Introduction and Part 1 of Sorting Through the Undead: An overview of the (self-proclaimed) communist formations in Canada, a 4-part series by Rob L.R. Part 2. Part 3. Part 4.

Introduction

Far from being popular, militant, ideologically advanced, or inspiring political vanguards of the working class, the (self-proclaimed) communist groups in Canada are more like partially-animated corpses or decaying zombies of their former selves.

In general, they either posture as revolutionary forces while seemingly ignoring glaring holes in their theory and shortfalls in their practices, or they have given up entirely on revolution (formally or informally) and exist basically as mere empty shells. If one spends a fair amount of time in or around these organizations and their crowds, carefully reads their material and studies their histories, they’ll quickly come to see that the revolutionary communist movement in Canada is in an overall unfortunate, even grotesque, state. Many of the proletariat’s self-appointed “revolutionary” groups more or less resemble the walking dead, soulless with half-thinking brains and rotting insides.

This is one of the biggest and most infamous roadblocks in the class struggle in Canada. That is, our historical inability to get a popular, correct, and serious communist formation (i.e. Party) together and to keep it going in the right direction. Developing a Communist Party (CP) that:

1. serves as a reputable political and organizational centre for the multinational working and dispossessed masses,
2. is able to self-critically sustain and improve itself, and
3. can actually take the lead in making revolution,

has been for most of the past century, and remains today, one of our main strategic tasks as a class.

Well, what stops one of the existing, zombified communist vanguard groups from going on to make and lead the revolution? Maybe the least-rotten one can be struggled with, resuscitated and rectified? I mean if they are truly dead and gone, does that mean we are tasked with going through the arduous and tiring process of building yet another CP of Canada?

To begin to figure out the answer to these questions, let’s take a minute to sort through the various undead and examine them carefully. The following is an overview of the self-proclaimed communist formations in the country at the moment.

The CPC is fairly prominent within the movement (for better or worse) and has a century-long history, so we’ll break it into phases and examine it in detail.

1917 – 1935: Birth and Growth

The first movement in Canada to build a Communist Party, in the proper Marxist-Leninist sense, emerged during the devastating inter-imperialist First World War and the domestic repression that came with it (enactment of “War Measures” i.e. martial law,¹ “internment” camps, bans on literature, basically no workers’ rights, etc.). The movement advanced as it was inspired by the successes of the communist-led Russian Revolution of 1917 and educated by the theoretical and strategic failures of the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919. By 1921 it consolidated and the (first) Communist Party of Canada was formed.²

Throughout the Roaring(ly Unequal) Twenties, the Party gained more experience, strengthened and formalized its ties with CPs internationally, and grew slowly but steadily. Through its connections to the newly-forged revolutionary Soviet Union it gained prestige, expertise and some political savviness.

Then came the early ’30’s and onset of the Great Depression. To “deal with” the problem of massive unemployment the government launched a campaign of mass deportation and mass incarceration. It targeting poor and unemployed workers, national and racial minorities, people who weren’t Protestant Christian, migrants, people who didn’t speak English, queer people, and “immoral” women and their children. The masses of unemployed urban people remaining were sent out of the cities to rural “relief camps”. They were paid pennies a day to work tirelessly building northern roads, railways, logging sites and the like.

The CP saw the revolutionary potential in the most downtrodden masses and sent cadre to these work camps. They managed to organize thousands of workers and unemployed people. Throughout the early ’30’s the CPC led many, if not the majority, of the country’s workers’ strikes and mass movements. The ranks of the CPC swelled and it experienced a spike in popularity and respect. This wave of recruits and supporters culminated in the famous On to Ottawa Trek of 1935, a train-riding convoy of militant workers from out west looking to bring their protests directly to the country’s seats of power.³

1935-1956: The CPC Loses its Revolutionary Soul

At the same time the Communist International organization (Comintern), of which the CPC was a member, had been collectively analysing the rise of fascism. During its 7th World Congress in 1935 the international organization made a general shift in strategy towards building a broader antifascist front. In line with this, beginning in 1937 hundreds of working people in Canada, including many Communists, bravely volunteered to fight in the Spanish Civil War for the progressive Spanish Republic against the Hitler-backed fascist rebels. Over thirteen hundred Canadians were organized under the antifascist International Brigades as the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion.⁴ Some comrades from Canada, including most famously Dr. Norman Bethune⁵, went on to selflessly serve the Chinese people in their War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.

