From the "CWVTJ" to the "Communist Voice"
Posted: Sat Feb 08, 2025 11:47 pm
From the Chicago Workers’ Voice Theoretical Journal to the Communist Voice
(from Communist Voice #1)
1. The Detroit Marxist-Leninist Study Group will soon be publishing, with the cooperation and support of other comrades, a new journal. Below we outline the reasons behind our decision.
2. The Detroit Marxist-Leninist Study Group wanted to see the "minority" define itself as an organization. We called for a loose network, the only organizational form suitable for the present low level of ideological agreement. We wanted to see the "minority" define itself as a political trend not a fragment of the past, adopt a statement of purpose, and reorient its flagship publication to take up the present tasks.
But the Chicago Workers Voice group is unwilling to join. It has declared that its differences with the DMLSG-- concerning anti-revisionism, the attitude to different political trends, MLP history, the historical role of various individuals, etc. -- preclude unity at present. Comrades in LA and Seattle have also pointed out that the existence of these differences among the "minority" preclude a general "minority" organization at this time. The differences include such basic questions as what is anti-revisionism, the attitude to the struggle against opportunism, and the role of theoretical work. There doesn't appear to be any possibility at present of a national organization embracing the former "minority".
3. There is also little chance that the CWV's journal, the Chicago Workers Voice Theoretical Journal, can continue to function as an informal central voice of the "minority" grouping. The CWV doesn't even see that at present we have reached a critical juncture. … It is intolerant of differences--for example, it failed to put forward the range of minority views on its endorsement of the journal El Machete in a timely way. And it is too self-absorbed, its imagination too constrained by the narrow concerns of a small circle, to deal with the needs of the rest of the "minority".
The CWV has embarked on the path of using CWVTJ as its exclusive voice, rather than as the chorus of the "minority". It is trying to create a rationale for this position by presenting CWV (as the successor of the former Chicago Branch of the MLP) as the hero of the last years of the late Marxist-Leninist Party, whose allegedly correct position was ignored by others. It upholds its mistaken criticism from several years back of basically correct Workers’ Advocate articles as the real fight against liquidationism, and this too helps blind it to the theoretical questions that face us today. At the same time it has a sectarian attitude to other comrades who were opposed to the development of liquidationism in the MLP.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. These stands of the CWV signify the fragmentation of the "minority". The former unity around the CWVTJ as chief "minority" journal was based on enthusiastic agreement about the need for the debate with the "majority"; the view that CWVTJ should be an open forum for all comrades; and the expectation that CWV, although formally free to do as it pleases, would informally show the same tact and consideration towards others that the elected editorial board of a national organization is supposed to show towards the organization's members. None of these conditions are satisfied today.
The "minority"-- which came together at the fifth and last Congress of the Marxist-Leninist Party -- succeeded in continuing the debate which the leaders of the "majority" sought to silence. It brought news of the struggle to other activists here and abroad. It succeeded in bringing together a number of comrades, thus overcoming for a time the impulse to fragmentation given by the collapse of the MLP. It provided a platform for comrades to put forward political views and encouraged continued theoretical and political work.
But the "minority" never even succeeded in defining what it was -- to the very end, it relied on the makeshift term "minority". It never was able to overcome ideological fragmentation. And it never succeeded in developing any encompassing organization at all, relying solely on informal arrangements which it is not even possible to completely ascertain.
6. Under these conditions, the "minority" as a cohesive political grouping doesn't exist any more.
The DMLSG will seek further clarification of the different stands of the different circles of the former "minority" grouping. And we will seek to maintain cooperation with all of the circles and individuals of the former "minority", both those who agree with the DMLSG on various issues and those who are critical of us. But we will not subordinate our work to decisions taken without our consultation and consent We would be happy if further discussion restores unity, and would at that time advocate journals responsible to a united organization as a whole. But we will not suspend our work while waiting for the outcome of future discussions.
7. In this situation, the DLMSG will publish its own theoretical journal, tentatively to be called the Communist Voice, to encourage theoretical and political work and to facilitate closer relations with those who see the tasks of the movement as we do. The aim of this journal is to further the anti-revisionist trend which we seek to build. It will also publish materials and correspondence from comrades with other views, but lack of resources prevents us from making it into an open forum that would automatically accept all interesting contributions of whatever standpoint. The existence of other journals such as the CWVTJ will allow materials which we cannot publish to appear elsewhere.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10. The Communist Voice will not only carry our own materials, but those of others. This includes contributions from those who don't agree with us but who have prepared materials of theoretical or political or historical interest. At the same time, the Communist Voice will seek to show activists the need to break with traditional but bankrupt leftist phrases and instead take up anti-revisionist communism. In regard to activist work, it will aim to orient it towards strengthening the independent links of anti-revisionism with the masses, and not to mere floating in the left or the mere repetition of popular phrases which no longer have a cutting edge.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <>
Announcing a new theoretical journal, the Communist Voice (excerpts)Issue #1 of the Communist Voice appeared on April 15, 1995. It began as the journal of the Detroit Marxist-Leninist Study Group, but in issue #4, September 15, 1995, it became the journal of the newly-formed *Communist Voice Organization”. Below are excerpts from an announcement of its first issue. The CWVTJ continued to 1998; the Communist Voice continued to 2016, and the Communist Voice Organization continues to publish articles in other forms.
