though on certain points we may be in the minority, unless we have differences of principle. The correctness and incorrectness of any line can be verified and discovered in practice. On the other hand, such close unity may not be possible to achieve, and more than one party building plan may emerge. Still, we believe that all comrades should strive to unite on a principled basis around a common party building plan, in order to carry it out in practice.


At the Denver Forum, it was generally agreed that some points or principles of unity (POU’s) were needed for circles and individuals to attend. The POU’s should be able to exclude consolidated revisionists and opportunists or those that more or less refuse to draw lines of demarcation, but not too high as to exclude those circles who, up to this point, are making some progress toward the development of a single, M-L party of the U.S. proletariat, or who at least have not joined a consolidated revisionist or opportunist “party,” “center,” or group. There is another reason for POU’s. An individual circle may hold that another circle is consolidated revisionist or opportunist, however, this perhaps correct conclusion is not shared by many other circles because they have not studied the line struggle carefully, the line struggle in underdeveloped, they are still struggling with that group, etc. If properly developed, POU’s would help combat small-circle spirit and sectarianism in relations between circles and individuals. POU’s establish a common denominator. The following are the POU’s for the MULC, the essence of which was agreed upon by the comrades that discussed the matter at the Denver Forum:

1. All forms of revisionism and opportunism are irreconcilibly hostile to the class interests of the international proletariat and must be combatted and defeated. The main international revisionist trends are: Soviet revisionism (and capitalism has been restored in the Soviet Union which is social-imperialist); Chinese revisionism (and the “theory of the three worlds” is counter-revolutionary); Yugoslav revisionism; Social-Democracy; Trotskyism. At this time, the PLA is the leading Marxist-Leninist party.

2. There is no genuine M-L party of the U.S. proletariat, or genuine M-L center in the U.S. communist movement, and party building is the central task of all U.S. M-L’s and advanced workers. Theoretical work is principal in this period where we lack considerable M-L theory to guide practice, and practical work must be carried out simultaneously. M-L theory is needed to guide practice, and practice in turn serves to further develop theory.

3. Contradictions among comrades are to be resolved through ideological and political struggle, Bolshevik criticism and self-criticism and transformation, in order to unite on a principled basis around line and practice, and achieve higher communist organizational forms of unity.

The first POU is designed primarily to exclude revisionists of the Soviet and Chinese types, and Trotskyites as well. The point on the PLA was made because defending the dictatorship of the proletariat and socialist Albania is one of our fundamental proletarian internationalist responsibilities, and most of the circles who will initially receive this Announcement already look to the PLA for leadership. It was generally felt that if this point was a stumbling block for some, these circles should be won to this position in preparation for the MULC. Agreement with this point should not be taken to mean unity with all the line and practice of the PLA.

The second POU relates directly to party building, and the points about there being no genuine party or center were made because no useful purpose could be served by having a “party” such as MLOC present, or a circle who essentially upholds COUSML as the genuine center. The points about party building being the central task and theoretical work being principal at this time were made because, while most circles have voiced agreement with these points, the MULC needs to address how to carry them out in practice. Earlier points about right opportunism being the main danger and the importance of the key link were dropped as these were points many comrades are not clear on, and therefore should be a part of the content and struggle of the MULC.

The third POU deals with the content and form of principled relations among comrades and remained because it was generally agreed these points should guide the practice of Marxist- Leninists.

Those circles and individuals receiving this initial Announcement are as follows:
1. Communist Committee (CC)
2. Demarcation
3. Kansas City Revolutionary Workers Collective (KCRWC)
4. Marxist-Leninist Collective (MLC)
5. Pacific Collective (PC)
6. Red Dawn Committee
7. Revolutionary Workers Collective (RWC)
8. Revolutionary Workers Press (RWP)
9. Some Comrades from the Bay Area
10. Wichita Communist Cell (WCC)
11. Workers Revolutionary Organizing Committee (WROC)

At the Denver Forum, it was generally agreed that a lone comrade or group of individuals could attend as long as they agree with the essence of this Announcement, including the criteria for attendance, and actively take up the tasks of the MULC. The question of a group of individuals not working toward and assuming some communist organizational form will be taken up in the course of the MULC.