Yet the Ontario-based leadership of the CP of Canada (including Tim Buck, Stewart Smith, Stanley B. Ryerson and others) infamously misinterpreted and distorted the 1935 directives made through the Comintern. Despite the militant attitude, spirit and self-sacrificing actions of the general membership, the Party’s petty-bourgeois leadership totally misapplied the general Comintern strategy to the particular conditions in Canada. They took an opportunistic swing and began to idolize the prospect of “improving” and “fixing” capitalism in Canada, even going so far as openly attempting to appease “good” capitalists. They sidelined the struggle against women’s oppression, the struggle against white supremacy, and the struggles for national liberation (even denying Québécois nationhood?!). They focused less and less on achieving socialism, and basically “forgot” about their historic task of struggling for communism. Their liberalizing and defanging of the Comintern’s strategic reorientation marked the beginning of an overall degradation of the CPC.

From this point on the CPC would fall deeper and deeper into revisionism. Revisionism takes on many forms but is essentially the process of (subtly or overtly) “revising”, modifying or forgoing core principles of Marxism. Ideologically, it leads to the adaption of an incoherent mish-mash of Marxist and capitalist ideas. In practice, revisionism leads to organizational dysfunction and the effective abandonment of the struggle for socialism and communism.

Come the Second World War, Canadian State repression intensified. Martial law came into effect through a second enactment of “War Measures”, pushing the Party into complete illegality. But it’s underground apparatus and security contingencies were underdeveloped and ill-prepared, leading to hundreds of prominent and at-large members to be quickly rounded up and locked away. Remaining secret members and supporters launched non-violent campaigns to advocate the freedom of their comrades, but were fruitless in the face of martial law. After the Soviet Union joined the war against Hitler in 1941 the restrictions on communists loosened in Canada and most were released.

Yet the State repression experienced by the CPC did little to stamp out revisionism within the Party. Upon their release from prison and return from exile, the Party leadership effectively dissolved the CPC and created in its place the legal Labor-Progressive Party (LPP), a sort of front.

Once the name change and organizational reshuffling were complete, the CPC/LPP became an open backer and sidekick of the governing Liberal party! (The same party that had implemented martial law and imprisoned all their comrades. . .) Later, it even went so far as co-endorsing candidates and forming election pacts with the Libs. The Party’s whole thing became: forget socialism (let alone communism!) and just try to get elected so we can co-run the imperialist government in a “better” way. It lost any semblance of a far-sighted, revolutionary strategy. This systemic turn towards revisionism, towards liberalism and capitulation, is well documented and thoroughly exposed in comrade Fergus McKean’s⁶ quintessential 1946 work “Communism vs Opportunism.”⁷

Throughout the ’40’s the Party traded international proletarian principles for a temporary surge in parliamentary votes from liberal-“democratic” middle-class people. As Japanese, Chinese, south Asian and Native peoples were barred from voting at the time, their struggles did not factor into the CPC/LPP’s Program much. The Party even muted it’s opposition to the Liberal’s fascistic internment and expropriation of Japanese people in Canada. In fact, it sometimes parroted the State’s dog whistles about so-called “security concerns” on the west coast!

Thus the Communist Party of Canada holds the distinction of being one of the first member-parties of the Comintern to turn off the path to communism and into the revisionist swamp. It got bogged down alongside the CP of the USA which had become revisionist around the same time as the CPC, came to similar incorrect conclusions, and took equally silly actions (or inactions).⁸ The non-communistic, liberal pathway which had been paved by the North American revisionist Parties was later taken by the League of Communists of Yugoslavia during the late ’40’s, and then eventually by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) itself!

