I would like to congratulate PLP for the work that you are doing, some of which I read in Challenge. I would also like to tell you about how I became a communist and why I joined PLP.
As I learned in the song Bella Ciao, which we sing here in a Creole translation, I will live and die a communist.
How did I become a communist? I was really a communist before I even knew about the concept of communism. Nevertheless, it was because of the reality of my life and my family’s life, and the social and economic conditions of our class which made me choose sides and become a communist. My activities in organizing among students, my political positions and my class consciousness also helped pave the way for me to become a communist. There was really no option more humane than communism in a society where the bosses suck the blood of thousands and millions of workers around the world.
I am proud to call myself a communist.
I came to the PLP through struggles in our town. I helped organize a student reading group, named for one of the founders of the first communist parties in Haïti, Jacques Roumain. It was started by a comrade in order to recruit young communists to the Party and to work with rural workers in our town. We read and discussed the ideas of the Party and the history of the communist movement. I was very interested and talked often with our comrade after our study group and one day he asked me to join our international communist party, PLP.
While our lives in Haiti may differ a little with workers in other countries, with differences in the degree of racist exploitation, I know that we have the same enemy, CAPITALISM. In short, I find that there is an obligation to be in a communist party.
I am not satisfied with the growth of the PLP in Haïti because I expect more from the Party. I will do my best however to work with and struggle with our comrades and friends to build PLP into a mass fighting revolutionary communist party.
Again, I take this occasion to say a big thank you to the members of PLP around the world for being commited to the class struggle. Let us fight for another world, a just world, a communist world!
Comrade S

I recently started working in a county clinic with predominantly black and Latin patients and workers. The rebellions in Ferguson, as well as the local fightback against the murder of 25-year-old black worker Ezell Ford here in Los Angeles, provided an opportunity to meet my new co-workers on a political footing.
I wasn’t sure what to do or how to do it but I knew workers were outraged about what was happening in Ferguson. I also wasn’t sure if they heard about Ezell Ford, murdered only two days after Michael Brown. So I printed out a picture of a demonstration I went to. I wrote a few sentences beneath it about sending our condolences to the Ford family and standing in solidarity with their fight back against racist police murders.
I showed it to one of my co-workers, Denise, and she literally took it and ran with it. Her first comments were that we need to make this into a card and print it out in color. She then passed it to another co-worker to change the wording. For obvious reasons, the administration wouldn’t support it: they removed the name of the clinic and simply said it was from me and my co-workers. Denise definitely improved the message while maintaining the politics of “stand in solidarity with fightback against racist police murders.”
Denise then took it to all our co-workers in the clinic and in the hospital nearby. She got about 25 signatures. She then typed them up in a nice font and asked for money. We raised over $200 just in a couple of days for the family. While she did most of the leg work, she mentioned me. Folks came up to thank us for what we were doing.
I discovered one of the nurses had her 25-year-old son murdered about 10 years ago. At the time, she was a nurse at the now non-existent trauma center her son was brought to and where he later died! The county hospital, along with its emergency rooms and trauma center, has been closed for the last seven years. This means more deaths as ambulances have to travel longer distances to hospitals already overwhelmed.
When the county hospital does open sometime next year, it will still be a skeleton of its former self with one-fifth the number of hospital beds available. And with Obamacare, this “safety net” hospital will require some form of health insurance. Given that LA County is expected to have one million uninsured in spite of government subsidies and expanded MediCal (the California Medical Assistance Program), this will mean more illness and death largely on the backs of black, Latin and immigrant workers we serve.
The Ford family was very appreciative of our efforts. Since the funeral last week, the fightback has died down some. Nonetheless, we have some contact with the family and its opened doors for more struggle on the job.
Denise and I have had a couple more conversations about Ferguson and the likely war in the Middle East. Denise talked about the fascist response in Ferguson and compared it to the response the bosses took in Boston after the marathon bombing last April. I showed her the latest CHALLENGE editorial as well as articles from our comrades who were in Ferguson. From the racist cops to this racist “healthcare” system, I hope to continue this struggle in our clinic and build a base for communism among these black and Latin women workers.
Red Health

Can we make a better society, a more humane and fair world? Dave Eggers in his 2013 dystopian novel The Circle sees us headed in another direction. His book is a major best-seller and is hard to put down. Reading it with our friends could open some useful discussions with them. Maybe imagining with them how society might change, they would better understand why we disagree with that book’s take-away message. Why, as Nadine Gortimer said, “Communists are the last optimists.”
The plot of The Circle centers on a woman in her early 20s, but the main philosophical perspectives are provided by the three “Wise Men,” billionaire founders of the company where she works. The Circle is a cutting-edge and rapidly expanding corporation that is the center of a fascist digital empire. It’s basically what you would get if Google, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft melded into one company and controlled over 95 percent of everything on the Web.
