DRAFT OF A LETTER TO MY ERSTWHILE COMRADES

Hello,

I do not know who is presently reading this email, so I do not know if we have spoken before, if you know or remember me, or of you recognize my name, or if you are members of what I have identified and criticized in the past as what was during my time with the group the leading clique of [] (I include myself at the time in this clique, and I too should be criticized).

Be that as it may. I left the [] in the summer of 2023, about a year after I’d helped found it, because of concerns laid out in the critique attached. In short

1. I feel I was “criticized” in an unprincipled manner, closer to bullying, demanded to correct “problems” in myself which were never explained to me to a greater extent than simply complaining that I was unpleasant or not liked, and which were certainly never laid out in any kind of scientific, Marxist political critique, largely coming as vague unsourced rumours allegedly from a wide variety of unnamed sources but only ever voiced by the two other members of the leading clique. It felt not so much like I was being criticized in a political organization, with which I have some experience, as that I was the subject of gossip in a group of friends who had decided I was no longer their friend. Quickly the back-door meetings of the inner clique called only to complain about me (which were not proper, systematic criticism-self-criticism sessions of the kind I have observed in other groups within the global revolutionary movement) ceased to be constructive work toward improvement of our organization and came to be confrontational and personal badgering of me, with no valuable critique whatsoever regarding what I could actually do better (I alone was asked to solve a “problem” in my personality my comrades refused even to identify). This is certainly not to say I was never unworthy of criticism during my time in the organization, or even that I never received legitimate criticism from which I tried to learn (I did, of which more later). But the principal aspect of criticism within the group was unscientific, unsystematic, personally distasteful rumour, which involved some amount of specific actionable complaints but more often turned on vague inferences about my character, what I was like (aloof, too talkative, unlikeable, etc. etc.), than on any clear account of anything I’d done and could correct.
2. I viewed this, and still do, as symptomatic of a larger problem, which not only led to unpleasantness to me but also (more importantly) was a contradiction that would surely hamper the organization’s work until resolved (which I did not feel I or we were prepared to do): a leadership style which was not democratic or principled, but entailed the absolute power of the personal gossips and caprices of a leading clique of 2 (formerly 3, before I was ejected). Certainly we were all well-intentioned. But the contradiction between the purpose-function of a nominal mass organization and this, actually quite individualist, cliqueist style (back-door gossip about others in the local progressive and anti-imperialist movement, e.g. — see the attached critique) is one that did, and will, hamper []’s efforts at every possible turn until resolved, and introduce antagonistic relations between members, and between members and the masses. This contradiction must be resolved for [] to advance. I did not see an ability in us to do this, when I left. This resolution must entail destruction of this leadership style and taking up a new one entailing real Mass Line connection with the progressive worker and student masses, and real democratic centralist struggle and unity among the members, involving genuinely democratic struggles among the cadre to resolve on a central leadership, not an inner clique pulling the strings, and genuine scientific and systematic criticism based on political concerns and specific analysis of specific events and their problems, not the caprices of a few members against other members and against other people in the local movement.

At the same time, I have never been anything but supportive of [] and its potential to play a part in the North American communist movement. I emphasize that, although I posted the attached critique publicly on my blog because I believe it will, or at least could, be useful to other comrades and groups that I know (largely through the connections of [] to which I was formerly privy) read this little blog, I at no point implicated [] or endangered its operational security. This is because I remain your supporter, whether you believe it or not. I am hopeful that [] can resolve the problem outlined above, a resolution I believe will likely come as more new comrades not from the original clique join and enliven internal line struggle, and truly advance our (the communists’) cause. I should like to see it do so.

This is why I am writing now. I know that the effort to reconstitute the (militant, militarized, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, and genuinely mass-leading and revolutionary) Communist Party, and the communist movement, do not need me– they are vast, and I am insignificant. Yet, out of hope for what the [] and other groups presently organizing across this country have the potential to do, I should like to be involved in that current again. I should like to be a contributor to [], or at least to the broader revolutionary movement, and I believe I am more mature and more capable of doing so than I once was.

