From your previous comments, you are clearly anti-CPUSA and do not represent the majority of the membership, who I've spoken to.
You even referred to something as simple as a "district" as a "branch," which is explained from the very beginning. We don't have a branch system. We go by wide swathes of areas called districts and then clubs and maybe collective if you go even smaller.
So I really don't believe you, no offense. It's kind-of like saying that you don't know who "William Z. Foster" is, tbh.
Unfortunately these chauvanistic attitudes like this are what hold back an organization with much potential, and instead opens the doors for other ML parties. This series of districts, clubs, and collectives is indicative of an anarchy of organization, an unaddressable problem while CPUSA remains as muddled of an organization as it famously is. This muddled organization leads to a fundamentally unquestionable leadership.
Despite intense criticism I even heard from members in NYC when I visited the party HQ (there was no Soviet gold in the basement, despite rumors), the self defeating policies and priorities of the CPUSA are not being changed at the pace they need to be to face the crisises we face head on. There's a reason most images of Palestinian protest feature PSL signs, and that the last emails I received before unsubscribing from the CPUSA newsletter was an art competition.
I ask that instead of dismissing well meaning criticism from fellow communists you take this criticism to mind and help make CPUSA become an organization worth championing instead of something which must be defended reluctantly.
It's not an anarchy of organization, but a hierarchy, actually.
Also, the policies change every 4 to 5 years and have to as we're a DemCent org.
You must listen to well-meaning criticisms directed at you instead of dismissing them, comrade. Especially since you're never been in the organization, afaik, and are critiquing it from an outside perspective.
From your previous comments, you are clearly anti-CPUSA and do not represent the majority of the membership, who I've spoken to.
You even referred to something as simple as a "district" as a "branch," which is explained from the very beginning. We don't have a branch system. We go by wide swathes of areas called districts and then clubs and maybe collective if you go even smaller.
So I really don't believe you, no offense. It's kind-of like saying that you don't know who "William Z. Foster" is, tbh.
No offense or anything.
Unfortunately these chauvanistic attitudes like this are what hold back an organization with much potential, and instead opens the doors for other ML parties. This series of districts, clubs, and collectives is indicative of an anarchy of organization, an unaddressable problem while CPUSA remains as muddled of an organization as it famously is. This muddled organization leads to a fundamentally unquestionable leadership.
Despite intense criticism I even heard from members in NYC when I visited the party HQ (there was no Soviet gold in the basement, despite rumors), the self defeating policies and priorities of the CPUSA are not being changed at the pace they need to be to face the crisises we face head on. There's a reason most images of Palestinian protest feature PSL signs, and that the last emails I received before unsubscribing from the CPUSA newsletter was an art competition.
I ask that instead of dismissing well meaning criticism from fellow communists you take this criticism to mind and help make CPUSA become an organization worth championing instead of something which must be defended reluctantly.
It's not an anarchy of organization, but a hierarchy, actually.
Also, the policies change every 4 to 5 years and have to as we're a DemCent org.
You must listen to well-meaning criticisms directed at you instead of dismissing them, comrade. Especially since you're never been in the organization, afaik, and are critiquing it from an outside perspective.
What criticism are you even leveling, you're just mirroring what I say when you say that.