With October 22 just around the corner, the thoughts of many anarchists turn where they do this time of year: to the RCP. But this October 22, important developments demonstrate the growth and strength of anarchist ideas, even to an organization sworn against those concepts.If you live in a large, urban area and attended a protest, you’ve probably seen at least one or two RCP members. You’re likely to see more by week’s end. The RCP, public pretensions aside, established the October 22 anti-police brutality event almost ten years ago, and they’ve done so with some success. Around October 22, the curious dance between anarchists and the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA becomes all the more pronounced. Anarchists and said Maoist group have often found themselves on the same road; how anarchists should deal with the group is a subject of continuous debate. Both present occasionally similar rhetoric, and anarchists are sought as recruits for its work (probably not a bad idea, since Mao himself was an anarchist as one point). If you know them, you’ve probably picked on the constant references to its leader, Bob Avakian, and members’ pushing of the party paper, but a funny thing happened on the way to the great leap forward.

Since the release of Greg Lewis’ “Mythology of the White-Led ‘Vanguard’: A Critical Look at the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA” the RCP has changed its tune in a number of ways. Today’s RCP seems to eschew old positions on things like homosexuality, acknowledges human rights violations in Maoist China, and puts a new focus on open debate. Such changes make some of us wistful for the bad old days. I fondly recall an RCP member telling me Peru’s Shining Path/Sendero Luminoso (a group the party supported) never killed civilians; or a four-hour argument I once had with an RCP member on the reeducation of gays, and comparisons the party made of homosexuality to prositution and drug use. That member, quite bravely, held the party line. I, and likely half the people they spoke with, scratched their heads.

Today, Lewis notes some of the changes in RCP tactics in his Our Culture, Our Resistance interview. And the new RCP approach is something for which anarchists can certainly take credit, as well as learn from.

Essentially, the new RCP approach seems to involve speaking first to shared progressive values (revolutionary change, “change the world,” for example), then emphasizing the need for open discussion (including acknowledging they may not have all the answers), and finally affirming the receiver’s importance to the discussion. For anarchists, these components sound familiar. They should. Since the 1999 World Trade Organization protests, an ongoing movement of people’s assemblies, consultas, social forums and more have brought decentralized principles to the forefront of radical organizing. These strategies are inherently anti-authoritarian, focusing on direct democracy and collective decisionmaking. Such an approach is a far cry from what was long-criticized as RCP dogmatism and secrecy; no doubt standing on the sidelines of every major social movement for the last 25 years has prompted a shift in language. However, it’s unlikely its core ideological principles have moved.

Whether you decide to engage in such dialogues is your own decision. Anarchists who tend to support coalition work with the RCP, in my experience, most frequently fall back on the issue as a question of being overly theoretical or “getting something done.” The problem is that anarchists, in truth, need to consider what we are seeking, as having those discussions is necessary. Simply moving from one “something” to the next does not build a new world. For people of color, this question should be even more urgent.

Another issue to be clear on is that such dialogues aren’t, in fact, dialogues; democratic centralism requires that members defend the party’s positions. Ask a member what criticisms they have of of the party program. Ask about how democratic centralism in the party works. See if you get a response.

As a vanguardist grouping, it’s doubtful the RCP will be able to cope longterm with the political shifts of today; the party itself has been in decline since is 1970s’ heyday, and a new nod to anti-authoritarian organizing models (despite criticizing them) is as much a sign of its desperation as our victories. As one observer put it, “clearly the RCP has also been at a loss as to how to really build a growing and developing revolutionary movement in this country.” The crisis within the RCP is one lots of groups struggle with, and something anarchists must consider as our movement grows.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!