Staying Relevant

An Analysis of U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organizational Activities in a Post-Soviet Environment

Kyle A. Johnson

California State University of San Marcos

Dr. Garry Rolison, Chair

Dr. Sharon Elise

Dr. Kristen Bates Johnson 1

“We stand as Lenin did prior to the revolution, with nothing but steel in our minds and passion in our hearts.”

-Kyle A. Johnson

Johnson 2

Acknowledgments

• Dr. Garry Rolison: You have been a mentor, a professor, and a comrade. You have inspired me to become a better scholar and a better person. Your ability to make me answer my own questions has turned me into a person I would take seriously had I ever met me. I thank you for all you have done for me and showing me what an uncompromisingly principled and ethical teacher should be. I know you will continue to inspire countless students.

• Dr. Sharon Elise: Knowing you over these years has changed my life forever. You have consistently challenged me and made me a much stronger, far more intellectual student. I cherish the time you have given to me and will never forget all the lessons you have imparted onto me. Whenever I had an idea that I couldn’t fully comprehend, I knew it was you that could take it and make sense of it. You will always be legend to me.

• Dr. Kristen Bates: Since the day I met you, I knew that you were a supportive and creative teacher that would always encourage the best in her students. You have driven my creativity through the roof and have inspired to look at one idea from so many different angles. Thank you so much for all your help, this wouldn’t have been possible without your structure so early in the program. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

• To my cohort: You have been some of the most interesting and accepting people I have ever met in my life. I have found friends, colleagues, and comrades. I hope to always keep in touch with you and will remember all of the perspectives you have shown me. Special shout outs to my comrade Yolanda, you have challenged me and pushed me to become a great student and a great leader. I am lucky to have a friend like you.

• To my family and my lady: Thank you for helping me get through this process, a process which would have overwhelmed me without you. You have calmed me when I was stressed, brought me up when I was down, and gave me the strength to keep going when I thought I had no more. This thesis is a part of you as it is a part of me. I am forever grateful. I love you.

Johnson 3

Table of Contents

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4-5

Statement of the problem……………………………………………………………………………………………….5-7

Theory…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7-13

Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………………………………….13-19

Methods……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…19-22

Results……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………22-31

Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………31-34

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..34-36

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...36-40

Johnson 4

Introduction

“Write in such a way as that you can be readily understood by both the young and the old, by men as well as women, even by children.” --Ho Chi Minh

Within the last two decades the world has seen a tremendous shift in the global environment with respects to economic, political, and social hegemony. These aspects have much to owe to a few events that have had a massive impact upon the world social setting.

Two main paradigm shifting events that changed the course of uninterrupted globalized capitalism were the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. These two monumental events spawned two separate styles of world activity, each event bringing in a new era of world policy and power relationships. With the dissolution of the Soviet Bloc in

1991, many have thought the idea of socialism to be dead and the inevitable intrusion of capitalism restored. Along with the ever expanding global economy, dominated mainly by the sole remaining superpower, the United States, and its allies, the political landscape has looked

singularly linear, with resistance coming from popular revolts and national attempts to resist

global capitalist integration instead of previous endeavors to join the communist bloc. With the

end of the Cold War and the collapse of the U.S.’s rival super power, the Union of Soviet

Socialist Republics aka the Soviet Union, the prospects of alternatives to Western style

capitalism seems marginal to say the least. With the grip of global capitalism seizing the last

remaining bastions of non-U.S. supported economic and political policies, what are activist organizations; specifically Marxist-Leninist activist organizations, to do to counter this newly unrivaled economic hegemony? Johnson 5

Marxist-Leninist organizations have been active in the United States for nearly one

hundred years, with a history of being victims of government persecution and occupational

blacklisting. Forced to recover from often devastating consequences, these organizations have

continued to give a voice to the victims of crimes committed by the United States and to promote alternatives to the current capitalist economic policies that are in place right now.

With the events mentioned above unfolding slightly over the last two decades, most hardline

Marxist-Leninist nations have disappeared, forcing the remaining anti globalized capitalist countries to adopt some market reforms. In this time of near absolute domination of globalized

capitalism and the near political impossibility of electoral change occurring in the United States,

how will modern Marxist-Leninist organizations attempt to reach out to the public and mobilize

for change? By critically analyzing the content promoted by these organizations and observing

the activities of public outreach, the potential for movement building will be discovered.

Statement of the problem

“Who are our enemies? Who are our friends? These are the questions of primary importance for the revolution” --Mao Tse Tung

Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the restoration of capitalism in formerly socialist

nations, the U.S. dominated ideology of free market, globalized capitalism has portrayed itself

the winner of the cold war and the rightful heir to the top of the global hierarchy. Alternatives

to the U.S. dominated world system, especially alternatives that were communist sympathetic,

were seen as fundamentally anti-American and worthy of political and social persecution.

Whether the first red scare of 1919-1921, the second red scare of 1947-1954, the witch hunt

that was McCarthyism, or the continual blacklisting from occupation for communist or Marxist- Johnson 6

Leninist supporters, the United States has made anti-communism a central pillar of its

existence. While the USSR existed, many found strength in knowing there was a bulwark against

Western imperialism and based their actions and parties off those of the Communist Party of

the Soviet Union. That continued to last until the years of Soviet revisionism and ultimately, its

dissolution. Without the presence of the Soviet Union and the isolation imposed on remaining

socialist/communist nations, many Marxist-Leninist activists have had to adapt to the new

environment of dominant, relentless, U.S. economic, political, and social power. Whereas

defense of the Soviet Union, not wholly uncritical, was seen as a main pillar of Marxist-Leninist

organizational activity, nowadays seems irrelevant to organizations hoping to enter the realm

of mainstream political audiences. The need to reconstruct the foundation for these

organizations has been the driving force behind their adaptations both internal and external.

Now that defense of a now defunct nation is no longer a sound tactic to recruit new

members to the Marxist-Leninist cause, activist organizations must now focus on new topics

that they deem as fulfilling and necessary as the previous tactic was. Many of these new focus

points have to deal with very hot social issues that have sharply divided U.S. politics and their

impact on the U.S. economy. Issues such as immigration, workers rights, racism, healthcare,

education, gentrification, imperialism, and their link to their main struggle against the capitalist

economic system have further evolved the ideology of Marxism Leninism and the organizations following it. Many of these issues were debated in previous times, but, as a lot of organizations did at the time, they looked to the Soviet Union to guide them in their fight against the ills in

American society and attempted to replicate Soviet social gains in the U.S. With that function Johnson 7

no longer existing, Marxist-Leninist organizations are being forced forge their own path, often

mirroring the revolutionaries who faced similar situations prior to their nations revolution.

With the eruption of popular revolts around the world and here in the United States,

Marxist-Leninist organizations have had to adapt to movements which shelter large amounts of

different ideologies. Occupy Wall Street and the Arab Spring have inspired mass mobilizations

around the world, often finding themselves leaderless, splinted, and highly sectarian. (Greene &

Kuswa 2012) Marxist-Leninist organizations attempting not only to incorporate themselves into these popular movements, but ultimately steer these movements through the idea of a vanguard party is a differentiating factor between Marxist-Leninist organizations and the

myriad of organizations participating in often international popularized revolts. (Galia 1987)

Internationalization, also a foundational pillar of Marxism-Leninism also has posed these

organizations problems regarding the relationship their presence has in the United States with

the popular revolts occurring in the Middle East. (Greene & Kuswa 2012)

In addition to the mass mobilization of the Occupy and the Arab Spring movements, the

increase in the use of mass media by the movements has spawned an ability to organize at a

much quicker scale and react to the changing reality that is the world of protest and resistance.