Mae Holland lands a job there and thinks she’s in heaven. What’s not to like about a great salary and benefits, beautiful corporate campus, free cultural events and a steady stream of gifts and special perks? Well, a few things. We watch Mae as she’s molded and shaped, working faster and harder, striving mightily to fit in and excel in an environment where her every keystroke is monitored and her efficiency — and by inference her attitude — is constantly evaluated by her superiors.
Behind the iPhone-like glossy image of the company we discover three outlooks represented by the three business partners. Ty Gospodinov, the enigmatic and brilliant generator of an endless stream of ideas and solutions to problems, would probably consider himself apolitical, perhaps with anarchistic leanings.
Eamon Bailey, the main public face of the Circle, is a father figure to the thousands of 20-somethings that make up the workforce. He is the one who lays out the philosophy of the Circle in speeches to thousands of employees in the Great Hall each month on Dream Friday. Bailey presents utopian visions that all hinge on information management breakthroughs brought to you by the Circle.
The third partner is Tom Stenton, the venture capitalist. He is best likened to a creature he brings back from the Marinas Trench, a shark that devours everything placed in its tank with astonishing efficiency. What he lacks in creativity and salesmanship, he makes up for by his uncanny (and merciless) business sense.
Slave Away Cheerfully
The contrast between the unlimited freedom and community that form the Circle philosophy presented by Eamon Bailey and the social reality of this 21st century digital sweatshop is hard to miss. There is a steep hierarchy ranging from the Wise Men on top, through the Gang of 40, who get to decide which lucky start-ups (“plankton”) will get the honor of being swallowed by the whale that is the Circle. These 40 managers are, in turn, revered and feared by the next level of bosses.
At the bottom of the ladder are the Newbies who slave away cheerfully (a less than exuberant tone of voice could result in a costly loss of points, or their job) as more and more computer screens are added to their work stations and they learn of the latest metric the Circle has devised to monitor their output. They never consider risking their dream job by complaining. Jobs outside the Circle, even those landed by graduates of elite colleges like Mae, are scarce and un-cool. It’s awesome to be a Circler, even at the bottom of the food chain.
The Circle philosophy, as presented by Bailey, is more fully revealed when Mae’s career hits a crisis. Mae gets in trouble when she’s caught borrowing a kayak without permission (and not wearing a life vest!), an indiscretion that could cost her her job. Eamon Bailey uses this situation and Mae’s desperation about keeping her post to get her to agree that she should always tell “the community” — in effect, her employer — everything. To be a good Circler she should believe that “Secrets are Lies,” “Privacy is Theft” and that “Sharing is Caring.” She is to become the poster child for transparency and will be elevated into the upper ranks of the corporation.
Then Bailey lays out his vision of “closing the Circle.” When the Circle is closed there will be complete access for all people to all knowledge and information. This transparency will create perfect democracy, security and happiness. Of course this transparency does not include the plans being hatched by the Circle elite and other important “intellectual property,” but Mae, like most Circlers, is so caught up in the intoxicating dream woven by Bailey (not to mention all the free stuff) that this doesn’t occur to her.
The emotional climax of the novel is a series of events that result from Mae’s ever deeper surrender to the Circle’s vision and its untoward effects on her parents and old boyfriend, probably the main loves of her pre-Circle life. (You will have to read the book to see how those come out!)
The Anticommunist Kernel
The prevailing outlook in the world today, sadly, is that things are a mess and solutions are hard to imagine. When the nightmare nature of the utopia painted on Dream Fridays becomes clear, that pessimism is reinforced. Eggers’s dystopia is different, and is published in a vastly different political context, from the two most famous 20th century novels about scary futures, Brave New World (Aldous Huxley, 1932) and 1984 (George Orwell, 1949). Those cautionary tales were written at a time when socialism was a rising force in the world.
The most explicitly anti-communist of the two, 1984, was published when the Soviet Union was widely admired for having defeated Nazi Germany in World War II and when the Chinese Communist Party had just made a successful revolution and taken control of the most populous country in the world. Clearly, from the bosses’ perspective, an anti-communist cultural antidote to the popular image of socialism was needed. They didn’t want workers in the West to start getting ideas.
Eggers’s anti-communism is more subtle. It pushes the idea that human nature precludes the existence of any truly collective, non-exploitative society. To the extent that the evil turn of the Circle is seen as the work of Stenton, it could even be read as anti-capitalist. But its pessimistic outlook is more profound than fear of aggressive venture capitalists. The anti-communist kernel of The Circle is the idea that any situation where everyone’s efforts are aligned for the same purpose will inevitably have someone behind the scenes pulling strings for their own purposes. In The Circle it’s Stenton, the main investor who sets priorities. But he is enabled by Eamon Bailey, who preaches, and maybe even believes, a humanistic vision of enlightened corporate control of human society, i.e., fascism.