As far as other circles and individuals are concerned, those comrades who have personal contact with them should arrange a meeting or correspond with them about the MULC. Comrades are encouraged to actively seek out other circles (e.g. comrades in the Bay Area should decide who will contact the J-Town Collective–we don’t have their address or know much about them Demarcation can contact the Sunrise Collective), including comrades who you know that are in another city or state. Once circles or individuals agree with the essence of this Announcement, including the POU’s, and want to actively participate in the MULC, they should carry out the same tasks as outlined elsewhere in this Announcement. Of course, these tasks could be carried out jointly, depending on the level of unity and history of struggle.


The question of the content for the MULC is likely to generate considerable controversy. Such disagreements are inevitable when, among the circles and individuals to whom this Announcement is initially being sent, there is no common, scientific view of: each group’s history; fusion; the recent history of the U.S. communist movement; party building as the central task, the tasks that comprise it and their interrelationships, how we should carry these tasks out–a party building plan; what it means to win the broad masses while the party is being formed and how do we take this up; the main danger; etc. Of course, these are not even all the major questions, let alone minor questions, of which we lack a common, scientific view. Naturally, with widespread disunity, unclarity and confusion, disagreements over the content for the MULC are bound to exist and there must be some struggle around this. On the other hand, we should not debate the content endlessly, or the MULC will never become a reality; some compromises will be necessary and some matters will be settled in favor of the majority will of those who meet the criteria for attendance, agree with the stated purpose, and actively take up the MULC.

It was the view of most of the comrades who discussed the question of the content for the MULC at the Denver Forum, that the focus of struggle at the MULC should be on party building. WCC feels this would include the general areas elaborated in the preceding paragraph i.e. each group’s history; fusion; recent history of the U.S. communist movement; party building as the central task, the tasks that comprise it and their interrelationships, how we should carry them out a party building plan; winning the broad masses; the main danger; etc. It was felt that by keeping the scope within these bounds, this would enable comrades to more thoroughly and effectively tackle the most pressing theoretical questions and practical problems, that is, what we need most of all–a common, scientific party building plan that will be implemented, and tested in practice.

There was also general agreement that in order to have a better grasp of groups’ views, comrades should document their EXISTING views, if any, on such questions as: fascism during the 30’s and 40’s; political economy of U.S. imperialism; class analysis of the U.S.; national and colonial questions (Black, Chicano, Native American, etc.); woman question; historical analysis of the PLA, CPC, Stalin, Mao, Hoxha; etc. This means that comrades should not try to come up with NEW lines in these areas, but document EXISTING views. Such areas would not, in the main, be discussed during the plenary sessions of the MULC. The question of the split in the U.S. working-class, what this means in terms of winning advanced workers, working with intermediate workers, etc. should be discussed. Also, a question such as two-line struggle and factions in a M-L party could and, in the opinion of the WCC, should be discussed.

It was generally agreed that, in the main, questions surrounding the Comintern, Fascism, Stalin, Mao, Hoxha, PLA, and CPC should not be the subject of struggle at the MULC, but be taken up through other forms. The KCRWC and WCC feel that one of these forms could be a Conference on the International Situation at least several months after the MULC. The principal reasoning behind this is that most of the circles could not possibly adequately prepare for struggle around all these questions and the stated focus for the MULC, i.e. party building, at once. Just because we are emerging from the dark confines of our small circles and communication and struggle with each other is at a higher level, we should not be blinded by this wonderful new reality and try to take up every question at once. At this time, the focus of a MULC should be the development of a common, scientific party building plan that guides our practice.