(Juris 2012) Given the dialectic relationship between organizational ability to resist vs. state’s ability to repress forms of popular discontent, (Greener & Huswa 2012) the tactic of mass

mobilizations in the forms of popular revolts have spurned the a new era of technological

struggles both virtual and physical. (Juris 2012) Marxist-Leninist organizations are going to have to incorporate these new technologies into their arsenal of struggle in order to become the leaders they have fashioned themselves out to be, but with conditions changing at the send of a Johnson 8

text or an update of a Facebook page, how will Marxist-Leninist organizations adapt their

activities to this post-soviet, technologically advanced world while maintaining their connection to the public?

Theory

“Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement” --Vladimir Lenin

After careful consideration of which theories would best describe and enlighten this phenomenon, I have chosen four main theories with subtle influences of many others. These theories will be Marxist conflict theory by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the theory of

Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci, the combined work of systems and social development theories of Jurgen Habermas and Michel Foucalt, and the Worlds-System theory by Immanuel

Wallerstein. These four theoretical approaches, while working off each other, produce the best analysis of the current environment U.S. Marxist-Leninist organizations find themselves in.

Detailed analysis of the three theories will help illuminate the creation and adaptations of the various organizations in this post-Soviet environment.

To start, one must understand Marxist conflict theory, the basis for much of the to-be

discussed theories. This theory covers the overall struggle of the international working class

against worldwide system of capitalism governed by the bourgeois capitalist class. This struggle

is seen as inevitable in Marxist theory as stated in the works of dialectical materialism. (Wolff &

Cullenburg 1986) This work states that each system creates its own destruction. In the current capitalist world, to create the super profits that it obtains, it must also create a mass of exploited laborers with no control over the system. Eventually the bourgeois will turn on themselves until an absolute monopoly is created, making the mass majority of the world the Johnson 9

proletariat and peasant class. With these conditions, the working class is going to unite and rise

against the bourgeois and reconstruct the system to work for them instead of the ruling class.

This theory has “dominated sociological thought for years and has inspired countless

revolutionary movements around the world.” (Wolff & Cullenburg 1986) As in the past, any of

these movements have taken the form of Marxism-Leninism. Marxism-Leninism is the

application of Marxist conflict theory to real life conditions, basically making it the vehicle for

the revolution purposed in Marxist theory. (Hoxha 1978)

Marxism-Leninism is described as the vehicle because of its use by

revolutionaries around the world to overthrow the capitalist system in their respective nations

and establish socialism. According to Marxism-Leninism, the capitalist system has entered a

stage of imperialist, neo-colonial capitalism, becoming “internationalist in aspects, thus

replacing nation state capitalism.” (Louw 1991) To counter this growing menace, the

communist movement must become internationalist itself, a Leninist concept known as

proletarian internationalism. The internationalist movement is to occur not in a classical

Marxist idea of spontaneity of the oppressed, but by an organization of leaders. Marxism-

Leninism is the application of Marx’s notion of working class revolution with the direction of a

vanguard party. That is one of the most important differences between classical Marxist theory

and Marxism-Leninism. The vanguard party is to become the guide, the leader of the working class forces against the capitalist system. Marxism-Leninism is also important due to its ability

to be molded to best fit the characteristics of the situation it finds itself in. (Carmichael 1973)

That model is still in place today, with many of the organizations that are being created are

designating themselves as the new vanguard for the 21st century. Classical Marxist theory will Johnson 10 still be used as the main analysis theory because of potentials it has to create evolved moments based upon an individual or organizations location in both place and time.

With Antonio Gramsci’s theory of Hegemony, the importance is in strive to look at the relationships members of society have within the institutions and culture they find themselves in. How is their society set up and what types of relationships does it produce/reproduce? The theory of Hegemony, or more specific, “Cultural Hegemony”, states that society from top to bottom, institutional and cultural, are devised intentionally to secure and reinforce Bourgeois control of society. This “expansion of classical Marxist theory is essential when analyzing

Marxism past the simplicity of pure economism.” (Hawley 1980) Wrestling control of the economy and putting it under worker or party control is but a piece of the puzzle, or revolution in their sense, the other piece of to reject the cultural hegemony and practices that were pressed upon them by the previously dominating classes. From values and ethics, to cultural practices and relationships, the entire thought pattern of the proletariat would need its own revolution alongside the economic revolution in order to secure the proletarians gains and prevent internal counter revolution. (Hawley 1980)

If the art and science of a revolution was a giant glass container, classical Marxist thought would be seen as the giant stones that fill up most of the container. Gramsci’s theory of hegemony can then be seen as the sand that is poured into the container to fill the gaps between the giant stones, thereby completely filling the container and ensuring an “Absolute

Revolution”. Whereas Marx focused almost exclusively on the economy and power, he neglected to fully understand the other forms of social control, from the ruling class to the proletarians own forms of personal control. Gramsci’s additional level of depth into the various Johnson 11

forms of control; such as frames of thought, educational paradigms, individualism, language,

brought Marxist thought from a cold, rigid, almost robotic concept of revolution into a flesh and

blood, fiery, flexible revolution encapsulating the totality of what constitutes a revolution.

Habermas and Foucalt bring a complexity into this study of Marxist-Leninist

organizations in the United States by analyzing the changes and tactics of struggles that have

been ongoing throughout the Marxist world movement. Habermas and his understanding of

the capitalist systems evolution and its continual protection of its system has been crucial into

understanding why the classical “Marxist notion of capitalism imploding in and of itself has not

occurred already or doesn’t seem likely to occur in the near future.” (Isenburg 1991) Habermas,

along with Foucalt describes power relations and the survival of the capitalist system based

upon two main foundations, the interventionist welfare state solely in regards to the economic

sustainability, and the destruction of social associations crucial to the development of social movement based on social, political, or economic justice. As Vladimir Lenin said, “People vote with their feet”, the need to liquidate any forms of social movement by maintaining a neo-

liberal, individualist, consumer system has thoroughly negated the power of once strong social

institutions based upon trade unions, ethnic organizations, and liberation movements of

women and the LGBTQ communities. Habermas describes these actions as intentional

displacements of the class struggle and conflict into areas where potential success of any

relatively strong movements will have no overall effects of the capitalist system, focusing

resources on human relations outside the economic sphere. Key to rebuilding the anti-capitalist

movement would “be to shed barriers imposed upon them, realize their artificiality, and regain

a sense of shared class conscious” (Isenburg 1991) in the more advanced area we find ourselves Johnson 12 in today. With the myriad forms of oppression many people find themselves today, social association and relationships based upon acknowledged lack of power are necessary to change abhorrent social conditions. With globalized capitalist oppression must come globalized organizational resistance, a form of dialectic to counter the devastation of capitalism on a global scale.

The World-Systems theory explains in detail the power relations of capitalist entities in the globalized economy. This theory has extended the analysis presented by the dependence theory in the realm that the World-System doesn’t rely on the state as the primary unit of analysis. In the World-Systems theory, the state is taken into serious consideration, but is coupled with international corporations, non-governmental organizations, and governmental alliances such as the European Union. This theory argues that these organizations mentioned above constitute powers in certain geographical areas that allow for greater control of the world system, and those organizations are grouped into three sections, core, semi-periphery, and periphery. The core organizations are the “entities who are the exploiting, economically directing groups.” (So & Hikam 1989) They acquire the raw materials required for production, the low wage labor that manufacture the products, and reap the surplus value. Periphery organizations are the exploited areas of the world that are dominated by the core organizations, they must give up their low wage labor, their raw materials, and are forced to extreme poverty in order to keep the living conditions acceptable for the core organizations in order to maintain population pacification. The semi-periphery organizations are the middle of the poles, usually the up and coming groups or groups that have invented a new way to acquire profits.

