It's throwing me for a loop. They don't seem to talk about anything actually related to communism. It doesn't seem much different from the Democratic Party.
Posted Jul 30, 2016, 5:21 AM UTC
Decades of secret service infiltration is the prevailing theory.
They're democrats that like the color red. If they were truly communist, they wouldn't have endorsed Hillary.
COINTELPRO basically rinsed it of true leftism.
I was a member of CPUSA up until the Hillary endorsement. I think the main issue stems from many of the senior members trying to reform the image of communism post McCarthy. The harder they try within the current system, the more ridiculous the proposals get. For God's sake, there was a serious proposal to remove mentions of Marxism from the party constitution.
Senator Joe McCarthy.
They were gradually infiltrated by FBI as part of COINTELPRO, where the agents work to disrupt, divide and defuse the radical leanings to push them further and further to right. They were encouraged to take more and more positions that 'would be more appealing' 'not get people's backs up' and the pursuit of public respectability left them with nothing unique to say. They also took on this idea of stages where each one had to be completed before the next could be started, and the first of which it to protect and vanguard against creeping fascism, and as such they end up endorsing the Democratic Party because to them republicans are creeping fascism that need to be halted before anything else can be done.
The other reply doesn't actually explain anything, all it's saying is "the CPUSA is bad, therefore it's bad." The problem is that they actually do read Marx, Lenin, etc., and still come to their conclusions. I gave a more detailed response in another thread a while back.
https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/4fue8c/what_would_it_take_for_cpusa_to_stop_being/d2c9cy0
A well reasoned post comrade. I appreciate it, though I whole heartedly disagree with their position.