The outline of the content below hopefully reflects the above views and will be, in the main, acceptable to comrades. Other comrades are encouraged to express their views and improve what is put forward. Some suggested readings are included.

I. Focus of Struggle

A. Circles and Individual’s History: Brief sum up of each group’s history: how it developed, the social basis, the major phases or periods of its ideological, political, and organizational development.

B. Fusion: what is the correct view of fusion? Does it include both party building and winning the broad masses? What degree of fusion exists between the communist movement and the working class movement in the U.S.? How do we fuse the two movements? References: Lenin, “Our Immediate Task,” “A Retrograde Trend. . . ,” “The Urgent Tasks of Our Movement,” “Apropos of the ’Profession de Foi’”, Vol. 4 LCW; Stalin, “The Party Before and After Taking Power,” On Strategy and Tactics, LPR ed. p. 53-57.

C. Party Building

1. Recent history of the U.S. communist movement (since the complete degeneration of the CPUSA): How did the current movement arise and under what general economic conditions? Briefly, what periods has the U.S. communist movement gone through and under what general economic conditions? NOTE: There is a need to develop uniform and consistent terminology with respect to periods and stages. References: Lenin, “Conclusion” of What Is To Be Done? (WITBD), “Tasks of Russian Social-Democrats” Vol. 2 LCW p. 327, Preface to “Tasks of Russian Social-Democrats” Vol. 6 LCW p. 210; Stalin, “The Party Before and After Taking Power” and “The Political Strategy and Tactics of the Russian Communists” On Strategy and Tactics, LPR ed. p. 14, 29, 30, 53-55: History of the CPSU(B), p. 1-53; History of the PLA, p. 1-98.

2. Party Building as the Central Task: How do we make party building the central task? References: Lenin, “The Urgent Tasks of Our Movement”, “Apropos of the ’Profession de Foi’”. Vol. 4 LCW.