Johnson 13

This theory can be used as an identifier for organizations based upon the anti-

imperialist/colonization and immigration struggles. Individuals may desire to see the United

States military out of foreign nations, an end to the economic exploitation of a foreign nations

labor force, and the fair treatment of immigrants whether documented or not. This theory has

done a remarkable job at applying a classical Marxist theoretical analysis of a single society’s power relations to the most macro levels. But, I would argue that this belongs in the middle of the other two theories as classical Marxist theory has always had an internationalist tone in its analysis of the capitalist system. While the World Systems theory does look at relationships between entire nations or geographical areas, it is still under the globalized capitalist system that Marx critiqued. That capitalist system could be argued as the creator of many of those states in the first place, rendering Marxist theory the most overall macro theory.

Bringing these three theories together not only enlightens us to the current state of the

Post-Soviet world environment, but how organizations evolve with this changing world environment. The world has changed tremendously since the fall of the Soviet Union, and with that change, a new form of struggle must be conceived. The struggle against new enemies such as globalization, neo-colonization, and ever expanding imperialism must be fought with a solid

theoretical understanding. These organizations, combining the three theories discussed above,

display an understanding that is solid enough to produce serious change. Building upon years of

social, political, and sociological understanding, the theories depicted in this section have

chronicled the development social movements for over a century.

Literature Review

“The writer is the engineer of the human soul.” --Joseph Stalin Johnson 14

Concentrating on the works of Galia, Carmichael, Louw, and Mandel in regard to Marxist

Leninist organizations and the beginning of social movements, many commonalities became clear. The study of people turning to a leftist radical orientation has been well documented and

researched. Whether through a lack of social mobility (Portes 1971 & Louw 1991), lack of

representation in mechanisms of change, (Carmichael 1974) or desire to contribute to an

organized movement (Mandel 1983 & Galia 1987), members of oppressed nations have

attempted to project their grievances through the work of organizations. Various studies have been conducted throughout the world, mainly in third world nations where the matter of exploitation and oppression leave little else for solutions. A commonality that many of these articles present is a feeling among the oppressed populations that the current political/economic system isn’t working for them, and the approved means for change will not create legitimate change, necessitating the creation of alternatives (Galia 1987). Alternatives, which Carmichael expressly simply as change which “incorporates the human in totality within the confines of social design and social change.” (Carmichael 1974) This feeling resonates in a different way in the United States, where the distrust of legitimate change might be similar, but the immediate need to generate change might not be as present. (Geschwender 1968)

Alejandro Portes, while conducting research in the slums of Santiago Chile, found that

many people with disbelief in existing “leftist” parties joined organizations or expressed

opinions more radical than the already established “Communist Party of Chile” because of its

perceived lack of revolutionary potential. In his research he found that: Johnson 15

“In Chile, as in many other nations, the Communist party played a crucial role in

developing radical political consciousness in the working classes; yet, today, new

extremist groups, especially those following the Castro-Guevara traditions,

regard the Communists as representatives of a traditional, "institutionalized" left

incapable of effective revolutionary action.” (Portes 1971)

There are several arguments against why revolutionary attitudes in the United

States haven’t developed and matured compared to other nations, namely “political

ignorance, social integration/isolation, economic insecurity, objective economic

hardship, and subjective deprivation”. (Plutzer 1987 Portes 1970) These conditions are

in addition to the subjective experiences of radical leftist activist, including Marxist-

Leninist. With a perfect example being the COINTELPRO program targeting radical

organizations beginning with the Black Panther Party and the CPUSA. (Cunningham

2003) These types of reactions come from many sides, including some members who

would consider themselves radical leftist, a main discrepancy culminating upon the form

of leftism, in this case Marxism- Leninism.(Donoso 1979). This main discrepancy

between members in the far leftist spectrum is usually over the view held of Joseph

Stalin. This is based on their analysis of Marxism, with only “scientific” Marxist viewing

him in somewhat of a positive light. (Donoso 1979)

Many revolutionaries studied in Chile were attracted to the potential

totalitarianism of structured revolutionary movements, reminiscent of Stalinist

movements, to avoid the instability and chaos of more unorganized struggles. (Portes

1971) An idea that was essential to the Stalinist movements was the concept of the Johnson 16

Vanguard party, a core foundation of Marxist Leninist Principles. The Vanguard party

was to be the leader of the revolutionary movement, composed of organic

revolutionaries from the “progressive classes”. (Golan 1987) The vanguard was seen to revolutionaries as a structure that was necessary to the revolution, a power to protect the revolution from the potential of social anarchy. (Golan 1987) Structure is deemed necessary as many people engaged in the process of revolution are often times the most disadvantaged and are forced to be at the front lines of the struggle, making the fight seem more likely to be successful. These revolutionaries in Chile have been ascribed similarly to U.S. radicals to what Portes describes, “Uneducated, un-informed, non- participant, and socially isolated lower-class individuals are, the stronger their tendencies toward leftist radicalism” (Portes 1971) Regardless of the make-up of revolutionary recruits and activist, the necessary of the vanguard party was wholly required, even if not fully composed of a Marxist-Leninist ideology. (Goland 1987 &

Portes 1971)

Both lack of mobility and status inconsistency are serious factors in leading to

explore leftist ideologies for members of highly oppressed/disadvantaged populations.

(Geschwender 1968) Of the two, the method discussed more often is social mobility,

with the lack of opportunities to improve the quality and position of their lives. As

observed by Geschwender, not only is the position of their lives of large concern, the

closing of the social status gap between their group and the group these people

consider inferior. The danger that could be found when looking at that the latter of the

concerns is the danger of an initially leftist movement turning far right and adopting Johnson 17

fascism. The main characteristic defining the direction of the movements is the direction

of mobility and where the people in that environment are located. (Foursov 1996) If the populace has lost the inability to move upward, the direction will usually be left, if people have been continually brought down socially, the movement may bring on a right turn. (Geschwender 1968)

In one unexpected finding, vastly different from the work conducted by Portes and Carmichael, John Kosa and Clyde Nunn (1964) found that the black population is more intolerant than the white population toward the idea of communism, namely due to their connection with religion. They found that across the SES spectrum, blacks were more resistant to the idea of communism than whites, with the lower class and more religious blacks being the most resistant. (Kosa and Nunn 1964) This was very surprising, as Portes will attest to the most oppressed sections of the populations being the most sympathetic to the communist cause, but that didn’t prove to be true. Some people have attempted to understand this and deposit this understanding into a theory, the main theory being the Privileged Worker Theory. This, which is based off the work of

Franz Fanon, states that the working class proletariat and its presumptions of communism don’t fit the mold for the more oppressed sections of society, meaning the lumpenproletariat. (Gordon 1978) This has not been proven and even has been hotly debated as other studies in Chile by Alejandro Portes have professed the opposite.

(Portes 1970 & Foursov 1996)

The changing of topics and how movements are being formed has thoroughly

changed with the times, especially after the 1960’s. While the earlier research focused Johnson 18 on the lack of mobility, the longer I searched, the more the research focused on exclusion of other marginalized groups. As social movements sought to further attack the status quo, more populations of different demographic were required to be incorporated in order to mount a successful offensive on said status quo. The primary emphasis for U.S. Marxist-Leninist organizations been struggling for the protection and expansion of “civil rights for the LGBTQ community, women, ethnic minorities, and the end of U.S. imperialism.” (Edelman 2001) These are the main type of resistance movements in the United States; unlike in “Third World” countries were the struggle is more often anti-capitalist or simply anti-imperialist. With a particular concentration on electoral politics, militancy has been expressed primarily by members of populations usually left of out the mainstream political process. (Ryan 1994) That is one of the aspects that are beginning to change in the United States, especially with the lessons that were learned from transitioning to democracy too early in various movements.