Revolutionary Optimism Based on History
Communists today still believe that a society based on collective effort to achieve common goals is both possible and good. This is not blind faith but an assessment of advances that revolutionaries actually achieved in the past. History is the basis of our optimism. Recent issues of Challenge carried a four-part series of articles describing the growth of a factory with over a hundred workers from what had been a four-worker scrap metal shop on a rural commune over a few years at the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in China.
The descriptions of life and work in that simple factory included dramatic increases in production and solving of difficult technical problems, but the hard work, long hours and creative energy was motivated by a shared desire to see the communal farm, the village and the society advance. No one got higher pay for their work, including those managing and leading the work. No one was in danger of losing their job if they didn’t meet production quotas, but somehow, everyone pitched in and got things done ahead of schedule. Although the farmers-turned-metalworkers in that Chinese village worked as frenetically as the Newbies in Eggers’s novel, their village and all its residents owned the factory which they had built by their collective effort. At least they did until the defeat of the Cultural Revolution.
Unfortunately, that little factory and the social relations that held it together were destroyed by the capitalist “reforms” introduced after 1976, a microcosm of China’s return to capitalism. The factory, built by farmers in a spirit of unselfish cooperation during the Cultural Revolution was handed over to one person as the new capitalist-style owner. Soon the social relationships changed to reflect the new ownership and a handful got rich while others struggled to survive. The sense of community was destroyed. This outcome was not inevitable, but it is what really happened.
A general awareness of the reversal of communist developments like that little factory, but on a massive scale, underlies much of today’s pessimism about the future. The Circle shows us a vision of capitalist social relations masquerading as “community” and creating a hellish work environment. The only alternatives presented to total surrender to exploitation by the company are very individualistic.
One lone shadowy character at Circle, Kalden, has a plan for sabotage. Outside the corporate campus confines, Mae’s former boyfriend, Mercer, and her parents, made miserable by the intrusiveness of the Circle into their lives, try to escape by living off the grid. But the notion that the general population — not to mention the slaving Newbies on campus — might rebel is never considered. The notion of collective action as a route to freedom from oppression, rather than as a mechanism of enslavement, is not even hinted at.
The feeling of hopelessness The Circle leaves us with is useful for today’s ruling classes. Without a vision of a new world worth working toward, we become passive in the face of injustice and exploitation. As communists, we need to find ways to help our friends and co-workers see the liberating power of collective action. More revolutionary culture to communicate this basically optimistic vision is sorely needed, but we shouldn’t expect those novels to end up on the New York Times best-seller list. Not until workers take over the New York Times! In the meantime, engaging our friends in speculation about the future, even using a dystopian novel as a jumping off place, can be a useful way to lay out the historical basis of our profound optimism about the future.

The U.S. bosses’ widening campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), also known as ISIL or IS, represents their latest move to control Middle East oil and dominate their imperialist rivals in the heart of their global empire. Oil is the lifeblood of capitalism. The loss of the world’s most profitable reserves would devastate energy giants like ExxonMobil and send the U.S. into its worst depression in history (see box, page 2). The bosses will continue to defend their interests at all costs. Twenty-three years of invasions, bombings and sanctions have killed more than three million working-class Iraqis and tens of thousands more in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia. For U.S. rulers, the most violent terrorists in the history of the world, eliminating ISIS terrorists would represent a drop in the bucket.
When Barack Obama said, “We don’t have a strategy yet” in the face of ISIS’s grab of oilfields and refineries in Iraq and Syria, he was lying. His capitalist handlers have had an explicit, petroleum-based, Middle East war strategy for decades. In his 1980 inaugural address, two months after profit-hungry Iranian rulers seized the vast assets of Exxon and other Western firms, President Jimmy Carter said: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.”
When U.S. presidents cite “vital American interests,” they hide the fact that these are the bosses’ interests, directly antagonistic to the needs of the international working class. Workers gain nothing from Exxon’s business. To the contrary, we are the ones who die in imperialist wars to protect the oil companies’ profits. This vicious cycle will end only when the bosses’ capitalist system is smashed by communist revolution and replaced with a society run by and for workers, who create everything of value. That’s the goal of the revolutionary communist Progressive Labor Party.
Obama Wedded to Oil War Doctrine
Obama’s anti-ISIS policy, outlined in his speech on September 10, is an extension of the Carter Doctrine and the pledge by President Franklin Roosevelt to Saudi Arabia during World War II: that the U.S. would defend the region’s oilfields at all costs. The same strategy triggered the Gulf War in 1991 under President George H.W. Bush. It drove the sanctions under President Bill Clinton that strangled Iraq from 1993 to 2001. It set off President George W. Bush’s “shock and awe” invasion of 2003 and the eight-year Iraq War that followed. Obama is as tightly tied to this strategy as the Republicans and Democrats before him.
