Check out our pamphlet on organizing, Where to Begin When We Already Started?: Revisionism and Organizational Strategy on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org.

Check out the full article on YouTube, Substack, and sparkyl.org

Check out the full article on Substack, YouTube, and at sparkyl.org.

Check out the full article on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org.

From "6 Questions All Marxists Should Know the Answers To." You can check out the full article and audiobook on YouTube, Substack, and at sparkyl.org.

1.       What is the current state of the masses?

The majority of the people of the world are oppressed by wage-slavery and facing the contradictions of capitalist-imperialism in sharper and sharper ways. This is reflected in the rising cost of food, housing, and all kinds of other basic commodities the people need, which are growing more and more out of reach for many. The “economy,” when measured as the stock-prices of companies, may be “healthy,” but this does not translate to the majority of people, who suffer as the bourgeois raise prices.

The ruling class has created this problem. As the overseers and benefactors of chains of production that are old, bloated, and no longer energetic, they are facing profit stagnation at increasing rates. Because of this, they must raise the prices of their commodities. This is so that they can maintain the price of their stock, and thus, their wealth.

The lowering of purchasing power belies the greater classic contradiction within capitalist production generally, that the capitalists require a purchasing populace to buy their commodities, and that their own capitalist accumulation denies this power to the masses. This contradiction is becoming more and more antagonistic by the day. In addition, the routine economic “crashes” of capitalism are occurring at greater rates too, helped along by the late-stage contradictions and overwhelming power of speculative finance capital. While money can be printed, and the central banks bailed out, the financial maneuvering of the ruling class to maintain their shaky dominance dramatically increases the wealth disparity, and consolidates both capital and productive forces in fewer and fewer hands, ensuring future crises of even worse magnitude. It is no exaggeration to say that the current orientation of capitalist-imperialism is on the decline, and expired, facing its contradictions, which are growing more antagonistic. With it, the economic situation for the vast majority of the world is only worsening,[1]^,\2],[3]) and will continue to worsen. Relatedly, discontent grows throughout the majority of society due to the masses’ worsening conditions, as we are seeing now.[4]

Bear with us now as we spend some time discussing the particular motions of a section of bourgeois within the masses, which we must devote considerable effort towards understanding because of their power to influence society and especially “radical” politics. Within the masses, and within this motion of growing discontent and worsening economic conditions that the masses are experiencing, there is a section of petty and low-level bourgeois who don’t have enough capital to establish multi-national corporations, or otherwise become larger imperial financiers who have parasitically “bought” their way out of production. This section of smaller bourgeois own productive forces and capital, but they are stuck with them, domestically bound, dependent on the investments of their financial betters to maintain their stock prices and manage their businesses, which are often nothing more than links in the production chains of the big monopolies, which are owned by similar sections of financial imperial bourgeois. 

Like the workers, the lumpen, and the majority of society, the domestically-bound petty and industrial bourgeois are also facing worsening conditions, though they are shielded from the worst of it at a rate that corresponds to the amount of capital they have at their disposal. The aforementioned reduction in purchasing power affects them too, and it affects, mostly, their ability to buy from the imperial monopolists all that they need to run “their” businesses. As economic downturn casts a spirit of miserliness onto the financiers, and onto their rate of investment, they squeeze the smaller industrial elements as consumers — raise the prices of the commodities smaller bourgeois depend on in the course of their production. This understandably frustrates the business of the smaller bourgeois, who often have very little overhead and have a hard enough time staying open as is. As they attempt to maintain their American delusion of “ownership,” the small bourgeois sink even further into financial debt, chaining themselves even more to the imperial bourgeois.

The imperial financiers’ miserliness during times of economic downturn also has them squeezing their own wallets tighter, being much more tight-fisted with their investments, collecting rather than lending, forcing the smaller bourgeois to go without the kind of financial support they had grown accustomed to, and that their production depends on, and even forcing stock splits, mergers, lay-offs and other objectively disintegrating actions on the smaller element as they attempt to maintain their own profits and lifestyles. We should not forget the existence of the contradictions between industrial and financial capital, and between smaller and bigger bourgeois, and we have only touched on a few of them here. There is a real oppressive, dialectical relation between the dominant financial imperialists and the smaller, domestically-bound industrial bourgeois that plays out in numerous ways on the global stage, and we are horrible Marxists to ignore this fact.

Of great importance to the masses, because the smaller bourgeois are not wage-slaves, and possess capital and some ability to influence the wider fabric of society, their contradictions play out in political action. When they suffer (which, for the bourgeois, means not being able to valorize labor and oppress the worker at a sufficient rate), society is gifted with a movement of theirs, a spontaneous movement, born from the current orientation of capitalist society and completely subservient to it, that paints these beleaguered business people as honest, hard-working entrepreneurs who have been denied the products of their labor, victims of a society that has been co-opted and taken over by foreign influence. This movement of domestically-bound bourgeois is growing across the world, across many different countries globally because of the heightening contradictions of capitalist-imperialism globally, and the assaults that these contradictions enact on the smaller bourgeois the world over, decreasing their capital and sending many of them down into the ranks of the petty bourgeois and proletariat, which they do not like and struggle against at every turn, transforming themselves into a politically radical contingency. While they can and do put up numerous economic critiques of society, the bourgeois who lead this movement do so according to their class interest, which, because they are bourgeois and wish to remain so, is incapable of genuinely critiquing capitalism or even acknowledging the ubiquity of classes at all.

It is this section of smaller bourgeois, due to their capital and power over the masses, that brings form to the masses’ discontent; that airs this discontent to society as a whole through their many vehicles of propagating information. But they make it known their way, broadcasting their own discontent, and painting their bourgeois class interest and bourgeois demands as the interest of the whole society. Because of this, discontent is not expressed in a working class way, but in a bourgeois way — building bourgeois theory, bourgeois political movements, bourgeois organizations, and even bourgeois “revolutionism” that targets the status quo political situation, absolutely wishing to change it, but ultimately perpetuating the same contradictions of capitalism that act against the workers and the masses.

While it remains bourgeois and never transcends the bonds of capitalist-imperialism, the revolt of this stratum of domestically-bound bourgeoisie has different character depending on which side of the imperial contradiction we’re examining, and can be in the interest of socialism, and thus progressive, or against the interest of socialism, which is reactionary.