The CPSU was able to make revolution and lead the first ever experiment of socialist construction. But it had trouble foreseeing and then holding back revisionism, bureaucracy, and capitalist-thought rising within the Party. CPSU leader J.V. Stalin and other dedicated comrades tried their best to keep the Soviet Union on the path to communism, but did not have the theoretical foresight nor organizational systems in place to protect and maintain its trajectory into the future. Stalin died in 1953, having not properly dealt with revisionism in the CPSU. Three years later, Party hack Nikita Khrushchev pulled off an anti-Stalin coup, thereby cementing the USSR’s turn towards revisionism and social-imperialism (socialism in words, imperialism in actions). For a detailed breakdown of the coup, the decline and eventual destruction of the USSR, read Ka Joma’s exceptional historical analysis “Stand For Socialism Against Modern Revisionism”.⁹

By the time of these cataclysmic, world-historic events in the CPSU the good ol’ CP of Canada was already wholly revisionist, opportunist and non-communistic. Since the mid-’30’s the Party had refused to acknowledge its theoretical and strategic degradation while avoiding its responsibility to properly and thoroughly engage in constructive criticism and self-criticism (with itself or other Parties). Now it mind-numbingly continued to tail the socialist-turned-imperialist CPSU in lock step.

1956-1991: Undead Stagnation and Irrelevance

True to the claims of right-wingers, throughout the “Cold” War the CPC was basically a flag-waver for the degrading Soviet Union. But unlike those right-wing claims, the CPC’s ties to the revisionist CPSU actually made it less revolutionary and less likely to lead any sort of revolt or revolution in Canada. Every capitalistic policy and imperialistic action that Khrushchev and his revisionist successors engaged in¹⁰ were overall justified, explained-away and upheld by the CPC. With each uncritical justification of imperialistic policies and revisionist gobbledygook, members left in waves. Principled proletarian internationalism was thrown to the wayside. The “revolutionary vanguard Party of the working class” had become an uncritical cheerleader for the Soviet Union and its allies while forgoing making revolution at home. The ol’ CPC was effectively intellectually and culturally dead, just a staggering zombie of its former self.

During the 1960’s, ’70’s and ’80’s the Party remained braindead and detached from the masses. Its membership consisted mostly of pro-Soviet idealists, radical liberals, boisterous careerists and some confused youth. The (ol’)CPC became a bitter rival to the rising, youthful anti-revisionist and Maoist formations in Canada. It got in the way of advancing revolutionary theory and practice in Canada, often acting like an unmovable anchor to the past. By being hostile to systemized self-criticism and unable to cope with changing conditions, the (ol’)CPC functioned as an undying, stagnant Right-wing force within the revolutionary movement. It remained so until the complete destruction of the Soviet Union and the ensuing collapse of the socialist bloc in the early ’90’s.

1992-2003: Death then Revisionist Resurrection

After the USSR was torn apart from both inside and outside, chaos reigned within the international communist movement. Many revisionist parties worldwide followed in the steps of the CPSU, with the zombified (ol’)CPC quickly imploding. George Hewison, then General Secretary of the (ol’)CPC, moved to completely liquidate the Party and replace it with some social-democratic thing instead. Like the chief opportunist he was, he used the undemocratic and bureaucratic systems within the degenerated Party to seize control of the Central Committee. Hewison then encouraged a huge faction of the Party to openly reject Marxism-Leninism and completely abandon the struggle for socialism and communism. Meanwhile a minority of the membership, led by Miguel Figueroa, Elizabeth Rowley and former leader William Kashtan, sought to uphold Marxism-Leninism (albeit a revisionist type).

Due to political revisionism and an overly-centralized and top-down organizational structure, the sharp dispute within the Party could not be resolved internally. A proper democratic system, link between leadership and members-at-large, nor a method of two-line struggle existed within the Party. Thus, the “Marxist-Leninist” faction felt forced to take the Hewison clique to court (!). The resulting out-of-court settlement basically split the Party in half, with Hewison and co. taking most of the Party’s fairly extensive assets (including its headquarters) before divvying up the remains.

Meanwhile the (nominal) Marxist-Leninist faction forged on. They essentially re-established the CPC at a convention in December of 1992. The rotten corpse was partially reanimated! The Party had been reconstituted yet most of its deep-rooted misconceptions, biases, and liberalism remained unrectified; its revisionism was left intact.

Within a year, the country’s ruling Conservative party implemented stricter parliamentary qualifications, aiming to destroy small parties and further monopolize big capital’s control of the bourgeois “democratic” system. The change in law made it so that any party that failed to run 50 candidates was to be automatically deregistered and have their assets seized! The newly reborn, small and financially-depleted (ol’)CPC (which was basically a tiny, radical-bourgeois parliamentary party at this point) found itself facing what seemed like targeted, immanent destruction. In the ’93 election the (ol’)CPC was only able to run 17 candidates and thus the State quickly swooped in to deregister the Party and seize its assets.

