First Published: The Call, Vol. 8, No. 29, July 23, 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.
The CPML’s campaign against subjectivism, sectarianism, and bureaucracy was a turning point for me.
Before this campaign got going, I was interested in The Call and the CPML. I thought The Call was the best newspaper of the communist movement. I was pretty sure the basic line was right.
But I still had serious doubts about whether the CPML was on the way to being the vanguard party of the U.S. working class. I thought it didn’t relate to people’s lives enough. And I was not prepared to join.
In the meantime, I have changed. Most important, I have studied and have come to see the three worlds theory as correct. But the CPML and The Call have changed, too!
I think that a new picture has emerged in The Call (in the last year or so). It’s saying that there will be a revolution in the U.S., but it will be a long and difficult struggle to build it. The CPML has become more realistic about the situation in the U.S. Here are some examples of what I mean:
Bourgeois ideology in the working class (including the Party) is an important fact that communists have to deal with. Take white chauvinism. We have to get good at explaining and showing through practice how white workers as well as minorities lose by discrimination. The Odis Hyde interview and other articles, especially recent ones on the Bakke and Weber cases, are good on this.
Another example of the CPML’s growing objectivity is that it acts in unity with very broad groups – like the anti-nuke movement. By giving this support, The Call is showing understanding of where people are at now, though it still puts out its own line on nuclear energy.
I think this more realistic attitude comes from the campaign against subjectivism, sectarianism, and bureaucracy. It comes from examining the situation we’re in, instead of acting on our own subjective desires and ideas.
It impressed me that the CPML took stock of itself and learned good lessons. Because of this and because I believe the CPML program is correct, I applied for membership in the Party and joined.
A friend,
Portland, Oregon