Communist Party Clubs as Organizing Centers of Grassroots Struggle: How to Get from Here to There

[This report is based on a number of collective discussions, in the preconvention discussion and more recently in a special meeting of members of the National Board and most of the district organizers which was held in January.]

Report to the National Committee

Good morning comrades.

Yesterday, Sam talked about the very grave dangers facing our country and the world. His report calls on the Party to find the ways to build the struggle against the ultra right, to connect the struggle for peace and against the Bush war policy with struggle against its vicious domestic agenda; to set our sights high; to think in new ways about the scope and scale of the problems, as well as the possibilities for winning struggles.

Sam quoted the NY Times editorial which pointed out that the Bush has no mandate for his policies. Bush's right wing agenda has no support in the grass roots, is what that says.

The connection between yesterday's discussion and today's, lies in the "how:" how will the Party most effectively engage in these battles. And the answer is by helping to mobilize that grassroots, the rank and file.

Joelle, in her excellent report, spoke very well to the important role our Party can play by helping mobilize and organize the grass roots to impact on the November elections. We can play an important role helping to organize the rank and file so that battles over health care and jobs can be won, like they were in Ashtabula.

GRASSROOTS LEVEL OF POLITICAL LIFE

And the way we'll do this is by strengthening the work of the Party clubs.

In Spanish, the expression for clubs is "organizations of the base." I want to take a few minutes to discuss the matter of the base, or, as we call it, the grassroots, the rank and file.

That we in the Party, on the left, are concerned about "the grassroots" is assumed; it is almost a cliche. But what does it mean? How well do we understand the importance of organizing at the grassroots, of building forms for influencing the thinking, and moving into action, regular people? Why is building the movements and as well building the Party at the grassroots not just a good idea, but essential?

Maybe it's obvious, but it occurs to me that the answers to these questions get to the very essence of the process of social change, to what the class struggle means and consists of, to how history moves, and last but not least to the role and "reason for being" of a revolutionary workingclass Party.

But then again, maybe it isn't obvious, because if it were, we wouldn't have the problems we do with club functioning, or at least on the scale that we do.

These questions -- about the grassroots level of political life and of our political work as a Party -- merit a thorough discussion.

The point has been made that we aren't the only ones talking about how to build and strengthen grassroots organization; in the labor movement and other movements there is much discussion on this very issue as well. It was a topic of discussion at the AFLCIO convention. A recent issue of the Nation, in an article on the anti-globalization movement, quoted Ohio Congressman Sherrod Brown who said that a vital task for that movement is to organize grassroots electoral pressure, for the coming elections and in an ongoing way to influence national policy on globalization.

The National Organization for Women is planning local actions on International Women's Day to pressure Congress to reject Bush's right wing judicial nominations.

And there are many other examples.

With all our problems, clearly, Communists make very important contributions to the struggles in which we are involved, and we shouldn't downplay or diminish that in any way. We bring the Party's powerful ideas -- on unity, on the role of the working class, on broad tactics, our strategic policy, our long term vision -- into movements and struggles, through our participation and leadership, with our press, and in other ways too.

Individual communists, district and national leaders, play very important roles in very important struggles.

But how often do Party clubs as collective, organized groups of Communists play that kind of role in a struggle, in influencing developments and thinking among people in our communities and workplaces? Not often enough. And obviously, that presents some problems.

One is those is that where most of the work is done by individuals, not connected to "organizations of the base," the Party will only be built in a limited way. New members' connection must be with an organization, not an individual, for it to last, for them to benefit from membership in the Party, for new Communist mass leaders to develop -- and we'll need lots of those.

Two: if the Party membership became mainly "at large," that would, over time, have a negative effect on our ability to collectively assess developments and make, implement, and test policy in life, and, last but definitely not least, such a situation would limit our ability to grow as an organized and influential force in the workingclass movement.

Building the clubs means building both the size and influence of the Party. And building the clubs is a strategic approach to Party growth, to expanding the role the Party plays in the class struggle and the levels at which we play that role.

If the clubs do not function, if they aren't connected with the main arenas of struggle and on the key issues that motivate and mobilize people, there is a fundamental weakness, a problem, in the relationship of the Communists to masses.

And after all, it is organized masses of people who have make political change, or, as Lenin put it, "politics begins with millions."

While the role of the Party can't and shouldn't be reduced to what the clubs do or don't do, it is also true that strengthening this weakest level of our structure is fundamental to the grassroots coalition building that is the basis for, and the only path towards pro-people, anti-corporate, meaningful changes.