Previously, though, when I tried to attend ostensibly public [] events I was rebuffed with further vague demands that I, essentially, fix myself. I am happy to criticize myself where a real political problem exists (I have tried to in [] in the past, and I contend I was spoken over and met not with proper critique but further bullying and bad-faith insults), but I will not return to sitting in a backroom being berated for not being likable enough by ostensible comrades, with no ability to articulate myself and be listened to, indeed no ability even to properly engage in self-criticism without my criticisms of myself being willfully misinterpreted and turned into further ammunition for bullying, as I charge they were during the last meeting I had with the members of your clique.

What I want to know:

1. Has [] resolved the contradiction between cliqueist leadership and genuine Mass Line and democratic centralism? Is it led in a proper manner; can all cadre dispute on a matter and see leadership reach a line democratically through open struggle, not clique mandate? I want no involvement, if not. And if you refuse to accept that this contradiction ever existed, I can only assume it still does, and remains an egregious flaw in the group.
2. Assuming it has been– what must I do to rejoin, or at least be allowed to support the group as a comrade or colleague? I want to help. I want to do good for our cause, as, I believe, you do. I am perfectly willing to self-criticize and engage in constructive ideological struggle in order to prove this– but I am not interested in more one-sided gossip turned against whomever leadership may dislike (me, or several other comrades in [] ([] is one) whom I deeply regret the unprincipled sort of attitude toward criticizing we had when I was a member of your clique (I do not include [] here– they are not our comrades, though they too we could have criticized in a more proper and useful way)).
   So, I ask, what do I do to rejoin, in a more progressive and productive capacity, and does the capacity for such yet exist?

You may, I suppose accuse me of hubris for having so much concern for my own membership. On the contrary. I know that I myself am nothing. It is only by sublation of oneself into the good of the masses that one can truly become oneself, and all I seek is an opportunity to do this.

I want to see the reconstitution of the Communist Party in this country on a basis of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; I want to see the final victory of socialist revolution with that guiding ideology led by that party. I see some potential to aid this in local-level revolutionary intellectual groups like yours. I know my ability to contribute to that is very little- but I should rather do a little than nought.

Solidarity, your comrade,
Kelly Sears

– ☆ –

POSTSCRIPT:

The above was drafted last year, in a hotel room, where I was staying the night before a revolutionary action with comrades of a different organization (that action is what I regard as having been my largest contribution to the revolutionary struggle of the world proletariat and allied strata against capitalist-imperialism and its ruling class and institutions in my life thus far; ultimately, a tiny contribution). Not all I wrote still expresses what I think and feel, and I have resolved not to send the letter to its original addressees.

I still feel much the same about:

“I know that I myself am nothing. It is only by sublation of oneself into the good of the masses that one can truly become oneself, and all I seek is an opportunity to do this.

“I want to see the reconstitution of the Communist Party in this country on a basis of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; I want to see the final victory of socialist revolution with that guiding ideology led by that party. I see some potential to aid this in local-level revolutionary intellectual groups like yours. I know my ability to contribute to that is very little- but I should rather do a little than nought.”

But I think it would be an error to conflate wanting to contribute to the revolution with wanting to contribute to this group, which I helped found. Being too fixated on that perhaps does indeed fall into an individualism of “so much concern for my own membership,” and into the elitism we ourselves had as a clique when I was still in that org.

I know that all aspiring revolutionaries must transform and remold ourselves into revolutionaries who can serve the masses as fully as possible; but there are limitations on one’s ability to do this, and many different ways to do it. I am working for revolution in the ways I can, both on my own and with comrades– so are the current members, new and old, of []. I am in solidarity with them in a shared cause– but my place is elsewhere. I am doing what I can; that is all I can do. It would not be productive to try to do something I cannot.