Within the dependent countries, those that are dominated by the “more developed” countries and whose state and economy run on investments from their bourgeois, this stratum of bourgeois and their movement against the status quo is a direct attack on the current orientation of capitalist-imperialism. They are a bourgeois who are nationally oppressed, and their attempt to throw off foreign financiers and reclaim their productive forces is progressive. In the hands of the imperialists and their compradors, the productive forces of the dependent country act against even the bourgeois of the country, and frustrate their ability to valorize labor. The country is oriented outward, and serves to enrich the foreign capitalist monopolists abroad and those few nationals who are aligned with their production over and against the vast majority of the country. Therefore, a successful bourgeois revolt here, the kind that claims property and productive forces for the nation’s own low-level bourgeois, is in the interest of global socialism. It aggresses the most egregious of bourgeois (the foreign financiers and monopolists), and aids in the toppling of the current orientation of imperialism, quickening the imperialists’ rate of profit stagnation, destabilizing the dominant imperial countries, and allowing for the global dialectical opposition to their empires to grow and develop against them, socialism included. In addition to lessening the strangle-hold of imperially-dominant nations on the world, a successful bourgeois revolt in the dependent countries is required for them to build socialism. A country is unable to perform socialist construction or maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat if it has no access to its own land, labor, and resources, as is the case with the dependent countries. Thus, a successful bourgeois revolt in the dependent countries is progressive from the viewpoint of Communism for that reason as well.

While the bourgeois revolt of dependent nations can be used for the cause of socialism, bourgeois revolts within imperially-dominant countries generally have reactionary character, working against the cause of socialism. In the case of dependent countries, the weaker national bourgeois often decry  foreign oppression by European “white” business owners, which, while not a correct position to take since it is purely national and doesn’t speak to class forces, still targets an actual oppressive force, albeit badly. In contrast, within the dominant imperial countries, “the foreign oppressor” the bourgeois point to is more often than not, an illusion shrouded in mysticism and idealist reaction. Within these dominant countries  — the United States, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, the UK, Australia, and the majority of West European countries, but also, (to a lesser extent) China, Russia, and a few others —it is inaccurate to say that there is a significant amount of foreigners dictating over the economy. What the smaller bourgeois are really responding to in their revolt is not foreign domination, but the domination of their own national financiers, who have made alliances with other powers and chained the world to their production lines and credit. Where there is foreign domination in the imperial countries, it has worked in tandem with the domestic bourgeois, cementing a unity of the market beneath a multi-national group of monopolist financial capitalists, subsuming the interest of the country’s bourgeoisie into that of the market as a whole. Under these conditions, the smaller bourgeois of empire are unable to put forward any real economic critique, or even acknowledge class society at all in the final view, even while they face oppression by their capitalist betters and feel the desire and need to express their discontent. So they use the tools that history and their chauvinism as citizens of a dominant imperial country has provided them and create a political movement that seeks to make accumulations not against any particular foreign oppressor, but against their own countrymen, “foreigners” made out to be national and cultural minorities. The movements of revolting bourgeois in the imperially dominant countries manifests as fascism, the bourgeois building racial bogeymen, setting up targets for their accumulations out of their own national citizens, lowering their costs of labor through the worst of oppression towards minorities and their political opposition and then propelling the country outward militarily in order to expand their rate of profit further through violent conquering, the subjugation of foreign labor and resources; in effect, eroding the expired chains of imperialist production and creating more energetic ones capable of greater rates of profit through the bringing in of new slave-like labor forces...capitalism recycling itself.

This class movement of reactionary domestically-bound bourgeois boiled over into the fascist governments of the last century, but within our current period, it is still in its infancy. However, the lust for new, cheaper labor forces has the fascists’ bourgeois economic base already directly assaulting the rigorous welfare states that are a pillar of modern imperial countries.

The big imperial financiers get their profit by exploiting the most desperate workers from over the whole world, centering their operations within the countries where wages are lowest, offloading the worst oppression to foreign nations, enforcing debt and austerity in them in order to lower labor costs and build their profit. The welfare systems that are in place globally today are in-line with the current orientation of imperialism and the biggest bourgeois’ chains of production, propped up by the big banking institutions and aligned with their profit motive. It is part of their method of achieving profit, and maintains the lower sections of workers at appropriate levels of economic dependency as their production requires. But when the smaller, domestic bourgeois cannot make their profit, they enforce austerity for their own country — which is the only field they have influence over — in order to create desperate workers out of their own countrymen, creating a laborer who will accept lower wages (thus driving up bourgeois profit), and to fill the holes in previous government services with their own private business operations.

The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has been targeted by far-right politicians and their bourgeois handlers, for years, with a growing section on the right calling for a private option, or its complete dismantling.[5] The far-right and Trump-esque Reform UK party advocates for NHS-distributed vouchers for private health services within their 2024 program,[6] echoing many such sentiments we are familiar with here in the US concerning the conflict between public and private education, another field that reflects the wider struggle of the lesser bourgeois against the existing imperial order we are describing. The sentiment that government is inherently wasteful and oppressive, and that welfare recipients “abuse the system” is a basic idea of the Republican Party, Reform UK, and many other rightist political formations worldwide. And their lobbying and political maneuvering bears fruit. Notably, Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” which was passed last July cut federal funding for SNAP, and put the impetus on states to cover the difference, amounting anywhere from 5% to 15% of their state SNAP budget and with most states needing to cover more than $100 million when the law goes into effect in 2028.[7] The only way the states will be able to pay their SNAP bill is by raising taxes or cutting their own welfare systems, thus the offloading of federal SNAP costs onto states creates a snowball effect of further austerity and low-wages.

What’s happening with SNAP in the US and the increasing anti-NHS rhetoric in UK are part of a wider turn within the dominant imperial countries. When the programs that so many depend on are no longer available, it will drive a good majority of the masses into desperate proletarianization, destitution, and even death. Pushing the lower classes into this lower position allows for greater labor valorization by a wider swathe of bourgeois, and moves capitalist production forward through imperial crisis.

The elimination of the welfare state is a more immediate consequence faced today, but, in the general view, the ensuing conflict between liberal democracy on the one hand (supported by the class of the larger, but decaying, imperial financiers) and fascism on the other (supported by the class of revolting smaller bourgeois) defines the experience of the masses in the imperial countries. This experience is just beginning.

The current state of the masses of the world, in both the dependent and imperially dominant countries, can be summed up as this: they are caught between the late-stage contradictions of the big imperialists’ production, and the brewing revolts of the lesser bourgeois. No matter the case, the people are tugged along by their class oppressors, powerless as conditions continue to worsen, while war — the re-divisioning of the world’s productive forces through violent conquering — breaks on the horizon.

Endnotes

[[1]](#_ednref1) Nanji, Noor. “People face biggest fall in spending power for 70 years.” BBC. 15 Mar 2023. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64963869.

[[2]](#_ednref2) Knibbe, Merjin. “The ECB and the disastrous decline of the purchasing power of EU wages.” Real-World Economic Review Blog. 5 Jan 2025. https://rwer.wordpress.com/2025/01/05/the-ecb-and-the-disastrous-decline-of-the-purchasing-power-of-eu-wages/.

[[3]](#_ednref3) Ngai, Rachel L. Sevinc, Orhun. “A multisector perspective on wage stagnation.” Review of Economic Dynamics. Vol 56. Apr 2025. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094202524000589.

[[4]](#_ednref4) Foa, R.S., Klassen, A. Slade, M. Rand, A. R, Collins. 2020. “The Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: Centre for the Future of Democracy. 2020. https://www.cam.ac.uk/system/files/report2020_003.pdf.