Collective action is the essence of the working class' power, and that applies to a working class revolutionary party too.

At the risk of being accused of overkill, I will add this: for the long haul, we have to strengthen the Party at the club level in order to play our unique role in the class struggle against capitalism, and in the revolutionary transformation to a socialist society, which will require, by definition, a democratic, grassroots, majority movement.

The clubs are the connection between the struggle in the here and now, and that long haul. So building the Communist Party at the base is a most important thing; it is the essential thing.

ORIENTING THE PARTY TOWARDS THE CLUBS

How do we orient the whole Party towards the clubs. How do we elevate this question? How do we change our attitude towards the clubs?

In the recent period, we've undertaken a process of renovation and rebuilding of the Party which has consisted mainly of changes at the national level, both organizational and political.

Through wide, democratic discussion, we have developed an excellent policy and tactics for today's complicated challenges.

We have made progress in the direction of streamlining our structure, and trying new things that turn us outward, make us more action-oriented, more "reality based and results oriented," although we still have a ways to go.

The Party is invigorated, politically and theoretically. And this is alongside our live and lively practical engagement on the many class struggle issues and battles. We have made headway in our efforts to become more connected and a more integral part of the political scene.

These were very necessary and important changes, and laid the groundwork for this next step in the process of transforming our Party.

The challenge before us now is this: to grow the Party and especially to grow and strengthen it at the grass roots -- to build the clubs.

We are proposing a campaign to put the building of the Party clubs front and center. The first step is that this campaign, this change in how we work, become a priority for the whole leadership.

And the low level of collective functioning of many if not most of our clubs presents us with a big challenge. Our starting point is this: strong, vibrant local organization is a matter of life or death for a working class revolutionary Party.

Marxism Leninism cannot be effectively applied to the class struggle or practiced by a Party without strong grassroots organization.

These are strong statements. But I think they're true. And if you agree, then we need to make a radical shift in how we approach the building of the clubs of our Party. Although this is a long term problem requiring long term attention, there are steps we can and must take in the here and now.

What's required first of all is a political change, without which the organizational proposals won't go anywhere. What's required is to raise our understanding, our political appreciation -- of the role of the Party clubs, so that we are able to give the necessary practical attention to their functioning.

Here's something to think about. If the clubs are the most important structures of the Party, if we agree that in a basic sense, they are the Party, and that giving political leadership to a club is the hardest job politically, requiring as it does the creative application and testing of policy, bringing new people around, working with broad forces, developing tactics, etc. Therefore, doesn't it follow that the best, the most developed Communists, should be club chairs?

As I said, it's something to think about.

NO PARTY BUILDING SEPARATED FROM STRUGGLE, NO CLUB BUILDING SEPARATED FROM THE REAL WORLD

We can't undertake the problem of strengthening the Party clubs abstracted from the political tasks of our day. Herein lies that hardest work: how to link local to national struggles; how to apply the Party's strategic policy "on the ground," so to speak. So, given our political priorities, how are we working on them in regard to the clubs? How are we helping the clubs implement our policy?

We talk about building left-center unity; and broad, labor-led, people's coalitions. How does this happen, how does it work, at the local, grass roots level?

Issues and struggles abound; we don't have to invent the class struggle; the challenges are awesome, and immediate: the danger of an unending, expanding use of US military violence around the world. Unemployment, the steel crisis, the health care crisis, the threat to social security, the budget cuts at the state and city level, the critical November elections. The many-sided attack on our democratic rights, on civil rights and liberties, on the rights of immigrants, on the right to organize, struggle and protest.

In a nutshell, we have to find ways to draw the clubs into struggle against the ultra right offensive, against the Bush administration policy, into the electoral battles.

Sometimes just asking questions isn't very helpful. But in this case, I think its exactly what we need to do: to ask, about everything we do, "how does this relate to, affect, the clubs?"

GETTING FROM A TO Z BY GETTING FROM FROM A TO B; AND, WHAT DO WE MEAN BY CONCENTRATION?

We have a long way to go to get where we want to and can be.

Our clubs are more different from each other than they are similar: They range in size from 3 people to 30; they range in frequency meetings from twice monthly, to occasionally, to not at all; they range in the quality of their meetings from well planned and organized, to agendas that are put together on the spot; they range in level of structuring from clubs with an exec that meets between club meetings, to those that don't even have a chair.

However, I'd say most -- not all, but the majority -- are on the low end of these various spectrums.

The lack of strong club leaderships is the key problem which has bearing on most of the other organizational issues.