The Party pushed on, putting most of its resources, campaigns, and energy towards launching a legal challenge against the government. Party leader Miguel Figueroa launched a drawn-out, decade-long legal battle with the State. In the middle of this, the Party created its mediocre paper People’s Voice and formalized its modern, still revisionist political program, “Canada’s Future is Socialism!” in 2001 (more on it later).

Figueroa’s case moved from court to court, with appeals and such, until eventually going to the Supreme Court of Canada. The 2003 landmark case Figueroa vs Canada was decided in favour of Figueroa, the Party, and the people. The courts walked back the restrictive election rules, lowering the threshold for party status from 50 candidates to 12 before scrapping the minimum candidate threshold altogether. Figueroa and the Party’s win, at its core a legal bourgeois-democratic win but a significant win nonetheless, was celebrated by the other small parties and by the public more generally.

2003-Present: 20th Century Revisionism Posing as 21st Century Communism

The Party, now consolidated, somewhat more well-known, and more financially and legally secure, moved on to expand its membership and its reach. The resuscitated yet still revisionist ol’ cadaver began to move and walk around! In 2007 it restarted its youth wing, the Young Communist League (YCL). Within the declining economic conditions of the 2010’s there was a corresponding (yet trailing) increase in class consciousness. Marxism and communism of all sorts began to take hold in the culture and ideology of the masses again and the ranks of the (ol’)CPC grew.

At the same time there was a resurgence in Maoism, especially amongst students and young people. The worst of this Maoism took the form of online weirdos posturing, while the best of it breathed fresh life and militant energy into the revolutionary movement. This new wave of Maoism put the (ol’)CPC in a defensive and confrontational position as its revisionism and liberalism were repeatedly pointed out, refuted and criticized publicly and within the wider movement.

In 2015-16, leadership passed from Figueroa to fellow old-guard Central Committee member, Elizabeth Rowley, who became the first woman to head the Party. Figueroa retained more of a secondary role by leading some mass orgs. As to be expected, Rowley did not budge one iota on revisionism and straightforwardly maintained Figueroa’s path, continuing to carry along much of the Party’s theoretical and organizational baggage from the 1900’s into the 2020’s.

The Party, now with a fairly good amount of fresh recruits and young members, persists. It’s 2001 Party Program has been modified and nominally improved upon through various conventions, (its last edit being in 2019, over six years ago). Suffice to say, it has glaring holes and remains ultimately revisionist, pacifist, and non-revolutionary. While we could go through their stated Program’s deficiencies point-by-point, we’ll instead briefly sum up the main errors in the (ol’)CPC’s theory and practice. It should be noted that the membership at-large is somewhat less revisionist than the Party leadership, with many (ol’)CPC and YCL members appreciating Maoist and anti-revisionist figures and ideas to some extent, (or at least tokenizes them to appease Maoists and appear more radical).

Overall, the modern rendition of the (ol’)CPC has three basic interconnected theoretical and practical faults; three basic indicators of its revisionism; three basic signs that its an undead Party walking.

1. An Idealist and Petty-bourgeois Class Analysis

In its theory and practice the (ol’)CPC carries within it many remnants of its “Labor-Progressive Party” days. Essentially, it clings to an idealistic and outdated perception of the Canadian working class. It refuses to properly acknowledge the extent of the ideological and material split generated within the working class, particularly in the imperialist countries. This split has grown since the ’70’s, with the upper, well-paid proletariat experiencing relatively good working conditions and living relatively comfortable lives alongside the petty-bourgeoisie while the lower, hard-pressed proletariat and precariat are actually desperately trying to survive. (Everyone’s standard of living is falling, but not at the same rates or to the same extent. For example, a well-off prol may be forced to sell their car or downsize their apartment, while a hard-pressed prol faces the very-real prospect of homelessness and destitution).

