Capitalist Music here ⊠Seeds of Communism here ⊠Nuclear War here âŠ
Letter: Beyond Symbolic Gestures: Organizing Masses for Communism
Fraternal greetings, comrades.
Having read Red Flag, I agree that The Strokesâ performance at Coachella showed that even within the spaces created by capitalism, voices of protest and gestures that unsettle those in power can emerge.
However, I also believe it is important not to lose sight of the underlying contradiction or dilute it. A song, no matter how powerful, cannot substitute for the conscious organization of the working class or replace the political struggle necessary to transform reality. Coachella remains, above all, a showcase for cultural capitalism, where art becomes a commodity and rebellion runs the risk of being absorbed as spectacle.
That is why, rather than merely celebrating the symbolic gesture, we should highlight both its limitations and its potential. While thousands of workers face insufficient wages, unaffordable rent, grueling workdays, and the constant rising cost of living, the system offers exclusive festivals and messages of protest packaged as entertainment.
That is the true contradiction we must highlight. Capitalism turns even criticism into a product. But it cannot erase the material conditions of exploitation that most of us experience as the working class.
Imperialism, exploitation, and the commodification of culture will not disappear by the will of corporations or through isolated acts of rebellion. Furthermore, we must not forget that artists, even when they rebel for a moment, continue to profit within this system. And in many cases, certain acts of provocation also serve as a way to attract attention, sell more, and strengthen their own image within the market.
Precisely for this reason, the response cannot be limited to fleeting admiration or momentary outrage. The real task is to transform that discomfort into class consciousness, organization, and communist struggle. Only communism offers a real way out of a system that commodifies culture, makes life precarious, and turns every form of rebellion into a business.
The question, then, remains the same: Which side are we on? And how much longer are we going to wait? Are we on the side of capitalist spectacle? Or on the side of the working class fighting to overthrow this order and build a communist society?
That is why the struggle is not just about making a symbolic gesture, but about organizing on a massive scale, joining the ICWP, and distributing Red Flag to strengthen the conscious struggle of the working class and to advance toward communism.
âComrade in El Salvador
Letter: Seeds of Communism: Combining Mental and Manual Work
Our manifesto Mobilize the Masses for Communism (MMC) explains that in communism we will eliminate wage slavery and break down the division between mental and manual labor. They will be combined. No one will do only mental work, and no one will do only physical work.
MMC says, for example, that in communism, the agronomist and the farmworker will be the same person. A friend said he thought that was very idealist. He thought that it wasnât possible, that it is too far a reach.
Many experiences show that the opposite is true. It is a materialist position, based on history and practice, not an idealist one. Many with first-hand experience and those who know people with first-hand experience are talking about the best way to grow food, using science and their own knowledge from experience of best practices for growing healthy fruits and vegetables. Some say that the soil is tired and needs replenishing. In the past, crops were rotated and the soil was given time to regenerate the needed nutrients. Bugs and other animals helped this process. An acquaintance in Fresno says that fertilizer actually depletes the soil.
Today, with the war against Iran and closing the Strait of Hormuz, the price of fertilizer has gone way up along with the price of fuel. Vegetables and fruit are more expensive and less plentiful. Many people are angry and worried about the situation. But when the focus of production is meeting the daily needs of people instead of profits, fertilizer isnât needed. Itâs possible to replenish the soil with healthy nutrients without the use of fertilizer.
This makes me realize how correct MMCâs point is that the agronomist and farmer/farmworkers should and will be the same people. A mass ICWP will encourage the people who grow food to develop the science of healthy soil and best practices. Masses will help. They can rely on knowledge of how societies before capitalist industrial farming successfully treated the soil and grew a variety of nutritious life sustaining fruit and vegetables. And collectively without profits and competition getting in the way, they can advance this scientific knowledge through theory and practice.
Collective knowledge and work of planting and harvesting will be combined with science. This conversation and struggle canât wait for some future date. Many people are angry and worried about lack of healthy food they can afford. They are worried about war. They are open to communist revolution now.
Capitalist industrial farming for profit and sale negated healthy subsistence farming to meet the needs of the masses. Communist collective work, experience, and science, combining practice and theory, manual and mental labor, will negate capitalismâs industrial production of food for profit. Communism will preserve the best from the past and collectively take it to a much higher level. Communism will mean healthy food for all without money produced and shared collectively.
âA Comrade
Letter: Worldâs Bosses Wonât Use Nuclear Weapons
Red Flag/Bandera Roja talks a lot about nuclear war as if it were a real and even imminent possibility. It takes seriously the bossesâ bluffs about âgoing nuclear.â I think this is a mistake and harmful to our cause.
For example, an article in v. 15 #13 said that the invasion of Lebanon is âanother step in an unfolding third world warâ and that the world is âteetering on the brink of nuclear confrontation.â
Another article, on Ukraine, said that âUS imperialism is bringing the world to the brink of nuclear devastation.â Elsewhere RF/BR said that until communism is established globally ânuclear war will remain a catastrophic possibility.â
Supposedly conventional war inevitably leads to nuclear war, as follows. One side, A, gains the upper hand and the other, B, fearing defeat, âresortsâ to nuclear weapons.
The problem is, the other side then âresortsâ to its own nuclear weapons and a devastating exchange ensues. But then itâs obvious that B is no better off because no one wins a nuclear exchange â itâs Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD).
And both are actually worse off because all theyâve done by destroying each other is create a power vacuum for competitors C, D, E etc. For example, if the US and China destroyed each other, Europe and Russia would benefit, not to mention India and Latin America.
The logic is simple but solid and for that reason I think that opponents, even in an all out WWIII, would come to a de facto entente (understanding) not to use nuclear weapons.
Make no mistake, if the bosses do shun a nuclear exchange, itâs not because their hearts are filled with compassion for the potential victims. Theyâve showed in the past no hesitation in killing millions to further their interests. If they shun the use of nuclear weapons, itâs because it would not be in their interests.
There is plenty of historical precedents for such ententes. During the second world war both sides had chemical and biological weapons but neither used them. After the war one German general was asked why they didnât dump poison gas on the D-Day beaches. He answered that the Allies would have in turn poisoned the tens of thousands of horses the Wehrmacht relied on for transportation.
For similar reasons, the US did not use nuclear weapons in either Korea or Vietnam. More recently Iran and the US and its allies had an unspoken entente not to attack the water desalination installations that make life in the Gulf possible.
Therefore, I believe WWIII, if it happens, will be fought with conventional weapons. We should stop taking the bossesâ nuclear bluffs seriously and stop scaring people with the prospect of trying to take power in a âFast and Furiousâ style apocalyptic waste land.
âComrade in Canada
Please send your letters, responses, and suggestions to contact@icwpredflag.org