continued from Part 1

Luckily, there has been a tidal shift in mass understanding of this issue. The crackpots are those who now deny it. Millions see it as a dire threat to humankind’s future. Thus, it is political issue that every candidate and every political party, including our party will have to address. In fact, in the national board we discussed making global warming and the environmental crisis a major agenda item at our next National Committee meeting.

Then there is the issue of immigration. The issue of immigration has surfaced dramatically over the last decade in our country and worldwide. It is a global issue that can be only understood in the context of the new stage of capitalist globalization and the pushes and pulls that this new stage brings to bear on working people. Never before have there been such massive flows of migrant labor within and between countries and regions. On a recent trip to Moscow I was surprised to hear the population of that city is over 20 million.

But the sudden population explosion is easy enough to explain. Socialism’s collapse combined with “shock therapy” impoverished tens of millions and sent them “tramping” for work far away from their homes.

Much the same could be said about workers in other cities and regions whose means of employment and livelihoods have disappeared through no fault of their own.

It is not natural population growth, but the ruptures in old ways of living and the uneven development and deployment of productive forces and capital across global space in the context of a worldwide accumulation crisis that account for these vast movements of labor power from stagnant cities, regions, and continents to more dynamic ones.

And so that there is no wrong impression given, this is as much a political process as an economic one. It is not simply the inexorable operation of the inner laws of capitalist development that are behind this new phenomenon. It is also determined at the political level where people, classes, and nation states interact.

The issue of immigration could well become the wedge issue of 2008 elections. Moreover for that to happen, it doesn’t have to roil the electorate in every state, but rather in a few critical states to make a difference in the presidential and congressional elections.

Thus we can expect to hear much about immigration, especially from the Republican candidates. Every candidate irrespective of party affiliation should feel the weight of the democratic movement on this issue.

Civil liberties

Civil liberties and equality in its various forms are issues that will command attention in these elections as well. The Bush administration with the full support of Congressional Republicans has done great damage to our constitutional liberties and has systematically dismantled measures for racial, gender, and other forms of equality. The state and its agencies have been turned into a wrecking ball of rights secured going back to our nation’s founding, not to mention in the last century.

Finally, the role of government will be a framing issue as well. In this regard, a rather significant shift in public opinion has occurred in so far as growing numbers of people see the need for government to play a constructive role in addressing seemingly intractable and worsening problems. The rightwing mantra that the best government is no government, that government has no business in providing for the common welfare rings hollow for many people after feeling the effects of a quarter century of right-wing dominance.

The mounting problems of healthcare, global warming, retirement security, racial and gender equality, and many others on the one hand and a recognition of the limitations and failures of the market to resolve mounting social problems on the other hand is causing people to reevaluate the role of government.

And this too will be a part of the national conversation next year.

The Party

At every opportunity we should be a part of the struggles and the organizational forms of the labor-led people’s movement – both old ones and new ones, battling the extreme right and corporate globalization. Such has been our strategic policy and political emphasis since 2000.

We said then that we wanted to get into the mix, and we have on many levels and in many ways. We are a larger factor in existing struggles and organizational forms of the core forces of the all-people’s coalition against the right. We eagerly joined the antiwar movement, lending our energy and leadership on a local and national level. In 2006, we jumped feet first into the 2006 elections and can take pride in our role.

And now with opportunities to widen and deepen our participation in current struggles and in the 2008 elections, it is imperative that every member and club find the practical ways to engage with this movement and its struggles. The doors are open, and no one is going to keep us out but ourselves.

To this movement we bring our energy, our appreciation of unity, our strategic and tactical insights, our understanding of capitalism, our vision of socialism, and our sense of partisanship.

This is all good. In fact, it’s great that we are in the trenches and giving leadership to this developing movement.

But it is not enough. We also have to build the Party, the People’s Weekly World newspaper (PWW), and the Young Communist League (YCL) in the course of building the movement. These two tasks are not separate, but should be organically combined into a single package of communist mass work.

I’m sure you agree that a larger communist presence in this broad based movement can only make the movement stronger and better able to meet today and tomorrow’s challenges. And it’s interesting to note that other activists and leaders of this movement who are not in the Party are telling us that they would like to see a bigger and stronger Communist Party.

So how do we crack this nut? There is no single answer and others at the meeting will speak to this question in more depth. So suffice it to say that we need more, what I call, “hands-on leadership.” And we need it to on two interrelated levels – assisting clubs and comrades in becoming more engaged in mass struggles and building the Party in the course of these struggles.

“Hands-on leadership,” means more assistance to the clubs and club leaders. It means attending more club meetings. It means going to lunch with the club chair now and then. It means meeting with club leadership on a regular basis. And it means taking the lead in our clubs to recruit a new member or sell a subscription to the PWW.

It means that our national staff members who travel meet with district committees and clubs where we listen to the possibilities and difficulties of recruiting. It means rethinking agendas for National Committee, National Board and District Committee meetings so that they reflect what is going on at the grassroots of the movement and the Party and YCL. It means that we assist clubs to take the next step or two in the their developmental process. It means that we help clubs develop recruiting plans, PWW subscriber lists, and mailing lists. It means that we give practical assistance to the preparation of club educationals. It means thinking through with the districts and clubs ways to become more involved in the peace movement and other forms of mass work.

I hope that I have made my point that the Party’s leadership has to mix it up more with the clubs and membership in a very practical and concrete way. We have to lead by example. Our role as Party leaders is not to solve problems in general, but to solve concretely and practically.

Having said that I want to make a few general remarks about leadership qualities. In addition to being “hands-on,” we should also put a premium on Party leaders who put the Party first, accent the positive, build confidence in the Party and its collectives, work hard and get things done, “turn down the temperature” and frustration levels, show greater sensitivity to issues of racism and male supremacy, and conduct themselves with modesty.

I’m not saying that we don’t have these qualities, but it is always useful to take a personal inventory and measure our self against what kind of leader we would like to be. I’m sure each of us will find that we are still a work in progress – kind of like the labor-led people’s movement.

But the good thing is that we are on the right path. Thank you.

From