This brushing over of the split in the working class leads the (ol’)CPC to basically overfocus on rallying what are essentially the middle classes (well-paid proletariat, academics, farmers and small capitalists) while under-focusing on the lower working and dispossessed classes (hard-pressed proletariat, super-exploited workers, deeply impoverished people, etc.). Lots of attention is given to the “common enemy” of “domestic and international finance capital” while the reactionary or downright fascistic nature of much of the middle classes is downplayed or ignored.¹¹

Additionally, since the working and dispossessed people in Canada are disproportionately comprised of women, oppressed and colonized nationalities, targets of white supremacy, and migrants, the specific struggles of these people is underprioritized by the (ol’)CPC. With their under-focus on the lower and deeper working class comes a limited understanding of the subsystems of capitalism; national and colonial oppression, white supremacy, and patriarchy. The struggles against these subsystems, while acknowledged as important, are not really fully understood by the (ol’)CPC as strategically vital and integral component-struggles of the wider struggle for socialism.

Thus, the self-proclaimed “most advanced section of the working class” doubts the power and ingenuity of its lower and deeper sections. It effectively sidelines the interests and struggles of the most exploited and most oppressed in favour of idolizing and capitulating to the (relatively well-off, privileged, capitalistic, reactionary) middle-classes, (including the well-off proletariat).

The (ol’)CPC, evidently comprised mostly of urban white people, doesn’t fully grasp the backward, individualist nature of much of the country. It underestimates how deep-rooted the capitalistic, settler-colonial mindset is, and just how racist and patriarchal (misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic) large swaths of the population are. Additionally, the (ol’)CPC is still blind to the fact that most middle-class postmodernists, radlibs, and “Leftists” are actually, in the final analysis, reactionary (they can make okay temporary allies, but their material and ideological entwinement with liberal capitalism usually holds them back from being good long-term, committed allies). The middle classes in imperialist Canada, far from being rallied around the lower and deeper proletariat, can at best be arms-length allies, and at worst be fascistic and counterrevolutionary opponents.

In accordance to its middle-class-oriented analysis, the (ol’)CPC’s immediate goal is not the overthrow of capitalism but the creation of “a democratic, anti-monopoly, anti-imperialist people’s government.” It denies the necessity of establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat, instead aiming to create an all-too-broad “new alliance” of “people’s forces [. . .] in which the Communist Party [merely] aspires to play a key role” (my italics).¹²

2. Pacifism

The (ol’)CPC goes further than justly opposing imperialist wars by adapting full-on liberal pacifism. Pacifism, a sweeping rejection of militancy and armed struggle of any kind, has taken prominence in both the Party’s strategy and tactics.

In its vague strategy, the Party implies that a protracted electoral process and/or some sort of spontaneous uprising will lead to the seizure of power. It even wishfully grasps onto the idea of a “peaceful transition to socialism” (something that has historically been proven to be impossible as it runs counter to the laws of capitalism and revolution). The (ol’)CPC’s general strategy stresses liberal unity over militant struggle, and doesn’t consider the inevitability, and rising importance, of armed struggle as a component-part of making revolution. (It instead only talks about using the socialist State’s monopoly of force after the seizure of power). It caters to petty-bourgeois sensibilities by attempting to completely take militant resistance, self-defense, and armed/physical operations out of class struggle and the fight for societal progress.¹³

In real life, as revolutions mature and ascend, armed struggle inevitably rises from playing a secondary, more obscure role to a primary, more dominant role at some point. As is well known, the capitalists and their imperialist State manufacture more psyops and wage increasingly brutal and desperate assaults on the people as their position of power is shaken. At some point, the class struggle must become a violent struggle to overcome, persist and achieve victory over the ruling classes’ repressive and power-clinging maneuvers. Ultimately, the imperialist State and its stubborn defenders of exploitation and oppression have to be fought. This is an uncomfortable fact for some, but a fact nonetheless. It’s the duty of a CP to consider and think-out the entire process of revolution from an all-sided perspective, being sure not to skim over or brush aside certain aspects that may make liberals squeamish. As purported Marxists revolutionaries, we’re supposed to know that wishful thinking, hopes and dreams, and pacifist “alliances” won’t make revolution.

This general strategic aversion to militancy comes across in the Party’s tactics. It prioritizes outdated day-to-day trade-union activities, middle-class “alliance” building, and feckless electoral campaigns. All while completely rejecting the urgent need for more militant and creative tactics. Even its demonstrations are more like self-aggrandizing, police-sanctioned strolls through downtown than militant protests against the system!¹⁴ This lack of militancy leads to an insane lax of security protocols. Government first and last names are used (and even encouraged!?), meetings are often live-streamed on Zoom, important documents are stored in Google Drive databases, etc., (as is fairly common in our decrepit movement). How obnoxious and arrogant! It’s pitiful, as what good does it do us to be unprotected, unprepared and incapable?¹⁵ It points to the Party being unserious about revolution; it doesn’t even seem to think of itself as a threat to the establishment! (Perhaps because it isn’t, and perhaps because it wants to remain that way . . . our “revolutionary vanguard”!).