This lesson, which was wonderfully described in Jeffery Ryan’s work The Impact of

Democratization on Revolutionary Movements, shows the impact of premature introduction of democracy to a successful revolutionary movement. It can be even more devastating than a powerful enemy because of the introduction of a pluralist vision, instead of a unified militant vision. (Ryan 1994)

One of the many concerns that plague people thinking about joining or people that have already joined a revolutionary organization is the repression they will face from the state. It is hard for many people in the Marxist Leninist scene to forget the devastation caused by the COINTELPRO program that was instigated by the FBI from the Johnson 19

1950’s to the 1970’s, yet is still in effect today. The task of that program was to misdirect and destroy these organizations ability to influence the populace.

(Cunningham 2003) Many times these instances of harassment became very serious, and in the case of the Black Panthers, they became lethal. J. Edgar Hoover declared the

Black Panther Party to be the “most dangerous internal security threat to the United

States” because of their combination of Black Power along with Marxism-Leninism, leading to the assassinations of Fred Hampton and the arrest of numerous members.

(Cunningham 2003) These groups were targeted because of the threat they represented to the power of the status quo, especially the threat of charismatic leaders, whom they believed were more capable then moderate activist to sway the populace. (Van Hiel

2011)Regardless, whether knowledge of these risks is known to the individual prior to involvement, the possible effects of repression will endanger them the same.

These newer Marxist Leninist organizations have learned from the lessons of the

previous generations, making them that much more dangerous to the current power

structure. One big influence in the development of new organizations was the work of

theorist such as Antonio Gramsci, who combined the notion of cultural hegemony with

classical Marxism. This changed the way people went about promoting change, namely

the separating of themselves from the culture of the bourgeoisie and understand that

charge will not be completely linear. (Salamini 1975) This type of mentality has been very effective, not only on the left scene, but has been adopted by many far right organizations, usually in an attempt to sway moderates to their cause. (Lowndes 2002)

All of these changes contrast to how the left used to promote change in the United Johnson 20

States, mainly by the use of legitimate political parties focusing on electoral change,

typically revolved around voting for the Communist Party USA to alleviate the income

disparity between the two main classes in the 1930’s-1950’s. (Korpi 1971) With the

experiences of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the mass mobilization of people as a

demonstration of the need for serious change (Calhoun 2013), the need for a leadership

party, a Vanguard party in the Marxist-Leninist sense is often seen as necessary (Ryan

1994)

While it concept of a Vanguard party may be necessary, evolving the concept of

Marxist-Leninist struggle is necessary due to the evolving nature of social movements. In the tradition of Habermas and Castells, classical Marxism fails to prioritize struggle of a non proletarian nature. (Buechler 1995) In this post-industrial environment, the

competing interest of different populations makes a unified struggle around class seem

improbable. (Buechler 1995) As many social movements are reactions to social systems,

movements have the possibility of being reactionary or progressive. The structure of the

movement and the appeal of a guiding party can be seen as a defense against reaction.

(Ryan 1994 & Buechler 1995) Along with the ability of parties to engage in mass

communication due to technological advancements, the connection between a party

and the masses involved in social movements can prevent deviations or splits within the

movement. (Das 1981) The main concern of the necessity of a Vanguard party is the

potential for detachment from the populations they were intended to lead. The

contradiction between leading the oppressed who may not have obtained Johnson 21

consciousness and having a party comprised of the most conscious may lead to elitism

or an actual obstacle to real liberation for the oppressed. (Mandel 1983)

Methods

“I think that our Marxist-Leninist parties and the progressive elements ought to look at this situation realistically and, on the basis of the theory of Marx and Lenin, find such means and forms of struggle that will turn the situation in favor of the revolution. This requires the creation of new Marxist-Leninist parties and the strengthening of the existing ones, of course, adhering firmly to the teachings of Marx and Lenin. They alone are able to make detailed analyses of the situation in the country, the ratio of classes, the strength of the working class, its strong and weak points, as well as the forms and methods which the bourgeoisie employs to subjugate the workers and the people. Such a study will serve each party, in its specific conditions, for struggle, for action, and not for sterile discussions which do not bring the liberation of the working class or the country, but, on the contrary, bring disruption and subjugation.” -Enver Hoxha, Marxist Leninist Revolutionary

Bringing about a qualitative approach to the analysis of contemporary Marxist

Leninist organizations, I used a series of two main techniques to acquire data. These two qualitative techniques were selected specifically to capture all aspects of the presentation and implementation of contemporary Marxist Leninist activities both physically and materially. With the desire to capture different scopes of actions, in a manner very similar to my selection of theories, I based my methods according to the micro/macro paradigm.

The setting for this research would be based in Southern California, specifically

San Diego. The chosen orientation was determined by being the most recently formed

Marxist-Leninist organization to be present in San Diego. I conducted a critical content

analysis of this organizations literature and mass media, specifically looking at the public

connectedness potential. Next, I conducted a complete observation of the public Johnson 22

outreach activities of the organization by focusing on a variety of different size

engagements and the potentials to attract public support. As this organization puts on a

large amount of activities due to the large population of San Diego, opportunities were

never lacking. Observations took place from the beginning to the end of April 2014, with

a total of six engagements, three discussion sessions focusing on prison relations within

the capitalist system, and three rallies focusing on “Saving Chicano Park” with the last of

the three being the actual main rally. Discussion sessions consisted of two hour speaking blocks with a Q&A session, and rallies occurring as long a permissible, with the main

“Save Chicano Park” rally operating from 12 p.m. to 6 p.m.

A critical content analysis would be absolutely necessary to understand the

adaptation of these organizations to this new, post-Soviet environment. Much of the

activities of these organizations are based upon media presentations of ideological

materials, a Marxist Leninist news service, and media recruitment tools. Especially with

the recent technological revolution creating an ever expanding social media culture and

the development of a new form of social connection based upon this culture, the

content expressed by these media is of utmost importance for analysis. Many of these

organizations have websites and blogs, they participate on social connection websites

such as facebook and twitter, and finally, they participate on various chat forum

websites that allow them to impart their ideology upon others. This new access to far

reaching technology has allowed organizations to develop in ways that are much

different from previous organizations. The fact alone that these organizations are

recruiting members who have no actual physical contact with the organizations they are Johnson 23

a member of, simply an online presence, is enough to show the adaptation of these

organizations in this contemporary setting.

Next, a complete observation within these Marxist Leninist movements

concludes the duet of methodological approaches when analyzing these organizations. I have chosen complete observation over interviews due to the nature of these organizations. With a collective, often grass root organization, the individual members are often obligated to repeat a series of set responses, with deviation often silenced

(Bree 2013) With the potential to marginalized voices within the organization, the potential amount of gathered information actually raises without performing interviews.