3. Party Building tasks and the key link, how do we move them forward?
a. What are our party building tasks and how do we carry them out
1. Theory and programme: what theoretical work needs to be done? How do we make theory primary? References: Lenin, “Engels on the Importance of the Theoretical Struggle” and II.The Spontaneity of the Masses and the Consciousness of the Social-Democrats, WITBD, Pek. ed. p. 26-65, “Letters on Tactics” Vol. 24 LCW p. 43; Stalin, “Theory” Foundations of Leninism, Pek. Ed. p. 21-26. How do we develop our party programme? References: On Marx and Engels, Pek. ed. p. 7; Lenin, “Declaration of the Editorial Board of Iskra” “A Draft Programme of Our Party” Vol 4 LCW, Stalin, “Pol. Strat. and Tactics. . .”, “Concerning the Question of the Russian Communists” On Strategy and Tactics, LPR ed. p. 5, 6, 23, 24.
2. Winning advanced workers: what are the characteristics of advanced workers? Where are they? References: Lenin, “A Retrograde Trend .. .,” Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism, ch. VIII (“The Parasitism and Decay of Capitalism”), “Imperialism and the Split in Socialism,” Vol. 23 LCW; MLC, “Proletarian Revolution and the Split in the Working class”; Piatnitsky, “The Bolshevisation of the CP’s.. . ,” Comintern doc, 1932. What is the character of our propaganda and agitation in order to win advanced workers? References: “Tasks of Russian S-D’s” Vol 2 LCW p. 329, 331, WITBD?, chap. III p. 68, 82, 83, 102, “Retrograde Trend,” “Where to Begin” Vol. 5 LCW p. 21, “Our Programme,” “Our Immediate Task,” “An Urgent Question,” “Declaration of Iskra and Zarya,’ “Apropos of the ’Profession de Foi’ ”, Vol. 4 p. 213, 216, 225, 291, 375. What is the significance of factory nuclei, fractions, cores, mass work in winning advanced workers? Is illegal work important and how do we begin to develop it? References: Lenin, “Letter to a Comrade” Vol. 6 LCW; Piatnitsky, “The Bolshevisation of the CP’s” (Comintern Doc. 1932); 1924 Comintern Resolution on Factory Nuclei (MLOC reprint); “The Work of Factory Nuclei,” (Comintern Doc. 1930); Lenin, Left-Wing Communism “Should Revolutionaries work in Reactionary Trade Unions? ” “Preface to the Collection Twelve Years’ Vol. 13 LCW p. 108; Losovsky, “Lenin and the Trade Union Movement”; “The Red International of Trade Unions” (Comintern Doc. 1921).
3. Uniting Marxist-Leninists on a principled basis: how do we carry this out? How do we provide forms to struggle questions out? What does it mean to draw lines of demarcation? References: Lenin, “Draft Declaration of Iskra and Zarya,” Vol. 4 LCW; Left-Wing Communism, Pek. Ed. p. 6, 7.
4. Building the center: what does it mean to build the center, what will this do to the movement, how do we go about doing it? References: Lenin, “Our Immediate Task”, “An Urgent Question”, “Draft Declaration of Iskra and Zarya”, Vol. 4 LCW, WITBD?, Sections IV, V, and p. 201, “Where To Begin”, Vol. 5 LCW.
5. Other tasks and questions comrades have: one question many comrades have is of two-line struggle and factions in the party. References: Stalin, “The Political Strategy and Tactics...”; “The PLA has Always Pursued a Single M-L Line” Albania Today, No. 2, 1977, p. 9; A Basic Understanding of the CPC, p. 25, 34, 40, 44, 78. WCC has questions around developing M-L’s, advanced workers into professional revolutionaries. References: WITBD?, “The Amateurishness of the Economists and an Organization of Revolutionaries”, “Retrograde Trend” esp. p. 19 LPR ed.
b. The Key Link: Is it significant to grasp the key link in theory and in practice, and if so, what is the key link in our party building movement and how do we carry it out? References: Lenin, “Where to Begin,” vol. 5 LCW, WITBD?, Pek. Ed., p. 201; Stalin, Foundations of Leninism, pp. 95-97, Pek. ed.; Plasari, “The Vanguard of the Revolution and Socialist Construction,” Albania Today, 1972.

D. Winning the Broad Masses: what is its relationship to party building? How do we carry this out? What is the character of our propaganda and agitation? What is the significance of factory nuclei, fractions, cores, mass organizations, especially trade unions, in terms of winning the broad masses? Is illegal work important? References: see references under winning advanced workers for propaganda and agitation, factory nuclei, trade union work: plus, Lenin, Left-Wing Communism, Pek. ed., pp. 96-99; Stalin, “The Party Before and After Taking Power,” On Strategy and Tactics, LPR ed., p. 53-57.

E. The Main Danger: What is the main danger in the U.S. communist and working class movements and why? What are some examples of the main danger? Is MLOC part of the main danger and why? How should we struggle against the main danger? What are some examples of the secondary danger at present, and how do we fight it? References: Stalin, Problems of Leninism, “The Right Danger in the CP.S.U.(B.),” Pek. ed., p. 309, or Works, Vol. 11, p. 307. Lenin, “What is there in common between economism and terrorism?” WITBD?, Pek. ed., p. 92-96; Lenin, WITBD? – on how not to bow to spontaneity.

II. Documentation of Existing Views

NOTE: The subject material below will not be the subject of criticism prior to the MULC or the subject of struggle at the plenary sessions of the MULC, except where the material directly fits in to The Focus of Struggle. Where comrades do not have existing views, they should simply state so. The basis for each view should be stated, e.g., independent analysis, the PLA’s line, etc. In addition, suggested readings should be included.

A. The current crisis of U.S. (and world) imperialism and the immediate and long-term economic and political prospects. Since the movement is very weak in political economy, references in this area would be especially helpful.