But I think the biggest problem the clubs face is the question of their relationship as grassroots organizations to mass struggle, to the people, to the working class.

Our members are very involved, in many organizations and movements. The membership review we conducted last spring showed a very high level of participation in many areas, including and especially in the labor movement.

But the clubs as organizations are insufficiently connected to the main arenas of struggle and the main issues. They aren't "organizing centers," places where collective thinking goes on, places to which we can bring those we work with. Most don't have an approach to local media. Clubs don't adequately utilize our own press, don't think big enough about it, don't use it as the "scaffolding on the movement," as Lenin put it.

Lest this sounds too negative, let me say this: we can point to very positive examples. Some districts, like Illinois, for example, have already begun to examine their clubs and make some changes to improve them; the Harlem club is experimenting with forms and has drawn a lot of people around it; the Roslyn club in Washington state does some amazing coalition building work and has had a big impact on its community.

But still, the positive examples are not enough, not nearly enough, and I think it's not too hard to see why, given how little attention we've paid to this.

So, to quote Lenin again, and briefly: What is to be done?

The hardest part of focussing on the clubs is coming up with concrete ideas on how to change and improve them, how to move from A to B. We can all imagine the perfect club, and we sometimes do that -- we picture it -- but since that perfect club is so far from what we often experience, we tend to give up. And we can't give up, we have to find ways to take steps now to change our clubs.

So first off, I'll say this: we'll need to be creative, flexible, bold. We will have to try new things, to experiment. We will have to be dogged. And we shouldn't be stuck on one way to build the clubs.

We have to find ways, right now, to put "more life" into as many of our clubs as possible. If that means putting a group of people together who are working on an issue, and have people around them who will join on that basis, we should consider it. If that means going person by person, club by club, and trying to figure out the best configurations of people, struggles, issues, we should consider it. Putting more life into the clubs will require help and work by the district and national leaderships -- we can't expect each club to do this on their own, because probably if they could have, they would have.

One idea is to establish some new clubs or make changes in some existing ones so that they are in a position to make breakthroughs, so that they can become "breakthrough club." These won't be the majority of the clubs, but even a few would provide us with important experience to learn from and build on. Every district should discuss whether this is possible.

Experimenting with forms shouldn't be taken to mean that we are abandoning concentration, in regard to any of the ways in which we use the term concentration.

Every club can and must actively work to connect to the working class and to the labor movement. There are many ways to do this, and the national and district leaderships have to give specific attention to helping clubs develop a specific approach to industrial concentration. As we've said so many times, many doors are open in the labor movement, and the economic crisis looms large.

We also speak of concentration in terms of building the Party in key communities. At our convention (and many times before and since), we said we should organize new efforts to build the Party in key communities of the racially and nationally oppressed, specifically East LA, South Chicago and Harlem. As Sam said in the Convention keynote, "building mass clubs in these areas would strengthen racial and class composition of the party and root us in communities that have a major bearing on city, state and national politics." So we are proposing some specific steps in this regard.

Last but not least: we also use the term concentration to describe a method of work for clubs, and the goal or ideal form of club organization, that is, clubs that are based in a specific neighborhood or shop. And we do want clubs that are focussed, and the more we grow, the more that will be the case.

But we shouldn't define concentration as simply a question of location; such a definition is too limiting, "too narrowly constructed." What matters is the content of that concentration; what matters is our goal for Communist grassroots activity.

That goal is Party clubs that are connected, that are involved in the main struggles in their area, that are interesting, educational, enjoyable places to be. We want clubs in which people grow politically and ideologically, in which leaders develop.

We want clubs that are organizing centers, that influence people, that can "bring out troops," that participate in and affect election campaigns. We want clubs that help bring the working class and its organized section to the fore, to the center of struggles; we want clubs that build unity. And I'm sure I'm leaving things out.

All of these different characteristics of well-functioning clubs are inter-related and inseparable.

So the issue is not whether or not we want clubs that concentrate, whether geographically or based on occupation.

Most of the forms clubs take in this next period will be transitional -- that's almost a given, since we are so small and the country is so big. And in every case, the things that we want to characterize all of our clubs -- participating in and helping to lead struggles, bringing new people around and into the movements and into the Party, having an organizational identity and a vibrant, challenging, educational life and dynamic -- these are all things which will drive further adjustments and improvements in the clubs.

More to the point, more important -- and most difficult -- is figuring out how to get from here to there -- or, how to transform the clubs that we have now. And again, I don't think there is a formula or model for that "how," for the transition.