(Bree 2013) The chosen organization that I have looked at performed a series of activities in the public sphere with the hopes of generating a heightened awareness of social, political, and justice consciousness, with the desire to create social change. Many of these activities range from small to large; from small educational sessions held at member’s homes or public locations, to full scale rallies and marches. Many of these events are fully open to the public, which allows me easy access to analyze their events in addition to giving me tremendous access to the members of these organizations. In addition to the public, many of these organizations belong to umbrella groups advocating for mass struggle in various areas. These umbrella organizations allow for further connection to the public and similar organizations. After meeting many of the members of these organizations in previous social events, I was invited to numerous events that have allowed me to determine the frequency and duration of these events. Johnson 24

I observed each type of event in order to parallel the micro/macro theme that I have been maintaining during this thesis. Micro events would be categorized as member

only meetings or intimate settings of small public gatherings, usually at coffee shops or

member’s homes. Macro events would be considered public speaking engagements,

film showings, all the way up to full scale rallies. Covering the entire scale of activities would demonstrate not only the potential effectiveness of their chosen activities, but the intentional reason why these activities were chosen in the first place.

It is especially important to note the connection these methodological

approaches have in regards to the public, their effectiveness is one of the most

important functions of these organizations regarding their desire to grow. The content

analysis and the participant observation aspect of this methodological approach

emphasize the connection and outreach by the organization to the public. By critically

analyzing the activities of this organization, especially in the area of public connection,

the understanding of the adaptations of Marxist-Leninist organizing in a post-Soviet

environment becomes clear.

Themes

“Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries, unite!” --Karl Marx

• Technology as a connection to the public!

Beginning with the content analysis of the organizations website and literature,

observers can immediately identify a target audience which the organization is Johnson 25 attempting to attract. This particular Marxist Leninist organization features a particularly

“in your face” attitude, stressing action and militancy. In regards to those qualities, the youth, particularly oppressed youth are targeted for recruitment. Unlike other organizations which tend to stress theory and consciousness building, whilst not completely ignored by my organization in question, tends to prefer, marches, rallies, and protest of corrupt business practices in the hopes of drawing out people who want to vent frustration with the our current system physically.

Immediately upon entering the website, the brightly colored red background with the words “Liberation” next to a list of “What We Stand For”, serves to draw readers into reviewing their party platform and positions. Along with certain news features of exploits either by their organization or world events, various tabs relocating the readers to different organizational functions allows the reader to travel where they seem most interested. One of the strongest aspects of the “join” section is the personal testimonials of various members of the organization, with the overwhelming majority being oppressed youths of color, class, or sexual orientation. Both simply text testimonials with pictures of the youths and complete video testimonials are present in the effort to connect with similar youths who are looking for answers. In continuing the tradition of adding photos next to all text, various photos of youths fighting these campaigns, typically in large numbers, are present throughout the “campaigns” sections, especially youths of color and women. The photos are definitely an attempt to showcase their large presence in the scene of “the struggle”, although membership numbers are not present and, as with many other leftist organizations, highly classified. Johnson 26

Present next to pictures and tabs were features allowing visitors to follow the website and the organization. The organization is active in many popular social media outlets, such as Facebook and twitter, and allows the visitors to subscribe to messages and alerts on their mobile device, allowing a constant stream of communication.

As with the literature presented, the website is also fully available en Español, a feature which allows them to connect with a vast amount of populations that don’t speak English or enough to fully understand the message being conveyed. With a main campaign of the organization being immigrant rights, having a press completely en Español is tremendous in its ability to attract a completely different section of oppressed youths. In addition to different languages, the website is also available for different computer formats, particular older or less powerful computers which may not be able to process the totality of the website, prompting a

“text only, low resolution” version of the website. This is also a very sound tactic in reaching out to members of society which may not have access to newer and more powerful technology.

Finally, the website allows all people, not just members, to print and distribute pamphlets, posters, and flyers from the website free of charge, allowing even non-member to spread the message of the organization.

• Campaigns, a call to action!

Within the website, tabs such as “campaigns” take the visitor to the various departments of struggle the organization have devoted itself to. The campaigns listed were “Stop U.S. Imperialist Wars! End Colonial Oppression!”, “Full Rights for All

Immigrants!”, “Labor: Better wages, benefits, and working conditions!”, “Community

Activism: Stop racism, bigotry, and attacks on social programs!”, “Defend Revolutionary Johnson 27

Cuba!”, and “Free Palestine!” Further investigating of these campaigns exposed a calendar of planned events and contacts to supporting organizations. A noticeable feature of the website was an absence of specific Marxist-Leninist material and theory.

The lack of theoretical material present on the website is seemingly intentional, serving the “Pan-Socialist, Marxist-Leninist” ideology expressed by the group, gathering the largest amount of potential recruits possible without being overly sectarian.

Connecting the focus on campaigns both international and local, such as the action taken to “Save Chicano Park” has allowed the website developed by the organization to generate a form of collective understand and responsibility to be “in the know” about various causes and actions of the organization. With the ability to know approximate times of public outreach sessions, what will be required, and what each individual member or sympathizer of the organization can do to further the specific campaign. The ability to mobilize populations for a cause becomes greater the stronger the connection with technology and the netter understanding of the campaign in the first place.

The desire to conduct campaigns, especially campaigns in solidarity with other social justice organizations is seen as more than just a tool of recruitment or bringing attention to a certain cause. The explicit intention to create campaigns to introduce populations to the necessity to physically struggle for justice, in a manner that thoroughly mobilized mass amounts of people, in a more structured form than Occupy or the Arab Spring, was a factor not overlooked due to the promoted idea of the necessity of a vanguard party. Through the focus on campaigns, the intention to connect Johnson 28

one campaign to the overall capitalist struggle is present on the website through

attached links to the campaign tabs and through physical interactions with the public

through discussion session and larger scale events.

• Connection on a small scale and the impact of testimonials!

Next, the organization likes to put on public gatherings of all different sizes, ranging

from intimate discussion sessions, usually no more than 20, designed to attract intellectuals

and youths who may not be fully aware of what the organization is completely about, to full

scale rallies and marches, often attracting hundreds. Starting with a more intimate setting, I

was invited to a discussion session titled, “Prisons and Capitalism: A Relationship of

Exploitation.” This was held at a coffee shop in downtown San Diego, CA, near the Gas Lamp

district. Upon walking into the shop, there had been a flyer on the window near the front door

inviting people from the streets to engage in dialogue with the organization. There was no fee

per say to enter into the dialogue session, but the moderator did ask all who attended, if they

could afford it to purchase a beverage from the shop in return for letting them use the space.

Since I could afford it, I purchased a drink along with a coffee for the bank, which was a term

used for free coffee for people who couldn’t afford it.

Once the session began, the members of the organization introduced themselves,

thanked us for coming, and proceeded to speak in a very inviting, calm manner, possibly

detecting a form of reluctance of being there. Along with a pedestal with a projector, a table

full of books and other literature for sale, and the table with the moderator and two other

members, the room was casual and low key, which I believe lent itself successful to combat any forms of reluctance. The members began giving personal testimonials about themselves, with Johnson 29

many different actions bringing them into the organizational structure. One member stated that he was a farm worker who had worked for under minimum wage due to being young and tricked by the owner about commission pay being better than hourly pay. He described his life as hopeless and saw no prospect for his future but strived to find a solution to his problem.

After being dissatisfied with any traditional unions or labor associations, he met a person from this organization while on a trip to San Francisco. He was given free literature which he read and distributed to his co-workers. He described a feeling of being enlightened, of knowing what he had to do. He then moved to San Francisco where he worked at a printing press so he could distribute organizational literature while providing himself with an income. Next, a Latina

woman approached the pedestal and began speaking about what brought her to the

organization, and that was the women‘s struggle for equality. She was born into a very

traditional household and described he life as being constricting and depressing. She left her

home at a young age and felt discriminated against for being Latina, a woman, poor, and largely

uneducated. While living in a homeless shelter she came across a rally held by the organization.