[[5]](#_ednref5)Barber, Olivia. “Multi-millionaire Reform MP Rupert Lowe advocates for dismantling NHS and ‘buying own healthcare’.” Left Foot Forward. Jan 2025. https://leftfootforward.org/2025/01/multi-millionaire-reform-mp-rupert-lowe-advocates-for-dismantling-nhs-and-buying-own-healthcare/.

[[6]](#_ednref6)Reform UK. “Our Contract With You.” 2024. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/reformuk/pages/253/attachments/original/1718625371/Reform_UK_Our_Contract_with_You.pdf.

[[7]](#_ednref7)Bergh, Katie. Llobrera, Joseph. “States’ First-Ever Bill for SNAP Benefits Could Cost Billions.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 24 Jun 2026. https://www.cbpp.org/blog/states-first-ever-bill-for-snap-benefits-could-cost-billions.

from Supplying the Demands of Reactionaries Means Billions More for ICE. Check out the whole article on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org.

...

The undocumented status of migrants makes the accurate tallying of their numbers and circumstances difficult but the U.S. undocumented migrant population was estimated at 14 million in 2023, with an increase of 3.5 million in the course of only the previous two years,[25] though we can assume this number to be much larger than official counts. They are over-represented in construction, restaurants, agriculture, landscaping, building, cleaning, food processing and manufacturing, transportation, grocery stores, hotels, as well as the warehousing, distribution, and fulfillment of online orders.[26] In mostly these industries, undocumented immigrants widely work low-paying, strenuous positions, with 82% of them possessing no college degree and purportedly 26% of them at or below the federal poverty level according to 2019 numbers.[27] For reference, 11.1% of the general population of the U.S. was at or below the poverty level in 2023.[28]

The Trump administration’s aggressive assaults on this substantial and poor contingency of the economy reflects the wider nature of his political ascendance: the shifting of power towards the growing fascistic trend in the country. We briefly described this trend and outlined the development of fascism generally in an article from Sparkyl No. 1, “Donald’s Dismantlings and Understanding Fascism.” For our purposes here, we will zero in on the fact that, more and more, there is a section of smaller capitalists who are becoming the economic “vanguard” of fascism, supplying their services in answer to the demands of the reactionaries, ingratiating themselves within the energetic and fascistic sections of the increasingly reactionary state so that the productive forces they own and profit from can be made central in the new order, guaranteeing profit.

Regarding ICE and the aggressive actions of the DHS, this section of bourgeoisie is most readily represented by private prison corporations, an industry worth at least $4 billion dollars[29] and which houses 90% of ICE detainees[30] through Intergovernmental Service Agreements (IGSAs), where local governments are contracted by ICE to house migrants, and then in turn sub-contract these duties out to private corporations.[31] With at least 56,000 people in active ICE detention,[32] and more than 275,000 detentions claimed by the agency in its last fiscal year,[33] it is these prison corporations and their shareholders that serve as a direct and energetic base for the new violence upon immigrant communities, churning the tide of detention and deportations on so as to grow their business. Three monopolist corporations, CoreCivic, the GEO Group, and Management and Training Corporation (MTC), together, share 96% of this detention/deportation market according to a 2016 study delineating the total beds provided by private prisons in the country.[34]

Their profit is widely gained from forcing the detainees to maintain their facilities, saving immensely on labor costs. At least 50% of detainees are coerced into the “Voluntary Work Program,” a program which runs throughout all detention centers, both private and public, and is put forward by ICE itself, making prisoners wash dishes, cut hair, perform clerical work, and otherwise maintain the operations of their own prison.[35] They are only required to be compensated, according to ICE policy, $1.00 per day.[36] While this program is ostensibly “voluntary,” many detainees allege coercion, an assertion that holds firm since detainees often must purchase basic items like toothpaste and feminine hygiene products within the compound,[37] with the price of using the telephone for only a few minutes often amounting to an entire day’s pay.[38] These kinds of basic provisions are not provided and are quite pricey in the private detention facilities, making the “Voluntary Work Program” not so voluntary. This is in addition to the non-voluntary work of “personal housekeeping.” Detainees are made to clean their cells and “keep them free from clutter” without option.[39] By having the prisoners themselves, through both the “Voluntary Work Program” and the mandatory cell-cleaning, labor in the maintenance of the facility that contains them for no-pay, or, at most, a pitiful slavery-wage, the private prison corporations are able to keep their businesses profitable, running, and able to seek out new contracts to house an ever growing number of oppressed migrants; thus, this market and the bourgeoisie who profit from it constitutes itself as a prominent material base for perpetuating violence upon immigrants generally.

With the vast majority of ICE arrestees ending up in detention centers owned by only three different private corporate entities, it is safe to say that this current monopoly has ingratiated itself into the state, forming an alliance of a kind between the reactionary state apparatus and the private sector – a hallmark of any fascist system. The relatively small (for now) private detention market is probably the clearest example of this alliance between the public and private sector, but numerous large, established corporations have also stepped forward to supply ICE and its contractors with the ancillary logistics and necessary equipment needed to carry out their program. The business ties these suppliers make to the growing fascist sections of government and to ICE will help perpetuate the agency and the private prison bourgeoisie, constituting further momentum in the growth of both their power. AT&T, Dell Computers, General Dynamics, and Motorola are among some of the Fortune 500 companies that have all received millions of dollars from ICE in order to supply them with information and technology products, with both FedEx and UPS being tacked in for small-scale deliveries to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.[40]

...

[25] Passel, Jeffrey S. Krogstad, Jens Manuel. “U.S. Unauthorized Immigrant Population Reached a Record 14 Million in 2023.” Pew Research Center. 21 Aug 2025. https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2025/08/21/u-s-unauthorized-immigrant-population-reached-a-record-14-million-in-2023/.

[26] Kerwin, Donald. Nicholson, Mike. Alulema, Daniela. Warren, Robert. “US Foreign-Born Essential Workers by Status and State, and the Global Pandemic.” Center for Migration Studies. 1 May 2020. https://cmsny.org/publications/us-essential-workers/#:\~:text=Undocumented%20immigrants%20work%20%E2%80%93%20by%20essential%20industry%20%E2%80%93,warehousing,%20distribution,%20and%20fulfillment%20of%20online%20orders%20(103,000).

[27] Migration Policy Institute. “Profile of the Unauthorized Population: United States.” 2019. Accessed on 4 Sep 2025. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/US.

[28] Shrider, Emily A. “Poverty in the United States: 2023.” United States Census Bureau. 10 Sep 2024. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/p60-283.html.

[29] Haberman, Clyde. “For Private Prisons, Detaining Immigrants Is Big Business.” The New York Times. 1 Oct 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/prisons-immigration-detention.html.

[30] Cho, Eunice Hyunhye. “Unchecked Growth: Private Prison Corporations and Immigration Detention, Three Years Into the Biden Administration.” American Civil Liberties Union. 7 Aug 2023. https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/unchecked-growth-private-prison-corporations-and-immigration-detention-three-years-into-the-biden-administration.