B. Analysis of classes and strategy for revolution in the U.S.
1. For example, does the proletariat include only industrial workers, industrial plus service and clerical workers, or all who work for wages? How large is the petty bourgeoisie, what strata are there, and what will their stand be toward socialist revolution?
2. In the strategy for revolution, what is the strategic (long-term) alliance? Proletariat plus oppressed nations? Proletariat plus sections of the petty-bourgeoisie? Is the “united front against imperialism” the strategy for revolution, as RCP and CPML have held? Who do we direct the main blow at? the labor aristocracy, the revisionists and trots, the Democratic Party?
3. What effects would moves toward more open fascism have on our strategy and tactics? What are the lessons of the 1930s and 40s on this?

C. Nature of the struggles of Blacks, Chicanos, and Native Americans. Is there a Black, Chicano, or Indian nation with the right to self-determination?

D. Nature of oppression of women under monopoly capital. Has a theoretical foundation for understanding this oppression been laid? Should the focus of our work in this period be in the industrial sector? the clerical-service sector? with oppressed nationality women?

E. Work in the military and secret work. What should our work consist of in these areas in this period?

F. On what basis do we say that the PLA is the leading party? Evaluation of the PLA’s criticisms of the CPC under Mao, and implications for the kind of party we want to build: place of two-line struggle, Mao’s leadership and theories “revisionist”? Nature of the Black liberation struggle; strategy for revolution, etc.? Criticisms of the PLA. Inconsistency by the PLA and Hoxha in attitude toward Mao and the CPC? Negation of Mao? View by the PLA on dissolution of Comintern in 1943 and the need for an international center for the communist movement. “Equality of parties”? Evaluation of Stalin by the PLA. Hoxha’s view of “well-intentioned” imperialist countries (PCDN, Nov. 15, 1978, p. 2) The PLA’s determination of fraternal parties (e.g. the CPC(ML) ).

G. Questions on the M-L line on the International Situation, e.g. main blow, main enemy, united front as a world strategy or a tactic.


The only way that the purpose of the MULC can be accomplished is through adequate preparation and struggle prior to the Conference itself. By this we mean that each attending circle and individual(s) would develop written positions on The Focus of Struggle and circulate these well in advance of the MULC. Not only that, but we think there should be an initial round of struggle in light of these written positions at least two weeks before the Conference. Prior to the Conference, it will be clear, at least through an initial round of struggle, where each circle and individual(s) essentially stands. Most of the major differences will be out in the open, and comrades will have an opportunity to consider them internally before the Conference gets underway. In this way, all of the cadre of the circles become involved in the struggle and in deciding the various lines. By carrying out this kind of preparation and struggle prior to the Conference, we stand a good chance of coming out of the Conference with either a common party building plan that is put into practice for the real test, or division into more than one tendency and more than one plan that is put to the test. In either case, this is far superior to just getting together to listen and discuss each other’s views without any concrete, collective action emerging, which is bound to happen if written positions are not circulated in advance, if there is no initial round of struggle or response prior to the Conference.

Adequate preparation also includes the written circulation of Documentation of Existing Views at least two weeks prior to the Conference. Although these written views will not be the subject of struggle prior to the Conference or the subject of struggle at the plenary sessions, except where certain aspects relate directly to The Focus of Struggle, there will be an opportunity to take up this material, in brief, during the time allotted for bilateral meetings at the MULC.


Prior to the Conference, each group would evaluate their views in light of the initial round of responses, and come to the MULC with updated positions. If there have been substantial changes, these new positions should be written up for distribution at the Conference. The updated positions of each group would then be laid out in summary fashion according to The Focus of Struggle, restricting as much as possible direct polemics against other group’s lines. Points of clarification would follow each presentation. After this is completed, there would be a two and a half hour break for lunch and for circles to discuss among themselves the updated positions.