She describes herself connecting with the reality that only revolutionary change will bring an

end to oppression for herself and many others like her. The stories of the members allowed the

audience to connect the struggles of working conditions to the struggles of discrimination

based upon demographic differences. She has since dedicated herself to her organization as a

literature distributor and discussion session organizer. After the testimonials concluded, the

session began digging deeper into the subject matter of the prison industrial complex and the

overall exploitive nature of the capitalist system, the slowly but surely call for action was being

introduced. This began a series of question and answer segments where the members of the Johnson 30

groups began asking members of the audience, who came out to be around 14 people, what

they thought were the necessary tactics or strategies in order to combat these forms of

dominance and exploitation. A few members of the audience stated plainly, “Revolution?

Socialism?” to which the organization members who say, “Yes of course, but how do we do

that?” To get the ball rolling I suggested, “Building a party of the working class to lead them

against the capitalist system, with the party being the vanguard of the working class.”

Immediately I received a series of positive laughs and a reply of “Someone has been reading

their Lenin!” The speaker soon continued on the course of Leninist ideology and the need for a

Vanguard party based upon unity and leadership of the worker’s movement.

After a series of further questions and information delivery, I began to focus less on the material being presented and more on the reactions of the public. What began as neutrality and some reluctance turned into enthusiasm, a desire to speak up and ask serious questions

instead of remaining reserved. I began to become excited myself, especially when people all

around us, people of completely different backgrounds began laughing and high fiving each

other, telling their stories or their experiences with prison and greatly adding to the material.

By creating an open space for potential members to feel comfortable to share their own

experiences and thoughts allowed a more connective environment, precisely the intent of

encouraging a collective nature for potential recruits. As the encounter became more in-depth

and reflective, I began connecting this passionate, fiery style of engagement immediately to the

literature and website this organization produced.

Once an apex of enthusiasm was reached in the room, the call to action was fully

disclosed, a revolutionary call to action. Memberships were offered to all who attended and Johnson 31

grand series of thanks was given to everybody for attending. All were encouraged to attend the

next discussion session and the bigger rally happening at Chicano Park later in the month

alongside many other activist groups. The overwhelming majority of attendees immediately

agreed, with only a few stating that they would have to check their availability in regards to

work and family concerns. In summation, the connectivity of the discussion sessions was

extremely successful in regards to getting acceptance of the organizations ideologies and

potentially recruiting a slew of new, energetic members.

• Generating critical mass, building solidarity of movements!

The larger rally which I was to attend more closely resembled the message being

conveyed by the website than the more personal discussion sessions. I purposefully arrived

early enough to see the organization along with numerous other collaborating organizations set up speakers, platforms, and tables for literature distribution for easy rally transition from one set of speeches to the next. Since this rally was dedicated to “Saving Chicano Park”, many immigrant rights groups, along with trade unions whom had members living in Barrio Logan, community rights activist groups, and three other socialist organizations of different tendencies

(Trotskyist, Democratic Socialist, and Maoist) in addition to the Marxist-Leninist organization in

research. With my organization in research speaking in one of the last segments of the rally

before the actual march around Chicano Park, I was able to see a performance put on by the

organization in front of a large crowd that had collected in front of them. Many of these

organizations had belonged to the umbrella group that is run by my organization in research,

which was named A.N.S.W.E.R. or Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. This group was a big

tent organization which covered a multitude of topics, from ant-war issues to immigration, Johnson 32

welfare rights, Palestinian justice, and justice for victims of U.S. imperialism. Connecting the struggles of labor/socialism to the liberation of oppressed populations made the umbrella organization unique in its orientation but powerful in its ability to attract multitudes of different people. All the various groups had tremendous charisma and speaking abilities, getting the crowd fired up and cheering each new speaker. When my organization began speaking, the militancy and the “in your face” approach which the organization had been known for erupted into a passionate damnation of the capitalist system and its division of workers based on race and immigration status. Various members of different backgrounds came to the podium and brought up their own experiences and how they came to the realization that revolution was the only way forward. Since the organization allows duel membership with other trade unions or community activist groups, many of the organization members were also laborers at the various hotels or restaurants in the area.

• The “New Wave”, re-imagining Marxism-Leninism of the 21st century!

This organization began speaking about the significance of Chicano Park, not just for

Chicano’s in general, but for what it stood for, for all people facing oppression. Due to the large

number of Chicano/as and other Latino/as along with a great number of Filipino/as, the park

was seen as a place where oppressed laborers of color along with oppressed youth could come

together in solidarity with one another and show the white, American, capitalist that they

would not lay over and take the beating they were given. Together with the unions and the

organizations movement, they could reinvigorate the power that the unions once had. That last

statement seemed very reminiscent of the “old school” socialist movements of the early 2oth

century. Another member of the organization had then came to the podium and chanted Johnson 33

“Obama! Escucha! Estamos en la Lucha” (“Obama! Listen! We are in the Fight!”) repeatedly, a slogan which generated a thunderous roar from the entire crowd. This statement reflected the refusal to support a “Democratic Party” regime due to its apathy toward the struggles of the working class. The connection to what can be labeled a “first wave” of the 1920’s labor movement could be easily identifiable. The connection of the organization to trade unions in an attempt to re-radicalize them is a tactic that has been used since the early 20th century by

Marxist-Leninist. I immediately turned and focused on the policed officers who had surrounded

us once we arrived. While at the beginning many had been walking around, with the roar came

a complete seizure of movement and a tense stance while thoroughly eyeing the crowd. Soon

the roar faded down and the speaker again began addressing the crowd with a statement of

connectivity, “Thank you comrades for your presence, thank you for your support, and thank

you for your patience.” (After he spoke a he repeated everything in Spanish, which continued

throughout his speech) “I am from Barrio Logan, this is my home, this is my Barrio, but today,

this is all our Barrio! What I see is many different faces, different backgrounds, but comrades

none the less! We are here because our system has shorted us, our system has abandoned us

and our system has lied to us! We are here to seek justice, not just for ourselves, but for

everyone! So today! Lets save this park, this park of my Barrio, but after, we must save all

parks! All Barrios! All our people everywhere! Viva la Revolucion! (Repeated several times

over). Again the crowd roared up in applause and I soon saw the organizations banners and

flags being waved throughout the crowd, they were also being handed out to crowd members

along with their fliers and membership application forms. This speech formed the bridge to

what can be described as the “second wave” or new left of the 1960’s and 70’s to the “first Johnson 34

wave”. While maintaining a strong dependence on the working class and unions as the principle

vehicle for change, the organization incorporated the “second wave elements of national

liberation, self-determination, and liberation for oppressed populations. This inclusion of

various aspects of struggle combined the two waves of movement into a coherent movement

which had the potential to attract the largest amount of populations possible. In a move similar

to the smaller discussion session I had ventured to earlier, the organization invited members to

a film festival and forum they were putting on the next month, with all people welcome and all

films being simultaneous shown in English, Spanish, and Tagalong.

Soon various forms of entertainment were beginning to start, such as Salsa dancing,

Mariachi music, Native American tribal dancing, and people singing the famous union song

“Solidarity Forever.” It was truly amazing to see the composure of these mass of people; workers, activist, youth, and the people who had simply heard the commotion and wanted to know what was going on. I counted fourteen membership forms being filled out for the organization in research, with a line being formed at their table. People were buying their clothes and accessories, along with simply making donations to the organization. As I approached the table, I could hear members of the crowd telling the organization members how they were looking for a Marxist-Leninist group that would fit their taste for a while and were very happy to find one, being particularly put off by the CPUSA and describing them as the

“Democratic Party’s lap dog”. The separation between this organization and the “lap dogs” were the refusal to support the Democratic Party by any means whether through funds or campaigns, which other avowedly Marxist-Leninist organizations had been performing. The entertainment had continued for an hour after the speaking until we were told that we have to Johnson 35

leave the premises, which sparked the mass exodus of people back toward downtown San

Diego or neighboring Logan Heights.

