Amid a critical global situation, with the environmental emergency severely hitting many parts of the planet with the worst temperatures ever recorded, a continuing danger of escalation of the inter-imperialist conflict between the U.S. and its rivals Russia and China, and an increasingly convulsive political situation in the United States with the fascist sector coalescing and growing stronger in the wake of the indictments against Trump, and gaining ground in the cultural arena with expressions directly or indirectly related to the fascist movement such as that of Jason Aldean or Oliver Anthony... Amid all this madness, of tremendous importance is the scientific understanding put forward by Bob Avakian that this is a rare time when revolution becomes more possible, and the struggle of the revcoms on the basis of that understanding to organize and win many masses among the "decent people" around a real revolution. The work of the revcoms within the American Sociological Association (ASA) conference, which brought together thousands of scholars from all over the country and the world, was in that context and as part of the work of the revcoms to fight within sectors of the intelligentsia (see “Revcoms at the American Sociological Association Conference: Spreading Revolution, Stirring Up Controversy, Waging Sharp Struggle”).

As was insisted in the orientation for this, there cannot be a true revolution without the forging of a revolutionary people of millions of people, and this cannot exist without having on its side an important sector of the intelligentsia and the middle classes. And this can only be done if we strive to frame the debate and struggle around the necessity and urgency of a true revolution.

The comrades responsible for the work of this team were always struggling for this to be the spirit of everything we did: To put forward up front and bluntly that in order to deal with the problems facing humanity and the planet today we need to organize now for a real revolution, and on that basis, to present how objectively there are two major obstacles in the thinking of the people who can and should be part of such a revolution: 1) All the "woke" madness, with its “cancel culture,” post-modernism, and narrow views reduced to the search for "safe spaces”; and 2) anti-communism: the "verdict" that disqualifies revolutionary experiences as a "nightmare" and dismisses it as an undesirable option for change in today's world. These obstacles are not limited to the United States, and this was noticeable in discussions with some people from other parts of the world who, while not very familiar with the term "woke," were familiar with the framework of thinking that goes with that term.

Taking that orientation in an environment such as that of the ASA conference involves being "unpopular" and unleashing a lot of controversy and animosity among many, but also from others curiosity and interest in learning more. And certainly, not doing so would mean alienating people from the only option for solving the problems facing humanity—real communist revolution.

The atmosphere we found among the attendees was as anticipated. Many of them are headlong into many of the attitudes and positions that have been propagated by the "woke" craze, with narrow-minded views that see no way beyond capitalism and have no interest in engaging in a serious debate about communism or why the "woke" framework is so destructive to achieving an end to all oppression and exploitation. Instead, many preferred to completely close themselves off from any possibility of debate with the revcoms, and some even preferred to complain on social media within their "safe spaces" and within their social circle where they could possibly find support for their prejudiced positions.

Given that, I was thinking about the importance of what Bob Avakian (BA) discusses in the article on Robert F. Kennedy Jr., particularly BA’s argument as to why communism, particularly the new communism, and revolution are very important issues to discuss. We encountered in some people within the conference an association of revolutionary communist ideas with "conspiracy theories,” and often that went hand-in-hand with a refusal to discuss these issues with us. That association is insane! Given that Bob Avakian and the new communism have systematically and resolutely fought for a scientific understanding of society and a revolutionary transformation on that basis! It is an illustration of how “woke” lunacy turns reality upside down and is a tremendous obstacle to revolution. Moreover, it is paradoxical that, as Bob Avakian points out, such anti-communism and negative verdicts on communism are more typical of the conspiracy theorists' way of thinking, and the confirmation bias in which they are completely closed to even contemplating the possibility that what they believe about it cannot be so.

BA points out that one of the possible reasons some people do not dare to debate with the revcoms about communism is that they know they do not have solid substantiation of their anti-communism based on evidence. This is true, and we must take advantage of it to put our finger on the sore spot and show the lack of rigor and substance that anti-communism hides. There is a lot of substance that we can take from this article on Kennedy Jr. and be able to challenge people who are not willing to debate seriously with revolutionary communists.

The saturation work that was done at the ASA conference was important insofar as it led to many of the attendees having to come up against these ideas, to know that there is a force contending to make revolution and is fighting against the obstacles to it.

On the other hand, it is very worrying (though not surprising), the tendency among intellectuals to underestimate the danger of the current situation and the tendency to follow "business as usual.” That reminds me of Stefan Zweig's words in the midst of the rise and consolidation of fascism and the attitude of the intellectuals of his time, very similar to the current situation:

[W]e still did not notice the danger. Those few writers who had really gone to the trouble of reading Hitler’s book did not look seriously at his programme, but laughed at his pompous prose style instead. The great national newspapers, instead of warning us, kept soothing their readers daily by assuring them that National Socialism, which could finance its agitation only with money provided by heavy industry and by audaciously running up debts, must inevitably collapse tomorrow or the next day.

[…]

Even when he had become Chancellor on that January day in 1933, the vast majority, including some who had helped him to rise to that position, still thought that he was just a stopgap and National Socialism would be only a transient episode.

Even the Jews of Germany were not especially uneasy.… After all, what violent actions could he carry out in a state where the law was firmly established, the parliamentary majority was against him, and every citizen was assured of his liberty and equal rights by the solemn wording of the constitution?

Then came the Reichstag fire, parliament vanished from the scene, Goering let his wolf pack off the leash, and all at once the rule of law in Germany was over. We were horrified to hear that concentration camps were being set up in the middle of peacetime, and secret cells where innocent people were murdered without the formality of a trial had been built in the barracks. This could only be an initial outburst of senseless rage as the new regime took power, we told ourselves, such things cannot last long in the twentieth century. But it was only the beginning.¹

Although this underestimation of atypical situations such as the current one is "predictable," it does not mean that it is inevitable. There is a material basis to be able to transform this terrain. In conversations with attendees at the ASA conference, we saw that there are some who do not agree with the whole "woke" story, and who seem to be starting not from a DeSantis-type fascist approach but from genuine concern. You need to fight to win those people over to a better position without letting that mean they set the frame. And that seems to me to have been correctly done in the work at the ASA conference, based on the objective necessity of revolution and on the basis of the new communism developed by Bob Avakian.

At the strategic level, in the struggle against these frameworks of thought that lower people's sights, if we manage to act as a force that, although small at the global level, is cohesive on the basis of the new communism, we can multiply the impact in this struggle.

Finally, I would like to make a personal comment on the experience.

It is very exciting to meet comrades with whom one feels a very deep bond, that even though we do not know each other personally, we are connected at least to an essential degree in a struggle as inspiring and liberating as the struggle for a communist society.

A warm revolutionary greeting,

xx