One of these steps (and this is not a new idea) is use of the media, in the first place the People's Weekly World. We've taken important steps to build the PWW in terms of content and coverage; Terrie will speak later about this. The paper is both a tool for club building and an ideological, political and organizing tool to be used by clubs for coalition building, for industrial concentration, workingclass concentration and movement building. This year we need to make some real headway on the building by the clubs of local readerships, and use of the paper by the clubs in an all-sided way.

We also have to look at how we use local media and the internet to promote our ideas and publicize our organization, including our clubs.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE IN A PARTY CLUB?

All of us have thought about why we joined the Party, and why others join or should join.

A lot of that hinges on what you get from being a member of the Party that you don't get anywhere else. We have to examine these questions in the context of what people experience in the clubs.

One comrade in our discussion in January made the point that regardless of circumstances, all clubs should be a place were people get a political education. We have to give much more attention to improving the political and ideological content of club life. We know this, we've said it a million times, and now that we have a functioning national education collective and an overall commitment to help the clubs, we're in a position to move forward on this.

Just some final ideas before the proposals.

In one sentence, I would describe our goal for building the Party as this: a much bigger, better organized Party made up of many active clubs engaged in building the workingclass movement, engaged in the main class struggle battles of our day.

Clearly, we won't get there without some big changes in our clubs, so,

How will we generate strong enough motivation to change what we've been doing, starting at the national and district level? How will we move the Party from where it is, from what we are doing, to doing something quite different?

We shouldn't kid ourselves; it will be an uphill battle, as change can be, and when it comes to the clubs, it's especially difficult, because we know from the get-go that what we are trying to change won't happen overnight.

But change we must, because the problems confronting the people are so big, and the need for grassroots resistance and struggle is so immediate and urgent. The kind of Communist Party that's needed today includes many elements: politics, ideology, initiative, involvement, and also, grassroots organization.

And we're on the way, I believe.

PROPOSALS:

1) The first proposal is that we hold a national conference on the clubs at the time of the June National Committee meeting, to which we invite comrades from every club in addition to the NC.

Why a national conference? To make the kind of change in approach and thinking that we're proposing requires some very special steps. I think it needs this kind of push. And the purpose of the conference would be both to exchange experience and ideas but as well to have an opportunity for the whole leadership to discuss this change, this new emphasis on the grassroots. Given the crowded calendar, holding a national conference combined with the NC meeting helps streamline things, and we should do it in as low budget a way as we can (grass roots style!)

2) Between now and the conference, we propose that the National Committee organize and take part in a Party-wide discussion on building the clubs. Specifically, we should shoot for meetings to be held in every district and in as many clubs as possible, with someone from the national leadership.

These meetings with the clubs should be a main purpose of the travel by national comrades during this time period.

3) That the districts organize a review of the clubs with an eye to how to strengthen them, in particular, how to strengthen club leadership, and, where possible, pick some clubs that we would aim to make into "breakthrough clubs."

4) That we meet with the Illinois, New York and Southern California district leaderships on the proposal to build the clubs in Harlem, East LA and South Chicago.

5) That all national bodies discuss how they can help relate to the club level of Party organization.

6) That in particular, the Nat. Org. Department figure out what it has to change so that it can be more helpful to districts and clubs. We have some ideas, including initiating a monthly newsletter focussing on club and district experiences, helping every club get connected to the internet, and finding methods for communication, back and forth, with the club chairs and districts.

The Ed. Commission has already begun discussing club educational work.

PS: The proposals should not include coming up with lists of things clubs should do.

------------------

I want to end with these thoughts: Nothing we are saying should be construed as a retreat from or a de-emphasizing of the necessity of building connections, relations, at every level, between the Party and the mass movements, between Communists and mass leaders and activists. That work is extremely valuable, and our participation and ideas have already made a difference in many struggles.

But to the degree that we're able to deepen and extend our connections and our own size and strength at the grassroots, that in turn will help to solidify and bring a new content to our relations at other levels.

Our ideas and input will have a lot more meaning if backed up by organizational umph, ie, troops, and by that I don't just mean Party members, but people we work with, influence, including activists from other organizations, in our communities and shops, congregations and PTAs, etc., who can be mobilized into action on issues.

We can't and mustn't separate the kind of Party we've envisioned, a Party which is "in the mix," from the kind of Party we want to build at the club level.

This report has included some "thinking out loud," and in some ways was meant to give us all a jolt; to jump start the kind of vigorous, sustained, collective thinking and effort that we are capable of and which will transform our clubs and our Party.