In both words and deeds the (ol’)CPC is toothless, staggering, passive, and even scared. It’s a system-compliant, pacifist, middle-class formation, long ago sapped of its militant revolutionary spirit.

3. Bowing to International Reaction and Campism

Thirdly, in relation to its middle-class analysis and pacifist orientation, the (ol’)CPC cozies up to and idolizes the world’s leading revisionist, fake-Marxist, and reactionary parties. It proudly participates in the International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties (IMCWP), an annual meet-up of various revisionist, social-democratic, and straight-up fascistic parties that for one reason or another continue to claim the title of communist.¹⁶ Similarly, the Party’s YCL is an affiliate member of the World Federation of Democratic Youth (WFDY), an eclectic hodgepodge of the same type of the IMCWP but for “youth”.

While these international orgs don’t have direct control of the (ol’)CPC’s policies, they reaffirm and uphold the Party’s revisionism (instead of calling it out) and negatively influence it ideologically and politically. This is particularly clear in the Party’s campism; in how it divides imperialism into two camps (the East and West) and sides with the apparent lesser of two (China, Russia, etc.). While it’s correct to identify NATO and US-led imperialism as the number one enemy of the peoples of the world, the (ol’)CPC goes further in insisting that the secondary, rising imperialist forces in the world are progressive or even “anti-imperialist”.¹⁷

The implications of this allow large parts of the (ol’)CPC to hold the belief that liberation can come from outside. That China or some other country can or will defeat Canadian/US imperialism for us, on the battlefield! That the long-time revisionist, social-imperialistic China will pave our pathway to socialism for us!¹⁸ They bet their hopes and dreams on foreign bourgeoisies instead of on the masses.

More commonly however, the (ol’)CPC’s cozying up to international revisionism and reaction leads to a whacko conception of world events, complete with liberal solutions. We’ll take a pertinent example: the (ol’)CPC’s deluded, pseudo-revolutionary position on Palestine.

In the midst of a categorical, qualitative shift in the Palestinian national liberation struggle, namely the Al-Aqsa Flood operation and Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing campaign targeting the Gaza strip, the (ol’)CPC remains out of step with both the Palestinian Resistance and the people of the world. As recently reiterated in a September 1st statement by its Central Committee, the Party still advocates for a stale, out-of-date Two-State “solution” based on the “pre-June 1967 borders”, while calling for the “demilitarization” of the Zionist-fascist State in a rather liberal-like way.

Yet the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the leading communist organization on the ground in Palestine, has been calling for one democratic State as the only viable solution for over 50 years! Even the less-advanced Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) only calls for two States as a temporary solution on the road to one democratic State. Thus the (ol’)CPC’s stance on Palestine is inline with China’s passive, all bark no bite, non-interventionist position, but is out of line with the actual leading resistance groups in Palestine! So, far from taking the correct, antifascist and proletarian internationalist position, (i.e. advocating for the armed defense of Gaza and Palestinians at large, the destruction of the genocidal Zionist-fascist State of “Israel”, and the complete liberation of the region from imperialism), the Party advocates for a meek plan. It takes stances that fit into the Chinese bourgeoisie’s careful, self-serving geopolitical strategy while appealing to soft-Zionists and petty-bourgeois academics.

These three theoretical and practical features; an idealist and middle-class analysis, liberal pacifism, and a twisted idea of proletarian internationalism, defines the modern revisionism of the (ol’)CPC.

So. . .

We can see that the good ol’ Communist Party of Canada does in fact appear to be a partially-animated, rotting corpse. The chances of resuscitation are low; it’s been dead for about 90 years. It exists as a decaying zombie of its 1930’s former self, propped up and partially brought back to life along the way. It reeks of liberalism, middle-class capitulation and cowardice. Peeyew!

Can it be rectified and go on to lead our revolution? Probably not. Will it get in the way of our revolution? Perhaps. Will we let the fight against revisionism, liberalism and opportunism slow us down? Hell no!

Let’s struggle for a bolder, truly revolutionary movement in Canada!