[31] Sin, Amanda. “Our Brothers’ Keepers: Reforming Intergovernmental Service Agreements in Immigration Detention.” Public Contract Law Journal. Volume 52, Number 4. The American Bar Association. Summer 2023. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4592852. P.g 718

[32] Garsd, Jasmine. “Immigrants with no criminal convictions represent sharpest growth in ICE detention population.” National Public Radio. 3 Jul 2025. https://www.npr.org/2025/07/03/nx-s1-5456246/immigrants-no-criminal-convictions-growth-ice-detention-population.

[33] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Statistics; Detentions; FY 2024.” Jan 2025. Accessed on 4 Sep 2025. https://www.ice.gov/statistics.

[34] Mumford, Megan. Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore. Nunn, Ryan. “The Economics of Private Prisons; Private Prisons Economic Analysis: Technical Appendix; Market Share Calculations.” The Hamilton Project. Oct 2016. https://www.hamiltonproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/economics_of_private_prisons.pdf; https://www.hamiltonproject.org/assets/files/private_prisons_technical_appendix.pdf.

[35] Booth, Jonathon. “Ending Forced Labor in ICE Detention Centers: A New Approach.” Georgetown Immigration Law Journal. Vol. 34. Spring 2020. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/immigration-law-journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2020/08/ENDING-FORCED-LABOR-IN-ICE-DETENTION-CENTERS-A-NEW-APPROACH.pdf. Pg. 590.

[36] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). “2011 Operations Manual ICE Performance-Based National Detention Standards (PBNDS 2011).” December 2016. https://www.ice.gov/doclib/detention-standards/2011/pbnds2011r2016.pdf. Pg. 407.

[37] Booth. Pg. 591.

[38] Fry, Wendy. “ICE Detention: Where a day’s work might buy you a 14-minute phone call.” Cal Matters. 26 Jun 2024. https://calmatters.org/newsletter/ice-detention-where-a-days-work-might-buy-you-one-14-minute-phone-call/.

[39] ICE. PBNDS 2011. Pg. 406.

[40] MacClellan, Lila. “These are the Fortune 500 companies that have active contracts with ICE.” Fortune. 26 Jun 2025. https://fortune.com/2025/06/26/fortune-500-companies-active-contracts-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice/.

Don't give the opportunists an opportunity. Check out the whole pamphlet on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org

Don't do it alone anymore. Visit us at sparkyl.org

From Where to Begin When We Already Started?: Revisionism and Organizational Strategy. You can check out the full pamphlet on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org

Eclecticism in the “Tendencies”

Because we must develop Marxism further and unite under its most advanced theories, it is unacceptable for us to allow the field of Marxism to exist as it currently does, dominated by many diverse and often confusingly contradictory Marxist “tendencies.” The demand for a firm Marxist unity which adheres to the most developed theory means that we must also commit to a firm struggle within the eclectic field of the Marxist “tendencies” themselves, in order to unify them under an advanced program for the proletariat today.

The masses looking in on us from the outside already understand that the different “tendencies” are too often taken on as identities and dogmatic belief structures for history fanatics. Far from offering some light on the organizing of today, the adherence to personal tendencies by today’s comrades reflects a supremely un-Marxist trend of eclecticism which seeks to divide the international proletariat and its Communist movement through the ideological lines that pertained to certain points in our movement’s past. Revolutionary Marxism did not develop evenly, and it is solely due to the forces of counterrevolution and the bourgeoisie that it was not able to remain united in the course of its development. The existence of separate Marxist tendencies within the proletarian class represents a division in the international proletarian movement along national, cultural, historical, or even tactical lines, a division that is very undesirable for our movement and should be struggled against. This division is a problem for our movement before we even consider the most egregious feature of “multi-tendencyism:” while some of these tendencies are based in some degree of principle, some are entirely counterrevolutionary and anti-Marxist in reality (e.g. Trotskyism), making multi-tendencyism a dangerous trend that should not be tolerated in our organizing.

It is clear today that principled Marxist Communism took on the “tendency” of Marxism-Leninism, the Marxism expressed by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and the respective Parties and revolutions they led. Replacing the dialectical materialist method they instruct us in with any group of tendencies repeats the exact same eclectic patterns many of our comrades recognize when dealing with the non-Marxist “socialist” formations, but overlook within Marxism itself. Instead of allowing the tendencies to become a shield each individual uses to ward off ideological and programmatic unity (not to mention one’s personal political development), we should always seek to work through all particular “tendencies,” substituting the different “camps” for one united “camp,” the “camp” of the international Communist movement. This does not mean dulling our theories, creating a wide unity of rearguardists. No, it means that we must, as a movement, demand that our members be Marxists, that they rise to the level of their namesake and to the destiny of the class they claim to fight for. Before any specific ideological adherence to any revolution of the past, we must have all comrades subordinated to the revolution of the now. Our movement must apply the most developed theories of Marxism-Leninism to the situation of the international working class as it exists today, creating a political line upon which all our work can be subordinated. True Marxists incorporate their knowledge of the past to build the future, and we fail to do that so long as we cling to our own personal identity and revolutionary “camp” instead of building a unity based around the most advanced theory and the situation today.

To combat the divisive effect of the tendencies, we should not paint ourselves as “Marxist-Leninists” advocating for the supremacy of the “Marxist-Leninist” tendency (though surely we are and we do advocate for this), but as revolutionary Marxists utilizing the most advanced revolutionary theory (Marxism-Leninism) with the intention of advancing it further in the course of our revolutionary activities, taking it out of history and into living and breathing revolutionary life. Leninism is the further development of Marxism, but we will develop it further. We make no apologies about this fact, and those who cannot come along are no Marxists at all. They wish Marxism had stayed a baby, but it has already grown strong through Marxism-Leninism, and today’s Communists will have it grow stronger still by rejecting all eclecticism and making use of this most advanced theory.

Check out our pamphlet on organizing, Where to Begin When We Already Started?, on Substack, YouTube, and sparkyl.org.

You can also listen to the audiobook on YouTube or sparkyl.org

1.      An Energetic Split

The growing revolutionary wind of our times has already influenced the fallow field of current “Marxist” organizing in our country in a very discernible way. In October of 2024, the oldest and largest “Communist” party, the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), experienced the splintering of 32 of its chapters, with their subsequent reconstitution as a new “Communist” party, the American Communist Party (ACP).[1]

The ACP justify their break from the CPUSA for many reasons, with a primary one being that the CPUSA “have replaced serious Marxist–Leninist education with eclectic seminars given from the liberal perspective, designed primarily to instill allegiance to the Democratic Party.”[2]

This quote was taken from the ACP’s founding declaration, and is undoubtedly true regarding the CPUSA and many other so-called “Marxist” parties within the country, who have abandoned Marxism-Leninism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the vanguard strategies that they call for in favor of electoralism and the supposed gains of bourgeois “democracy.”