Discussion

“To accept anything on trust, to preclude critical application and development, is a grievous sin; and in order to apply and develop, “simple interpretation” is obviously not enough” -Vladimir Lenin

The results of these findings were interesting the fact that they seemed to constitute a new wave in the U.S. left, following the “New Left” of the 1960’s & 70’s. All the features of the

“New Left” were there: the struggle for self-determination of oppressed peoples, the struggle for LGBTQ rights, the struggle for immigrant equality, and continuing of the advancement of the woman’s struggle. All the struggles that had been fought for in the “New Left” had been continued in to this new wave, but in a very interesting change of direction, many elements of the original leftist movements from the late 1920’s thru 40’s had been serious revamped. Many of these elements were making the workers struggle and the alliance with the trade unions their serious foundation for continuing the legacy of this new Marxist Leninist movement. The re-militarization of the trade unions and the working class alongside their alliance with other oppressed populations was the central preoccupation of the organization. While many of the members of this organization where also in unions themselves, they sought to rebuild the original Marxist-Leninist notion of merging the workers movement with the socialist movement in order to combat the “Business Unionism” that was spoken by rank and file union members and the organization members.

The connection this organization had was spectacular, especially with their relationships

with the various trade unions and community activist organizations that that supported them. Johnson 36

The connection between race, gender, immigration, and sexual orientation was made a central priority by this organization and the connection they had with the capitalist system. The need they had stressed for the population of oppressed people to be militant and join their organization had been derived from the quote “The proletariat must be organized, must have strict organization, or they will fall. Unity forms organization and organization forms strength.”

(Lenin 1917) The composition of this organization and its alliance with other unions and community groups had combined the prominent features of both previous waves of socialist movement, the worker/union movement of the first and the self-determination/liberation movements of the second.

Their forms of connection, while varied, catered to almost every type of person within the population they were attempting to reach. From small gatherings which brought a sense of ease and intrigue to potentially reluctant persons, to full scale rallies showcasing alliances with numerous other activist which drew hundreds of people. Combining the physical presence the organization had on the ground with people in a face to face manner with the online presence in the cyber world, the potential for growth seemed very plausible. With the ability of this organization to connect with people who are not able to establish physical connection with the organization is an advantage that only recent groups have been able to take advantage of. One could only imagine what the CPUSA of past times or the Black Panthers could have done with the advent of the internet. The websites ability to allow people to print off literature, become a member, make donations, and import their own story of their own personal struggle have a quality that is indicative of this “new wave” of leftist movements, particularly for this new sect of Marxist-Leninist organizations. The ability to compete for recruits, establish new services Johnson 37

established from a Marxist Leninist point of view, connect viewers with a coalition of numerous

supportive groups, most notably it’s A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition which it steers. Forming coalitions is not a new phenomenon, but the availability to connect with groups from across the country that may have no physical connection with each other, much like potential members themselves; it’s a feat to marvel at itself. With the level of technology growing at an ever

expanding rate, the possibility for reaching even more and more people becomes and ever

growing possibility.

In addition to the social connection of the internet, the ability for people to start their

own chapters in locations not yet already within incorporation to the organization gives the

members or potential members a sense of empowerment and self direction as long as

allegiance to the party’s line is maintained. After passing the introductory period of membership, members could start building their local chapters where ever they desire and begin the party building work which was reported as the mainstay of their time and resources.

With the relatively open interpretation of Marxism-Leninism expressed by the party in order to gain the largest growth possible, the freedom for individual chapters to organize and struggle for Marxism-Leninism within their specific regions characteristics and qualities allows them to grow into region orientated chapters lead by a national chapter which combines those experiences and those of the rest of the world. Local experiences also allow the unique new services that are produced by the organization to have a grassroots feel since most of the information they express is either reported by members themselves or from affiliate groups.

With a news service seemly an essential piece of a growing political organization, the presence which can serve to greatly increase the reputation of the organization. Johnson 38

Conclusion

“I am a Marxist-Leninist and will be one until the last days of my life” -Fidel Castro

With technology progressing society at an ever changing pace, the adaptations of political parties, especially Marxist-Leninist political parties must become a central priority for survival to prevent being left in the dustbin of history. For these parties or organizations created more recently, this has been an easier task, but attempting to learn the lessons of previous organizations along with the perils of new forms of social control, the level of danger may be yet a great as the previous generations. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union and many other socialist/communist nations, new organizations have had to greatly change the way they connect to the public for growth and consciousness raising whilst continuing to focus on combating the “death of Marxism” strategy of globalized capitalism that accompanied the fall of the Eastern Bloc. The organization in research took many of the adequate steps to keep up with the challenges of this new internet and information age, a step which has ensured its successful alliances with other numerous organizations and its ability to span coast to coast, often with members having absolutely no physical contact.

The level of unity between peoples of such demographically unique backgrounds is also an aspect that is required for an ever growing and ever merging social movement.

(Geschwender 1968) As different people move into different areas, often with long established populations, the ability to create an environment of cooperation and understand is one of the most important functions for an organization attempting to lead people out of a classical

Marxist notion of “false consciousness”. With the demographics of the organization expressing a great devotion to multiculturalism and an obvious need for members to fight racism, sexism, Johnson 39

and homophobia, the incorporation of Marxist-Leninist class struggle lens and the structure of

this type of party allows a greater potential outreach for new recruits in their attempt to

rebuild the ideal type of Marxist-Leninist party. With the hopes of including undocumented immigrants, prisoners, unemployed persons, and people of every type of background save the upper-middle and upper classes, the days of a new Marxist-Leninist organization have arrived.

Involving oneself with an organization dedicated to combating every form of oppression allows an organization to be at the forefront of many struggles at the same time whilst creating a bridge between social resistance movements between them. Along with their umbrella group, the relationship this organization has with various trade unions, community activist groups, and immigrant rights groups allows information to be shared both ways and allows members to gain insight into various movements which only creates a stronger party and a more competent and consciousness membership and community. Compared to the observable size of this organization to other avowed “socialist” organizations, the success of the organization seems easily visible to the eye.

Further research which could continue the analysis of post-Soviet Marxist-Leninist

organizations in the contemporary United States would be deeper personal interviews with the

individual members throughout the various ranks and positions. Analyzing what brought them

to these organizations, what they wish to contribute, and what change they hope to make

would be phenomenal in terms of connection better their personal interviews within the

context of Marxist-Leninist ideology. In addition, a cross comparison could be made within the various different groups/organizations within the broad leftist movement in general whilst maintaining a Marxist-Leninist viewpoint when analyzing the various other forms of potential Johnson 40

resistance and growth. Studies regarding a person’s level of political acceptance could showcase the level of understanding and allowance of leftist political ideologies, specifically

Marxism-Leninism and its potential to reach a wider, more mainstream population in the

United States. Along with the research provided in this thesis, the understanding of the

adaptations of Marxist-Leninist organizations in post-Soviet United States is a topic that will

garner continued interest throughout these unstable economic years.