(from Communist Voice #1)
1. The Detroit Marxist-Leninist Study Group will soon be publishing, with the cooperation and support of other comrades, a new journal. Below we outline the reasons behind our decision.
2. The Detroit Marxist-Leninist Study Group wanted to see the "minority" define itself as an organization. We called for a loose network, the only organizational form suitable for the present low level of ideological agreement. We wanted to see the "minority" define itself as a political trend not a fragment of the past, adopt a statement of purpose, and reorient its flagship publication to take up the present tasks.
But the Chicago Workers Voice group is unwilling to join. It has declared that its differences with the DMLSG-- concerning anti-revisionism, the attitude to different political trends, MLP history, the historical role of various individuals, etc. -- preclude unity at present. Comrades in LA and Seattle have also pointed out that the existence of these differences among the "minority" preclude a general "minority" organization at this time. The differences include such basic questions as what is anti-revisionism, the attitude to the struggle against opportunism, and the role of theoretical work. There doesn't appear to be any possibility at present of a national organization embracing the former "minority".
3. There is also little chance that the CWV's journal, the Chicago Workers Voice Theoretical Journal, can continue to function as an informal central voice of the "minority" grouping. The CWV doesn't even see that at present we have reached a critical juncture. … It is intolerant of differences--for example, it failed to put forward the range of minority views on its endorsement of the journal El Machete in a timely way. And it is too self-absorbed, its imagination too constrained by the narrow concerns of a small circle, to deal with the needs of the rest of the "minority".
The CWV has embarked on the path of using CWVTJ as its exclusive voice, rather than as the chorus of the "minority". It is trying to create a rationale for this position by presenting CWV (as the successor of the former Chicago Branch of the MLP) as the hero of the last years of the late Marxist-Leninist Party, whose allegedly correct position was ignored by others. It upholds its mistaken criticism from several years back of basically correct Workers’ Advocate articles as the real fight against liquidationism, and this too helps blind it to the theoretical questions that face us today. At the same time it has a sectarian attitude to other comrades who were opposed to the development of liquidationism in the MLP.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. These stands of the CWV signify the fragmentation of the "minority". The former unity around the CWVTJ as chief "minority" journal was based on enthusiastic agreement about the need for the debate with the "majority"; the view that CWVTJ should be an open forum for all comrades; and the expectation that CWV, although formally free to do as it pleases, would informally show the same tact and consideration towards others that the elected editorial board of a national organization is supposed to show towards the organization's members. None of these conditions are satisfied today.
The "minority"-- which came together at the fifth and last Congress of the Marxist-Leninist Party -- succeeded in continuing the debate which the leaders of the "majority" sought to silence. It brought news of the struggle to other activists here and abroad. It succeeded in bringing together a number of comrades, thus overcoming for a time the impulse to fragmentation given by the collapse of the MLP. It provided a platform for comrades to put forward political views and encouraged continued theoretical and political work.
But the "minority" never even succeeded in defining what it was -- to the very end, it relied on the makeshift term "minority". It never was able to overcome ideological fragmentation. And it never succeeded in developing any encompassing organization at all, relying solely on informal arrangements which it is not even possible to completely ascertain.
6. Under these conditions, the "minority" as a cohesive political grouping doesn't exist any more.
The DMLSG will seek further clarification of the different stands of the different circles of the former "minority" grouping. And we will seek to maintain cooperation with all of the circles and individuals of the former "minority", both those who agree with the DMLSG on various issues and those who are critical of us. But we will not subordinate our work to decisions taken without our consultation and consent We would be happy if further discussion restores unity, and would at that time advocate journals responsible to a united organization as a whole. But we will not suspend our work while waiting for the outcome of future discussions.
7. In this situation, the DLMSG will publish its own theoretical journal, tentatively to be called the Communist Voice, to encourage theoretical and political work and to facilitate closer relations with those who see the tasks of the movement as we do. The aim of this journal is to further the anti-revisionist trend which we seek to build. It will also publish materials and correspondence from comrades with other views, but lack of resources prevents us from making it into an open forum that would automatically accept all interesting contributions of whatever standpoint. The existence of other journals such as the CWVTJ will allow materials which we cannot publish to appear elsewhere.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10. The Communist Voice will not only carry our own materials, but those of others. This includes contributions from those who don't agree with us but who have prepared materials of theoretical or political or historical interest. At the same time, the Communist Voice will seek to show activists the need to break with traditional but bankrupt leftist phrases and instead take up anti-revisionist communism. In regard to activist work, it will aim to orient it towards strengthening the independent links of anti-revisionism with the masses, and not to mere floating in the left or the mere repetition of popular phrases which no longer have a cutting edge.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <>