The last word?
There will be many readers who will believe that this is the wrong way to approach the problems that exist in the CPI. We would agree.
Anything and everything presented in these pages could – and should – have been dealt with within the ranks of the Party membership. But, at every level, the leadership did everything in its power to ensure that that did not happen.
“When you tear out a man’s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
On numerous occasions and in numerous ways members tried to have their voices heard. What those voices would have articulated might have been right or wrong in varying degrees but they stood no chance of being explored. Discussions or arguments were won or lost not on the basis of objectivity or persuasion but by numbers. Or, by being strangled at birth.
It was made clear to the leadership that if the debates did not take place within the Party, then they would be conducted from outside the Party. The leadership had any number of options on how to deal with the problems that were facing them: these were simply political developments that the leadership needed to take account of and try to accommodate and manage.
Instead, the leadership decided on a road of confrontation. Not a confrontation with the ideas but a confrontation with the individuals. Not exactly what Fidel Castro had in mind when he stated that there needs to be a “battle of ideas”. The ideas were ignored while the destruction of the will, of the character, of the motives of the individuals was embarked on. As always, they decided to shoot the messengers as a way of avoiding having to deal with the message. And, as always, in doing so they exposed for all to see their complete political, organisational and managerial immaturity. And, exposed their utter lack of confidence that they had the ability to handle matters other than by brute force. Neither did they anticipate that one day the messengers might shoot back.
There were no rules to their game or any rules that existed were dispensed of to achieve a predetermined outcome. As a consequence, the leadership at each and every level, made mistake after mistake and dug hole after hole. Not accustomed to being challenged, they resorted to bully-boy tactics in the most amateurish and ham-fisted ways imaginable. For this they will be held to account – more on that another time.
Normally, the leadership would have to face a minor skirmish but in the end, the ‘disruptors’ would skulk off in the political wilderness. Not this time.
In the end, we all have to live with the choices we make. All we ask is that our readers accept that the choices we faced – like those of so many comrades before us – were limited by the actions of the leadership of the Party. We are communists with a stake in the future of the Party. That some of us are outside the Party is not of our choosing.
The CPI does not own the concept of communism nor does it have any trademark protection deeming it the only avenue for communists to explore the road ahead. It has no Marx-Engels-Lenin-Connolly-like exclusive insight into how communists (or anyone else, for that matter) should travel that road. One of its biggest problems is that it thinks it does.
The first step in working towards progress has to take place within the Party itself. The leadership has run out of excuses and there is absolutely no necessity for the Party itself to be in the pitiful state it is in. If the Party itself is not functioning at its highest potential then its policies – no matter how good they may be – are worthless. The deliberate holding back of potential by the leadership of the Party is the single greatest threat to the future of the Party.
And that leads to the notion that they are always right and that no other ‘analysis’ can hold a candle to them. It is just like the Roman Catholic Church: The Roman Catholics believe themselves to be the “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church”. They hold the notion that Christ established here on earth only one Church and they believe in the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church in addition having exclusive insight to their god.
We have seen how that has worked out. They can believe it all they like but, nobody is listening to them. And, nobody (except the church leadership, perhaps) cares where they get their ideas from.
At this time, all that matters is that ideas are matched with action, with explanation, with positive and convincing argument, with a vision and with hope in order to start to pave a way forward. If that process is faulty then that’s that.
The assertions and aspirations of the Party are not god-given – they have to be man-made and presented to people in a way that is both relevant and appealing.
Similarly, the methods used by the leadership – and others in the party – have not produced an effective, unified party. Continuing to use those methods is not acceptable because these methods will not work any better in the future than they have in the past.
The Party needs assistance, a different approach to how it handles its internal conflicts and differences of opinion. Those who reject and scoff the proposal to engage independent mediation have a duty to offer an alternative – and not an alternative that has already been tried and failed.
Join the Party and turn it into a communist party.
If you are in the Party, then step up and take your responsibilities as communists seriously.