References

Blee, Kathleen. 2013. “How Options Disappear: Causality and Emergence in Grassroots Activist

Groups” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 119, No. 3 (November 2013), pp. 655-681

Published by: The University of Chicago Press Article DOI: 10.1086/675347 Article

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/675347

Block, Fred. 1990. “Capitalism versus Socialism in World-Systems Theory

Review” (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 13, No. 2 (Spring, 1990), pp. 265-271 Published

by: Research Foundation of SUNY for and on behalf of the Fernand Braudel Center

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40241152

Buechler, Steven M. 1995. “New Social Movement Theories” The Sociological Quarterly, Vol.

36, No. 3 (Summer, 1995), pp. 441-464 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Midwest

Sociological Society Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4120774

Calhoun, Craig. 2013. “Occupy Wall Street in Perspective” The British Journal of Sociology, Johnson 41

Vol. 64, No. 1 (March 2013), pp. 26-38 Published by: Wiley on behalf of The London

School of Economics and Political Science Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41812070

Carmichael, Stokely. 1973. “Marxism-Leninism and Nkrumahism” The Black Scholar, Vol. 4,

No. 5, PAN-AFRICANISM (III) THE CARIBBEAN (February 1973), pp. 41-43

Published by: Paradigm Publishers Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41163550

Cunningham, David. 2003. "Understanding State Responses to Left- Versus Right-Wing Threats:

The FBI's Repression of the New Left and the Ku Klux Klan." Social Science History

27(3):327-370

Das, Mitra. 1981. “Social Movement, Social Change, and Mass Communication”

International Review of Modern Sociology, Vol. 11, No. 1/2 (Jan.-Dec. 1981), pp. 127-

143 Published by: International Journals Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41420783

Donoso, Anton. 1979. “Stalinism in Marxist Philosophy” Studies in Soviet Thought, Vol. 19,

No.2 (Mar., 1979), pp. 113-141 Published by: Springer Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20098822

Edelman, Marc. 2001. “Social Movements: Changing Paradigms and Forms of Politics” Annual Johnson 42

Review of Anthropology, Vol. 30, (2001), pp. 285-317 Published by: Annual Reviews

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3069218

Foursov, Andre. 1996. "Communism, Capitalism, and the Bells of History." Review 19(2):103-

130

(http://ezproxy.csusm.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/61500631?acco

untid=10363).

Greene, Ronald Walter and Kevin Douglas Kuswa. 2012. "From the Arab Spring to Athens,

From Occupy Wall Street to Moscow": Regional Accents and the Rhetorical Cartography

of Power Rhetoric Society Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3, REGIONAL RHETORICS (2012),

pp. 271-288 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41722435

Isenberg, Bo. 1991. “Habermas on Foucault Critical Remarks” Acta Sociologica, Vol. 34, No. 4

(1991), pp. 299-308 Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd. Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4194740

Geschwender, James A. 1968. “Explorations in the Theory of Social Movements and

Revolutions” Social Forces, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Dec., 1968), pp. 127-135 Published by:

Oxford University Press. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2575142

Galia, Golan. 1987. “The 'Vanguard Party' Controversy” Soviet Studies, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., Johnson 43

1987), pp. 599-609 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/151959

Gordon, Derek. 1978. Working Class Radicalism in Jamaica: An Exploration of the Privileged

Worker Theory” Social and Economic Studies , Vol. 27, No. 3 (SEPTEMBER 1978), pp.

313-341

Guerre, Brian. 1992. "Communism in a Capitalist World: The Classic Marxist Theoretical

Perspective." Socialism and Democracy 8:77-104

(http://ezproxy.csusm.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/61336411?acco

untid=10363).

Hawley, James P. 1980. “Antonio Gramsci's Marxism: Class, State and Work”

Social Problems, Vol. 27, No. 5, Sociology of Political Knowledge Issue: Theoretical

Inquiries, Critiques and Explications (Jun., 1980), pp. 584-600 Published by: University

of California Press on behalf of the Society for the Study of Social Problems Article DOI:

10.2307/800198 Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/800198

Hoxha, Enver. 1978. “The Marxist-Leninist Movement and the World Crisis of Capitalism”

The Hoxhaist World Party Institute of Marxist-Leninist Studies at the Central Committee

of the Party of Labour of Albania 1978

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/marxist-leninist.html

Johnson 44

Juris, Jeffery S. 2012. “Reflections on #Occupy Everywhere: Social media, public space, and

emerging logics of aggregation” American Ethnologist, Vol. 39, No. 2 (MAY 2012), pp.

259-279 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association.

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23250820

Korpi, Walter. 1971. “Working Class Communism in Western Europe: Rational or Non-rational”

American Sociological Review, Vol. 36, No. 6 (Dec., 1971), pp. 971-984 Published by:

American Sociological Association Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2093759

Louw, Stephen. 1991. “Marxism-Leninism, Radical Democracy and Socialism”

Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, No. 78, Development and Ethics

(October 1991), pp. 139-158 Published by: Berghahn BooksArticle Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41801941

Lowndes, Joseph E. 2002. “Unstable Antistatism: The Left, the Right, and "The Outlaw Josey

Wales" International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society , Vol. 16, No. 2 (Winter,

2002), pp. 237-253 Published by: Springer Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20020161

Kosa, John and Clyde Z. Nunn. 1964. "Race, Deprivation and Attitude Toward Communism." Johnson 45

Phylon 25(4):337-346

(http://ezproxy.csusm.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/60599038?acco

untid=10363).

Mandel, Ernest. 1983. “Vanguard Parties” Mid-American Review of Sociology, Vol. 8, No. 2

(WINTER 1983), pp. 3-21 Published by: Allen Press. Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23252795

Portes, Alejandro. 1971a. "On the Interpretation of Class Consciousness." American Journal of

Sociology 77(2):228-244

(http://ezproxy.csusm.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/60908327?acco

untid=10363).

Portes ,Alejandro. 1971b. “On the Logic of Post-Factum Explanations: The Hypothesis of

Lower-Class Frustration as the Cause of Leftist Radicalism” Social Forces, Vol. 50, No.

1 (Sep., 1971), pp. 26-44 Published by: Oxford University Press Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3006047

Portes, Alejandro. 1971c. “Political Primitivism, Differential Socialization, and Lower-Class

Leftist Radicalism” American Sociological Review, Vol. 36, No. 5 (Oct., 1971), pp. 820-

835 Published by: American Sociological Association Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2093669

Johnson 46

Plutzer, Eric. 1987. “Determinants of Leftist Radical Belief in the United States: A Test of

Competing Theories” Social Forces , Vol. 65, No. 4 (Jun., 1987), pp. 1002-1019

Published by: Oxford University Press Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2579020

Ryan, Jeffrey J. 1994. “The Impact of Democratization on Revolutionary Movements”

Comparative Politics , Vol. 27, No. 1 (Oct., 1994), pp. 27-44 Published by: Ph.D.

Program in Political Science of the City University of New York Article Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/422216

So, Alvin Y. & Muhammad Hikam. 1989 "Class" in the Writings of Wallerstein and Thompson:

Toward a Class Struggle Analysis” Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Winter,

1989), pp. 453-467 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. Article DOI: 10.2307/1389132

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1389132

Van Hiel, Alain. 1990. "A Psycho-Political Profile of Party Activists and Left-Wing and Right-

`Wing Extremists." European Journal of Political Research 51(2):166-203

(http://ezproxy.csusm.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/926762105?acc

ountid=10363)

Wolff, Richard D. and Stephen Cullenberg. “Marxism and Post-Marxism” Social Text, No. 15 Johnson 47

(Autumn, 1986), pp. 126-135 Published by: Duke University Press Article DOI:

10.2307/466496. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/466496