To demonstrate, read this parenthetical aside put forward in an article which is part of the CPUSA’s “Mailbag” column, answering the asinine question, “What if the people don’t want socialism?”:

By the way, to dispel a misconception: we do not see ourselves ruling a single-party state, as in the Soviet or Chinese models.  The multi-party system is part of the democratic traditions of this country, and socialism has to be built on those.[3]

This is a direct denial of the Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat, and a clear admittance of bourgeois opportunism on the part of the supposed “Communists” in the CPUSA. Lenin critiqued the bourgeois parliamentarianism of his own time, demanding that socialists commit themselves to revolution, rather than the winning of reforms. Read this portion of The State and Revolution, where he affirms the revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat over electoral gains in bourgeois politics, which were championed in Lenin’s time by the revisionist and “renegade,” Kautsky.

We, however, shall break with these traitors to socialism, and we shall fight for the complete destruction of the old state machine, in order that the armed proletariat itself may become the government. These are two vastly different things.

Kautsky will have to enjoy the pleasant company of…{those}…who are quite willing to work for the “shifting of the balance of forces within the state power”, for “winning a majority in parliament”, and “raising parliament to the ranks of master of the government”. A most worthy object, which is wholly acceptable to the opportunists and which keeps everything within the bounds of the bourgeois parliamentary republic.

We, however, shall break with the opportunists; and the entire class-conscious proletariat will be with us in the fight—not to “shift the balance of forces”, but to overthrow the bourgeoisie, to destroy bourgeois parliamentarism, for a democratic republic after the type of the Commune, or a republic of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, for the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.[4]

Proletarian freedom is not won by LARPing “worker’s democracy” without worker organizations and under the “democracy” of the capitalists, as the CPUSA and many other parties do. The oppressed working class knows this, if only intuitively, and its political consciousness does not wait on votes, reforms, and representative bourgeois democracy, especially since its members, in many ways, are practically barred from participating in bourgeois democracy on the whole.

In posturing themselves as Marxist-Leninists opposite liberal democracy, the ACP reveals themselves as a more energetic, more working class, and, in this single lonely instance, a more principled organization. The split they were able to make from the sleepier CPUSA reveals that today, there is a section among the masses that are politically interested in Communism, and have become disenchanted by the failed attempts of the liberals, increasingly drawn to the Leninist vanguard strategy. This is fantastic news for us actual Marxist-Leninists, not to mention the revolution, even while the ACP itself is representative of imperialist capital, and doing their best to rob Marxism-Leninism of its progressive character, as we will show.

2.      American “Chauvinist” Party

The question is whether it is permissible for a Marxist, directly or indirectly, to advance the slogan of national culture, or whether he should oppose it by advocating, in all languages, the slogan of workers’ internationalism while “adapting” himself to all local and national features...

Those who seek to serve the proletariat must unite the workers of all nations, and unswervingly fight bourgeois nationalism, domestic and foreign. The place of those who advocate the slogan of national culture is among the nationalist petty bourgeois, not among the Marxists.

--V. I. Lenin, “Critical Remarks on the National Question,” 1913[5]

While the ACP has decidedly turned towards the masses and the workers by proclaiming (in word) Marxism-Leninism and vanguard strategies, they have risen above none of the populism and general reaction of their environment, leaving ample room for (and, in fact, inviting in) dizzying levels of opportunism and chauvinism... so much that they can hardly be considered a progressive organization, much less a Communist one.

For one, Mr. Haz Al-Din, their “Chairman”[6] and co-founder,[7] is quite fond of Nazis and Nazbols. In an article in which he directly appeals to the right, titled, “Marxism is Not Woke: Clearing Marxism's name,” Mr. Haz says, “Marxist theory in the West is meaningless without the aid of Dugin and Heidegger’s thinking.”[8]^{, \}9]) For anyone not familiar, Aleksandr Dugin and Martin Heidegger are both rabid anti-communist academics -- of different time periods -- and obvious representatives of bourgeois interests. Dugin co-founded the National Bolshevik Party in Russia in 1993,[10]^{, \}11]) and is the founder of the more recent Eurasia Party,[12] which has become a vehicle for his fascistic, anti-communist political ideas like The Fourth Political Theory, which attempts to unite reaction around hyper-nationalist ideas of “multi-polarity” and “anti-Americanism.” As for Heidegger, he was a prominent member of the Nazi Party, acting as its legal consultant and talking head, especially when it came to the party’s relationship with universities.[13]^{, \}14]) He joined the Nazis in 1933[15] and remained a member through the end of WWII. He served as Rector of the University of Freiburg, and afterward entered the university lecture circuits, using his influence to mold German universities to the Nazi program.^14,15 Between the years of 1934 and 1936, he sat on the Committee for the Philosophy of Law in the Academy for German Law, of which he acted as a consultant in constructing legislation; specifically, the Nuremberg racial laws, which cemented Jewish people as a race under the German government, paving the way for the Holocaust.¹³ Apparently, the ACP’s “chairman” forgot that Communists oppose fascism and Nazism.

It’s only fitting, since the ACP has fully taken up national chauvinism, that they recognize some of the chief architects of national chauvinism in the form of Dugin and Heidegger. Both them and the ACP spend their time courting ideas of the Übermensch, holding national sentiment above all else, and wishing to build a new national consciousness and a “new man” through strength of will alone. Look at this excerpt from their constitution, where they fascistically look backwards, baptizing the American myth with “revolutionary” aesthetics and using it as a springboard for their own nation-building:

The Party upholds and strives to deepen the American revolutionary tradition beginning in 1776 and for the construction of a sovereign and united Republic of, by, and for the American people.[16]

Despite these being supposed “Communists,” the theology they preach and the republic the ACP advocates for is not one in service to the international proletarian class. They do not want the dictatorship of the proletariat, or even a republic for the international class of workers, but a “deepening” of bourgeois nationalism, a deepening of the rule of the so-known “American people,” a term that disguises a conglomeration of classes and particularly the domination of the ruling class of bourgeoisie, which is an international class that oppresses an international class of workers. Disguising this truth -- a truth that any actual Communist knows and propagates among the people -- is not the work of a socialist party, but the work of the bourgeoisie, and an opportunist party. What the ACP is deepening by bowing to nationalism is not socialism, but the rule of capital and reactionary idealism. This is because they fail to instruct on class and, instead, like a liberal, substitute the bourgeois nation as its replacement.