The president’s plan for now is to attack ISIS through air strikes and major ground deployments by regional allies. But since this approach will inevitably fail, the U.S. rulers’ growing hydrocarbon rivalry with China promises a deeper, wider and deadlier Middle East conflict (“NATO Foresees Three Years of War in Iraq,” Le Canard Enchaine, 9/10/14). On September 16, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said he might recommend “the use of U.S. military ground forces” in Iraq.
It’s not just Iraqi oil that’s at stake. Given ISIS’s expansionist program, the U.S. bosses have to worry about the longtime linchpin to their Big Oil world order: Saudi Arabia.
Racism: U.S. Bosses’ Dilemma
ExxonMobil and the finance capitalists who own it are openly steering U.S. policy on ISIS. Their problem is that Obama, hindered by a fractured Congress and a war-weary public, can’t provide the billionaires all the firepower they want. Meanwhile, the rulers’ racist attacks on black and Latin youth — a key part of their effort to divide and pacify the working class — pose a dilemma for them. The same young people murdered by cops in U.S. cities and apartheid towns like Ferguson, Missouri, the same ones who are imprisoned by the millions by the racist criminal justice system, are also the bosses’ leading source of cannon fodder for their perpetual imperialist wars. By alienating these youth, the capitalists undermine their case for their needed military draft. Alienated workers also contribute to the unreliability of the present U.S. military, which will once again be counted on to shore up U.S. control of the Middle East.
Obama Gets His Marching Orders
Two days before his ISIS speech, Obama hosted a White House dinner for a handful of former top-level war planners to hear “their views on a range of national security and foreign policy issues” (New York Times, 9/9/14).
The mass-murdering guest list united Democrats and Republicans. All had tight connections to Exxon itself or its founding Rockefeller family, which bankrolls hundreds of “philanthropies” to advance U.S. imperialism. In sum, the group represented U.S. capitalists’ “central committee,” the tight circle that gives Obama his orders. They included:
• Stephen Hadley, national security advisor for George W. Bush. He helped lead the deadly 2007 troop surge in Iraq and now works directly for Exxon;
• Condoleezza Rice, another Bush national security advisor, also hired by Exxon. According to Iraq Oil Report (2/8/13): “Rice and Hadley have been consulting Exxon on Iraq and on the broader region as well since at least 2011”;  
• Richard Haass, the Director of Policy Planning under the Bush State Department, helped prepare the 2003 Iraq invasion. Haass currently heads the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the finance capital think tank that counts Exxon as a “founding member”;
• Samuel R. Berger, who advised Clinton to bomb Bosnia and Kosovo and sits on the boards of imperialist foundations like the Rockefeller- and Soros-funded International Crisis Group;
• Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution policy factory, which lists the ExxonMobil Foundation as a top donor;
• Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security advisor to Jimmy Carter and the author of the Carter Doctrine. Together, Brzezinski and David Rockefeller founded the Trilateral Commission, which seeks to unite pro-U.S. forces from North America, Europe, and Asia in a potential World War III alliance.
Obama’s ISIS manifesto, in which he compared the new fight to U.S. air campaigns in Yemen and Somalia, failed to satisfy this oil-driven oligarchy. Kenneth Pollack, a Brookings scholar, suggested that Obama “should have reminded the American people that this is ultimately about oil and our economy....we need to acknowledge that that is where our ultimate interest in the Arab states lies” (Brookings website, 9/11/14).
Haass, meanwhile, wrote that the capitalist bosses “need to set a scale of effort on our part far larger than anything that is being undertaken or contemplated in Yemen or Somalia.” As Haass lamented, “What air power cannot do is take and hold territory. You need a ground component, and we are not in a position to provide that” (CFR, 9/11/14).
Building PLP Under Rising Fascism
Aggravating the bosses’ problems is the need for more military funding for their relentless oil wars. This can come only from intensified exploitation of the U.S. working class, from higher taxes to cutbacks in wages and social services. Workers will suffer greatly from these attacks. From Ferguson to France to Palestine,  workers will also respond as they always have in the face of capitalist oppression: with greater opposition and fightback (see pages 4, 5, 6).
Despite Obama’s caution and their reluctant and inept regional allies, U.S. capitalists cannot walk away from the Middle East. They will do what they feel they must to sustain their brutal system of exploitation. Expect more workers’ blood to be spent for bosses’ oil. But as Karl Marx declared, capitalism generates the seeds of its own destruction by creating a working class. The job of Progressive Labor Party is to lead that class to communist revolution and to end imperialist war for all time.