Sentiment and Will: The Qualities that Distinguish the Communist (Pt. 3)

The party does not launch recruitment campaigns, nor does it entice the sympathizer with positions or rewards. Rather, it is the sympathizer who asks for admission. Above all, the party does not go out of its way to grow its numbers “through any means.” In situations where there is no struggle, an abnormal increase in numbers may actually be a sign that something was said or done that should not have been said or done. In this case, it is prudent to go back over the recent history of the organization. All of this was taught to us by our masters.

When determining the criteria for admitting militants, the primary consideration must always be the defense of the party’s theoretical and organizational integrity. Those who join the party bring with them the ideas and habits acquired from previous experiences. If the party is unable to integrate newcomers into its work, these past influences could pose a serious threat to the party itself. The party is exposed to the external environment. It is like an organism that can get sick simply by breathing, inhaling microorganisms that may cause illness. A weak organism with few defenses is in danger if these microbes grow uncontrollably. Compare this to an organism that has developed sufficient antibodies, and continues to produce them. Such an organism has no problem defending itself against the microbes that continuously attack it.

The party’s defenses lie in nothing more than the proper conduct of its life. This must be carried out through theoretical work, the application of its traditional way of functioning, the clarity of its exposition, and the defense of its positions.

Nothing is more important than this last point, and by applying publicly, we already have a selection process for those who approach the party and wish to join it. On the other hand, a vague and sloppy presentation, with overly tolerant tones, will attract not only the uncertain, but also time-wasters, chatterers, and even intellectuals without a party of their own, who seek a platform to pursue the activities they most desire.

Allowing these elements to enter and simply hope they will be detected and neutralized later is not the best course of action. In fact, this process would inevitably lead to rifts, misunderstandings, and disappointments. At worst, it could lead to divisions and factions, and even the loss of good militants.

The party, above all else, values theoretical and organizational rigor. Extreme clarity in stating the party’s positions in all fields is a tradition not only of the Left but also of Lenin. Evidence of this can be found throughout the entire history of our movement: from the Left (not yet the PCd’I) intervening for the 21st condition of admission, accepted at the Second Congress of the Third International, to our subsequent actions within the PCd’I and the International, the 1952 split, and the very insistence on adherence to doctrine that led to our expulsion in 1973. We may be called dogmatic, Talmudic, or accused of suffering from doctrinal schematism. While we firmly reject these labels, we still prefer them to ill-defined attitudes and vague, opportunistic statements that prioritize only immediate benefits.

This tradition must be continuously defended and reaffirmed, especially for the young people who approach the party from countries where the revolutionary communist tradition is less established. The proper transmission of our theoretical heritage is absolutely vital. If we could somehow rank the importance of our activities, this transmission would undoubtedly be at the top.