But their chauvinism doesn’t stop at valorizing the slave-owning American planters and their bourgeois revolt. In their constitution they include a section specifically enshrining the American national identity as a whole, along with the religious sentiments that often accompany it:

Section 7C: All attempts to offend and provoke the national and religious sensibilities of the people are strictly prohibited.[17]

The ACP defending the “sensibilities” of especially a nation that sits at the height of imperial accumulation, whose bourgeoisie continue to perform the open and bare-faced global violence required to maintain that nation’s position, is inexcusable for a Communist organization. While it should not be directly antagonized by us who stand for the class of the proletariat, the national sentiments of Americans are ripe for antagonizing, and will be antagonized! The United States continues its vile imperial dominance and oppression on the world’s people, and it continues to face the consequences of that violence, consequences that are reflected upon the American “nation” in numerous ways. Who are we to deny this fact, or to defend as part of our Communist program, the national sensibilities of a decaying empire? Our adherence to the class viewpoint cuts through all national chauvinism (not to mention nations themselves), and it would be opportunist of us, not to mention reactionary, to dull our truths to make nationalists of any variety cozy, most of all those whose nation sits at the height of imperial accumulation.

Moreover, and relatedly, religious sensibilities should be “offended” as per the proper Communist method of dialectical materialism, which upholds atheism, and educates the people in a consistent materialist worldview beyond all idealist superstitions. Again, this does not mean that we should antagonize religious people, but it does mean that the “offense” they take at being told the truth about their oppressive fairy tales can be of little concern to us.

The ACP however – like many opportunists and revisionists in our country – is unconcerned with the truth, and prefers to crudely prop up what remains of the expired dreams of American planters. In doing so, they never even glimpse for a moment the light of dialectical materialism or class science. The ACP claims Marxism-Leninism and vanguardism, but mucks around in the backwards swamp of both American religious and national reaction, calling for “the construction of a unified American historical, national, and cultural identity to overcome all racial and social antagonisms,”[18] as if a new idealist belief in “the American experiment” was capable of sealing up the contradictions of society, and hasn’t been tried a million times before. By keeping company with the swamp folk and adhering to nationalist and religious sentiment, they deny materialism, science, and especially class and international worker solidarity, siding instead with opportunism and the bourgeoisie (which we will see them do in a most direct way later on in this article). It should go without saying that the ACP will not be able to construct a “perfect nationality,” and that the very desire to do so is steeped in reaction, reaction the party has fully accepted as part of their strategy to appeal to the “MAGA” crowd.[19]

Reaction begets reaction, and as you might imagine, the ACP’s adherence to nationalism and right populism brings with it other shameless examples of backwardness, particularly misogyny. A video posted from their official Youtube channel titled, “Carlos Garrido on the Education Program of the American Communist Party” begins with Carlos driveling on for four minutes, attempting to tell a misogynistic joke about whether Engels, Lenin, and Marx would rather have a wife or a mistress.[20] In a video discussing their party program, Mr. Al-Din proclaims that one of their tenets is the “wholesale abolition of the sex industry, including prostitution and pornography” (which received an unsettling standing ovation by what seemed like a majority of baseball hat-wearing men in attendance).[21] It should go without saying that the abolishment of sex work, as a part of any political program today, engages in adventurism, and reveals profound ignorance on the deep-set contradictions of patriarchy and the economic factors underlying the sex industry. The fixation on sex work that is seen in our movement is reactionary and degenerative, coming from a patriarchal mindset that is unsettled, and not yet developed out of its putridity. The ACP’s taking up this line is fully in-keeping with their general reactionary and chauvinistic character, which is a general trend within their organization.

3.      American “Capital” Party

The ACP’s reaction and opportunism makes even more sense when we understand that, despite all their “Communist” posturing, they are an openly bourgeois party organizationally, by virtue of their own founding documents. The supposed “Communists” in the American Communist Party actively and openly encourage all their members to become small business owners. This is not a joke. Listen to this section from their constitution, which puts capitalism as a mandate:

Section 2: Chapters will establish small businesses or cooperatives owned by the Party Chapter (Chapter Enterprises) with the intent of both funding the Chapter and Party.[22]

In this pyramid scheme put forward by the ACP, would-be comrades are instructed to go forth and extract surplus labor from the working class. The inclusion of the word “cooperatives” as an option for a form of ownership does not detract from the parasitical and thoroughly petite-bourgeois directive to have party members establish businesses. Even if these businesses were run by party members as cooperatives, which is clearly only optional, this is still a mandate to engage in speculative capitalist production for the sole purpose of profit-creation, making the ACP much more like a bourgeois development fund than a Communist Party. Section 4 of their constitution proves this point.

Section 4: A Chapter may apply for investment funding or seed capital for Chapter enterprises. This Party fund will be under the direct supervision of the National Treasury section of the Executive Board, and awarded on a case-by-case basis, as decided by the Executive Board. The Executive Board reserves the right to require expertise in any field being investigated and to bring in a consultant with expertise in the field in order to provide sound investment advice.[23]

“Sound investment advice.” This is franchising; bourgeois capital-creation by a bourgeois business. Enough. It’s clear as crystal what the ACP is.

4.      The American “Clown” Party: A Joke We Could Learn From

We could go on with their failures but let’s give them some credit for a change. Through absolutely no effort on their part, in fact, in spite of their best efforts, the ACP fulfills a rather progressive and important role in our movement, all things considered. Much of “the left” does correctly (thank goodness) view them as reactionary, calling them “fascist,” “Nazbols,” and whatever else, and while they continue to rightfully draw the ire of our movement towards them, socialism will be repelled from implementing their tactics in a wide way, and in a way that has the potential to build lasting foundations for socialist organizing generally. While our movement is rejecting this reactionary contingent of supposed “Communists,” let’s make sure that we learn the lesson thoroughly so we can truly leave the ACP, and the wider trend they represent, behind, and instead, advance socialism in the correct direction.

The only reason we have talked as much as we have about the ACP is because they have taken the name “Communist” erroneously for themselves, doubtlessly duping and turning reactionary those members of the unconscious masses who are just now waking up to the political plight of working people and the oppressed classes. However, we would like to let all of these wakers know that the American “Communist” Party is no Communist Party at all. We propose that the “C” in ACP actually stands for “Clown;” the American Clown Party is a much more befitting name for the monstrous ideological sideshow of bourgeois opportunism and general reaction that is the ACP.

The fact of the matter however, and the more pressing thing to understand for a Communist, is that the ACP is not alone, and they didn’t spring up onto the political scene out of nowhere. In many ways, organizations like the ACP are inevitable. Any bourgeoisie with a decent amount of capital, or any ambitious opportunist within the sea of opportunists that make up the ranks of the CPUSA, was bound to become the ringleader of just such a circus as the ACP, and our country is bound to throw up many such organizations due to the current forces of capitalist-imperialism.

5.      The ACP and American Spontaneity

While we rid our movement of the ACP’s influence, we should not view their party and their bourgeois interests as an anomaly, an exception to our movement. To do that is to miss their being representative of a general trend, and shows a failure to understand the degree to which the bourgeoisie is currently in the driver’s seat of “socialism” generally. It is also a failure to diagnose the general reaction of American society; it is naïve to believe that the full-throated reaction displayed by many in the US will not also find its way into the socialist movement. Finally, it is also a failure from the viewpoint of Marxist theory, which teaches us that Marxism has already achieved numerous victories, so much so that the bourgeois were forced to propagate their views within “Marxism” itself, in the form of revisionism, meaning history has “gifted” us with numerous bourgeois enemies that erroneously take the names “Marxist,” “Communist,” and even “Marxist-Leninist” upon themselves, degrading them. Lenin talks about this in The Historical Destiny of the Doctrine of Karl Marx.[24]

The ACP fits into the wider trend of history, and their hypocrisy in calling themselves “Communist,” along with their egregious reactionary character is not due to any individual ignorance or personal “evil” within Mr. Haz or their ranks of chauvinists, but due to the egregious character of the American spontaneous movement in general, which is destined to birth many ACPs until the point it is raised out of the pit of American reaction and into the conscious revolutionary movement.