The plenary session would then resume and take up The Focus of Struggle, by subject area. It should be noted that all the subject areas are interconnected, but for purposes of presentation and struggle, some division must be made and the resulting subject areas approached from different angles. At the beginning of each subject, the Chairperson would sum up the unities and disunities, struggle would commence and after the differences are resolved and/or the differences are sharpened, the Chair would again sum up the unities and disunities, and struggle would move on to another subject area.

There would be an hour break for lunch and for supper each day, and evening sessions, with some time at the end of each day for the circles to discuss matters internally. The plenary sessions are expected to last two and a half days. At the very end of the plenary sessions, the Chair would sum up the party building plan or plans that are going to be put into practice. A criticism and self-criticism session would bring the plenary portion of the Multilateral Conference to a close. Depending on the length of the plenary sessions, there would be an afternoon and evening on the third day set aside for bilateral meetings.


I. Day 1
A. Start 8 a.m.: groups lay out updated positions in summary fashion, with clarification after each presentation.
B. Noon- lunch break and circles caucus.
C. 2:30 p.m.: resume plenary: struggle by subject area begins on fusion, party building, recent history of U.S. communist movement.
D. 5:30 p.m.: hour supper break
E. 6:30 p.m.: resume plenary: party building as the central task, party building tasks and key link- theory and programme.
F. 10:00 p.m.: break for the day, circles can caucus.

II. Day 2
A. Start 8 a.m.: resume plenary: struggle on party building tasks and key link winning the advanced, uniting M-L’s.
B. Noon: hour lunch break
C. 1:00 p.m.: resume plenary: struggle on building the center, other tasks, key link.
D. 5:30 p.m.: hour supper break
E. 6:30 p.m.: resume plenary: struggle on winning the broad masses and main danger
F. 10:00 p.m. break for the day

III. Day 3
A. Start 8 a.m.: complete plenary: sum-up sessions, unities and disunities, party building plan (or plans) and criticism and self-criticism.
B. Noon: hour lunch break.
C. 1:00 p.m.: begin bilateral meetings
D. 5:30 p.m.: hour supper break
E. 6:30 p.m.: bilateral meetings continue, if desired
F. 9:30 p.m.: conference officially closes


1. Location: to be determined and communicated at a later time
2. Housing, Food, and Costs for the MULC: will be dealt with in the coming months ahead
3. Resources available:
4. Maximum number of comrades from each circle: this will be determined precisely after some of the above is arranged. Right now, two or three seems reasonable.


1. Initial Announcement of a Multilateral Conference (MULC) on Party Building was sent out.

2. By ___: mail to the WCC your intentions regarding the MULC, that is, do you basically unite or disunite with the purpose, criteria for attendance, content for the MULC, etc. Circles and individuals you are in contact with should also try to adhere to this date, if at all possible. After receiving mail on _____ WCC will sum up the responses, make some decisions based on this Announcement and the responses, and mail out by a summary containing a list of comrades that are committed to actively participate in the MULC, any criticisms and amendments to this Announcement, comments from those who couldn’t or wouldn’t attend.

3. By ___: those circles and individuals committed to the MULC, will circulate to other such circles and individuals their lines on the questions contained in “I. Focus of Struggle.” The WCC will circulate, or communicate, many of the details on logistical matters by this date.

4. By ___: circulate to participating comrades:
A. your initial response to the various positions expressed on The Focus of Struggle.
B. your views, where applicable, to the questions contained m: “II. Documentation of Existing Views.”


In closing: no doubt there is a tremendous amount of work associated with this MULC. If comrades truly see work and struggle around, and at this Conference as the main way to move party building forward in the next four months, we will take up the necessary tasks, make the Conference a collective success, and a tactical victory for the U.S. proletariat. Several comrades have expressed considerable interest in this Conference, and some work on it has been done. Much, much more remains. Let us make concrete, sustained, and collective efforts to unite around a common party building plan that will be tested in practice.

With Communist Greetings,
Wichita Communist Cell (WCC)