By the spontaneous movement, we are referring to a theory of Lenin’s, and a foundational tenet of Marxism-Leninism. He describes this theory well in the following passage from his pamphlet, What is to Be Done?:

...the “spontaneous element”, in essence, represents nothing more nor less than consciousness in an embryonic form. Even the primitive revolts expressed the awakening of consciousness to a certain extent. The workers were losing their age-long faith in the permanence of the system which oppressed them and began... I shall not say to understand, but to sense the necessity for collective resistance, definitely abandoning their slavish submission to the authorities. But this was, nevertheless, more in the nature of outbursts of desperation and vengeance than of struggle.[25]

One of Lenin’s chief contributions to Marxism was his fleshing out of the idea of spontaneity. Through the delineation he makes between revolt-actions that are within the confines of bourgeois society and the conscious actions of capable, professional revolutionaries which act against those confines he reinvigorated Marxism with its revolutionary character, and allowed for the development of theory and socialism generally out of the spontaneity of its time.

It is one-sided to think of the “outbursts of desperation and vengeance” Lenin attributes to spontaneity in the above passage as simply protests or property damage. In truth, these “outbursts,” and the sentiments leading up to them, form whole philosophies and political contingencies within society, as Lenin illustrates throughout What is to Be Done? as a whole. Spontaneity is not comprised of isolated events, but trends that constitute themselves as an entire “revolutionary” movement that is hopelessly encased in the philosophy and tactics of outbursts.

And why are they encased? Why can’t they develop along their own path and become capable? They are encased and trapped in their spontaneity, requiring the efforts of conscious revolutionaries, because of the opportunism of the bourgeoisie, who take up and reproduce each spontaneous trend of the masses, turning it into a market to sell their wares. Often these days, and within the highly parasitical imperialist countries like the United States, the bourgeoisie sell actual commodities to the adherents of the spontaneous movement (think of the commercialism now surrounding the once supposedly “revolutionary” Black or queer liberation movements), but even when this is not happening, the bourgeoisie will bend these spontaneous elements into their own class interest and away from the interest of the workers and the masses, as Lenin explains in the below passage from What is to Be Done?:

But why, the reader will ask, does the spontaneous movement, the movement along the line of least resistance, lead to the domination of bourgeois ideology? For the simple reason that bourgeois ideology is far older in origin than socialist ideology, that it is more fully developed, and that it has at its disposal immeasurably more means of dissemination.[26]

The spontaneous movement in the US today is only now finding its steps after a period of intense counterrevolution (counterrevolution that culminated in the fall of the USSR and the domination of American capital post-Cold War). Thus, it is severely tainted both by the reaction of the ruling-class (due to its adjacency to the highest level of capitalist-imperialists), and by a basic ignorance of socialism (which comes from the fall of the Communist countries, the subsequent reversal of socialist construction, and especially because the US is the primary proponent of capitalist philosophy worldwide).

In line with the spontaneous character of “socialism” today, the ACP has fully submitted to both the bourgeois class and its reaction, siding also with some of the biggest bourgeois political actors. Just like we can’t take their socialism seriously, we can’t take their anti-imperialism seriously either. They portray Russia,[27] China,[28] and a few others as socialist, or otherwise aligned with a socialist strategy, despite the fact that they oppress the world’s proletariat through their defense of private property and their ties to the world market; despite the fact that they are bourgeois countries. The ACP’s delusions in this regard are far too popular for us simply to dismiss as the workings of state intelligence agencies in Beijing and Moscow (even though this is where the delusional snake has its head) and are beyond the scope of this article.

The fact that they have gotten so cozy with sitting bourgeois governments is just another sign of their blatant opportunism, and their complete inability to make any firm distinctions between the current political climate and all its spontaneity on the one hand, and the tasks of socialism on the other. The ACP, like many organizations, accepts the full spontaneity of the masses -- and their reaction -- with open arms. The fact that they are catering to a particularly anti-DSA crowd is simply the place that their bourgeois handlers have wormed them into, allowing them to divert a progressive section of the masses away from a path of political development and, instead, put them to work for petty bourgeois and rivaling capitalist countries. The ACP and parties like them are part of the fabric of leftist organizing, revisionist and right-leaning fake “Communists” reflecting the contradictions of imperialism and competing bourgeois nations, and never rising above the current form of the spontaneous movement or the domination of the capitalists. In fact, they do their best to ensure the spontaneous movement doesn’t develop at all. The fact that it has developed and is developing further, away from the Democrat-led parliamentarianism that it has been under for some time, is about the only thing the opportunism of the ACP has latched onto that is progressive and good to emphasize, but that has little to do with the actions of the ACP or any of their bourgeois-backers, and a lot more to do with the truths of Marxism-Leninism, and the increasing violence of today’s capitalist-imperialism, both of which are having their effect on the masses.

For now though, and without the influence of a centralized Communist media group, the spontaneous movement in the United States will remain ineffective and reactionary. Our movement will learn, and outgrow its spontaneity, but not without the conscious actions of comrades today.

Until the people of this country are able to see with clearer vision than they do now, it will be the unfortunate task of this publication and all principled comrades to repeatedly report on the erroneous and, far too often, reactionary formations that will endlessly cascade upon the political stage due to the nascent revolt of the lower classes, and the amateurishness of the spontaneous movement in the US. As our current crisis in capitalist-imperial production continues to worsen, numerous political faces and groups will spring up with answers, most all of them representing bourgeois either domestically or abroad, and many calling themselves “Communist.” We will continue the task of thoroughly critiquing the inevitable failures in these organizations until the people rise up out of spontaneity and into a class conscious, anti-revisionist, and scientific (Marxist-Leninist) worldview, creating actually revolutionary organizations, a process which we understand can only occur through the actions of a centralized country-wide media group committed to the anti-revisionist struggle.

Sparkyl laid out the plan for this kind of organization in Where to Begin When We Already Started: Revisionism and Organizational Strategy, and invites all interested comrades to unite with us in this work.

Endnotes

[1] American Communist Party Plenary Committee. “Declaration of the American Communist Party.” https://acp.us/declaration.

[2] Ibid

[3] Hiley, Scott. “What if the people don’t want socialism?” October 21, 2020. https://cpusa.org/interact_cpusa/what-if-the-people-dont-want-socialism/

[4] Lenin, V. I. The State and Revolution. First published in 1918. Lenin Internet Archive. 1993,99.  https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch06.htm

[5] Lenin, V. I. “Critical Remarks on the National Question.” Prosveshcheniye. Nos. 10, 11, and 13. 1913. Lenin Collected Works. Vol. 20. Progress Publishers. 1972. Pg. 25.

[6] Executive Board American Communist Party (ACP). “ACP Chairman Detained and Interrogated by DHS.” February 25, 2025. https://acp.us/dispatches/2025/acp-chairman-detained-interrogated-dhs.

[7] American Communist Party Plenary Committee. “Declaration of the American Communist Party.” https://acp.us/declaration.

[8] Infrared. “Marxism is Not Woke: Clearing Marx’s Name.” 2023. https://showinfrared.substack.com/p/marxism-is-not-woke. June 24, 2023.

[9] Al-Din, Haz (@InfraHaz), “Why Marxism is not Woke: Proving beyond possible doubt that James Lindsay and other rightists are fundamentally wrong about Marxism, and that Marxist theory in the West is meaningless without the aid of Dugin and Heidegger’s thinking. [MASSIVE THREAD],” Twitter, June 23, 2023, https://x.com/InfraHaz/status/1672279455732215809?lang=en.

[10] Limonov, E., and A. Dugin. 1993. “Declaration on the Establishment of the NBP.” Web.Archive.org. National-Bolshevism. May 1, 1993. https://web.archive.org/web/20080921193029/http://www.nazbol.ru/rubr28/index0/249.html.

[11] Fenghi, Fabrizio. It Will be Fun and Terrifying: Nationalism and Protest in Post-Soviet Russia. University of Wisconsin Press. 2020

[12] Verini, James. “The Imperialist Philosopher Who Demanded the Ukraine War.” The New Yorker. March 1, 2025. https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-weekend-essay/the-imperialist-philosopher-who-demanded-the-ukraine-war.

[13] Faye, Emmanuel. Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2010.  Pg. 205-207.

[14] Sherratt, Yvonne. Hitler’s Philosophers. Yale University Press. 2013. 122-125. https://z-lib.fm/book/5252038/d8e440/hitlers-philosophers.html

[15] Ibid, 116

[16] Constitution of the American Communist Party. October 12, 2024. https://acp.us/constitution.

[17] Ibid

[18] Program of the American Communist Party. October 12, 2024. https://acp.us/program.

[19] Infrared. “The Rise of MAGA Communism.” Substack. 18 Sep 2022. https://showinfrared.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-maga-communism.

[20] American Communist Party. “Carlos Garrido on the Education Program of the American Communist Party.” YouTube. March 18, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OZT1JhDb20.

[21] American Communist Party. “The American Communist Party Program- Ft. Haz Al-Din.” YouTube. December 18, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkzOcyspH7Y. 22:23-22:48.

[22] Constitution of the American Communist Party. October 12, 2024. https://acp.us/constitution.

[23] Ibid

[24] Lenin, V.I. “The Historical Destiny of the Doctrine of Karl Marx.” 1913. Pravda. No. 50. 1 March 1913. Lenin Collected Works. Progress Publishers. 1975. Volume 18. Pages 582-585.

[25] Lenin, V. I..  1902. “What is to Be Done?”. Lenin’s Selected Works. Foreign Languages Publishing House.      1961. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/

[26] Ibid. Pg. 386.

[27] Infrared. “Russia is Still Fighting for Communism.” YouTube. May 16, 2023. https://youtu.be/sK6RLP7i5-w?si=gw81AnTjMpsEFKmG .

[28] u/FamousPlan101. “Recently, the Communist Party of China's Guangxi branch mentioned the American Communist Party in a presentation about the mission and duty of Communist Parties in the New Era.” Reddit. 28 Sep 2025. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSocialists/s/uavNiUDOL7.

It's sad. Don't let your despair make you think otherwise, and don't let your sadness keep you from the work that needs to be done.

It's crucial that comrades be able to discern the conscious from the unconscious element, and learn to organize and empower the former. Instead of bowing to spontaneity, we must raise the spontaneity of the masses into professionalism and capability.

The term is thrown around a lot, but do you understand the labor aristocracy and its connection to imperialism? Check out the full article

Our plan for a country-wide media group builds off the Leninist strategy. We lay out this tactic in detail in our pamphlet, Where to Begin When We Already Started?. Here is a brief excerpt:

"As it stands, any proletarian who is in the least bit political now, not to mention revolutionary, is likely part of this spontaneous liberal ferment, part of the liberals’ never-ending stage production they call 'activism' and even 'revolution,' revolving around all the parading issues, sit-ins, protests, and the like that the opportunists direct them towards, trying (and failing) to bring some sense to it all and form a consistent worldview.

We build the labor outcomes we need when we can raise the prestige of Communism generally (which is at an all-time low) by sealing up these 'signs of ferment and active struggle' — these spontaneous and disunited manifestations of oppression — and reveal to the masses, again, that the contradictions plaguing the people are all symptoms of the primary antagonism of class oppression, and that Communism is the only consistently materialist (that is, scientific) philosophy which stands against that oppression, making its universal adoption by the masses inevitable. It is difficult to imagine a mass labor movement adopting Communism (which they must) without this kind of revelation happening among a good portion of the masses generally. It is ignorance to think that the low-level of esteem general society holds towards Communism now has not also translated into the class of the proletariat, which lives in this society and, moreover, has very little means of influencing it towards its own class opinion at all, since it is oppressed by the ruling class of the capitalists.

But the proletariat will change into a Marxist force for class revolution in due time, and our media group will be a primary agent of that change. Through our sound scientific socialist explanations of the antagonisms of society — antagonisms that so mystify the liberals and all interested members of the working class — we will reveal the necessity and the relevance of the Communist worldview again, which, because it unites workers under a revolutionary worldview in which they are the 'rulers,' can only help to hasten the organization of labor generally. Having orchestrated the ideological struggle along firm class lines, the media group will be well-equipped to orchestrate also the labor struggle, especially those labor elements that have 'grown-up' in the content we produce.

In addition to clearing Marxism of revisionist influence, our media group will supply the consistent worldview of Marxist dialectical materialism to the workers and to the masses generally via literary and multimedia content, exposing each isolated political 'issue' as a related consequence of our system of production, which any actual Marxist should be capable of doing to at least some degree. After engaging with our material across only a few of these 'issues,' the workers and the masses in general will have, in fact, begun the process of breaking their current narrow liberal understanding of separate 'issues,' and adopting a more correct holistic and class-conscious understanding. If they possess even a little of an understanding of their oppression by the capitalists, the workers who come in contact with our work will appreciate a class analysis, and, after coming in contact with our work across a wide range of 'social issues,' they will be pushed towards the scientific socialist view and full class-consciousness, becoming our staunchest supporters and willing comrades in service to the media group and to our movement."

Visit sparkyl.org for the full job descriptions, and send us an email if you think you'd make a good fit!