There has always been a fundamental dividing line in the socialist and communist movements. There are those who argue that the working class needs political, organizational, and ideological independence from the capitalist class. And there are those who argue varying degrees of political collaboration with the capitalist class.

The Revolutionary Communists of America are firmly in the camp of class independence. From day one, we have argued that the American working class needs our own party, and that we can give no form of support to capitalist politicians of any stripe.

Given the exploitative relationship between labor and capital, the working class and the capitalist class have zero common ground. Flowing from this, we, as workers, need our own organizations, our own political program, and our own guiding ideology—Marxism.

Many on the left accuse us of being irrationally intransigent on this question. Let us explain.

The class line

Through a rigorous study of the internal laws governing capitalist society, Marx proved that the interests of labor and capital are irreconcilably and diametrically opposed. Any improvement in the wages, benefits, and conditions of the working class must necessarily eat into the profits of the ruling class—and any increase in the profits of the ruling class must necessarily worsen the wages, benefits, and conditions of the working class.

When they’re speaking amongst themselves, the capitalists frankly acknowledge this reality. For example, look at the tone taken by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in his 2018 book, Capitalism in America, when discussing economic trends in the early 1920s:

The 1920s were dominated by three great themes. The first was the rapid improvement in productivity, particularly in the first half of the decade … With the trade unions quiescent after the initial postwar discontent, and inflation at zero, companies were able to capture a princely proportion of these productivity improvements in corporate profits.

In other words, because the class-collaborationist leadership of the labor movement was “quiescent” at this time, the newly created surplus value went towards corporate profits rather than workers’ wages—a delightful prospect for Greenspan, who devoted his entire life to upholding the interests of the US capitalist class and their profits.

Then there’s Warren Buffett’s infamous moment of class candor: “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war—and we’re winning.”

It only makes sense that the serious strategists of capital are aware of the divergence of interests between the workers and the capitalists. But they also understand that acknowledging the class line in public would be self-defeating. For their economic and political system to function, they need to convince the working-class majority that there is such a thing as “shared interests” between the capitalists and the workers.

Over the centuries, the bourgeoisie has perfected the art of blurring the class line in society, intentionally confusing the matter in the public eye. Democratic and Republican officials alike drone on about “our national interests” and “our government.” They speak about why “we” need to take control of Venezuelan oil or why “we” need to compete with China.

For instance, the following 2015 quote by Barack Obama will appear on the exterior of the Obama Presidential Center Museum, currently under construction in Chicago:

America is not the project of any one person. The single most powerful word in our democracy is the word “We.” “We The People.” “We Shall Overcome.” “Yes We Can.” That word is owned by no one. It belongs to everyone. Oh, what a glorious task we are given to continually try to improve this great nation of ours.

This is just one example of the countless ways in which the class enemy seeks to continually reinforce the false idea of shared “national interests.”

But workers and capitalists have no shared interests whatsoever. The capitalists have an interest in maintaining wage slavery. Workers have an interest in overthrowing the capitalist system, forming a workers’ government, and beginning the transition towards a communist society. There is no common ground.

Our message to the working class

The reformists, including the main leaders of DSA, acquiesce to the pressure of capitalist society. In the US, this usually means convoluted justifications to “utilize the Democratic ballot line.” In other words, they advocate subordinating the socialist movement to the capitalist Democratic Party, rather than running independent socialist candidates.

Revolutionaries, on the other hand, insist on clarifying the real state of affairs. We want to clarify and sharpen the class line—not assist the bourgeoisie in their efforts to obscure the matter.

This means we cannot, in any way, shape, or form support candidates of the Democratic or Republican Parties, which are both capitalist parties through and through. This includes self-described socialists running as Democrats, such as Zohran Mamdani and Bernie Sanders. We can and should have a friendly attitude towards workers with honest illusions in these parties and individuals, but we cannot and must not capitulate to the pressure to politically join hands with the class enemy.

To support a candidate of a capitalist party would essentially be lying to the working class. We would be implying that the Democratic Party is a tool that the working class can utilize for its liberation. This idea is false to the core, and we have a duty to tell the truth to our class.

To the narrow-minded reformists, this appears as mere squabbling over a so-called “tactical choice” over which ballot line to run on. They think it doesn’t matter if a socialist candidate runs as a Democrat, as if the “ballot line” used is a matter of no real importance.

Yet in the real world, workers absolutely do think about politics in terms of ballot lines. While support for both capitalist parties has greatly diminished in recent years, voting simply “Republican” or voting simply “Democrat” is a strong tradition in the US. We need to engage with the working class on these terms, while putting our own perspective forward: We should support neither of these parties favored by the billionaires! Workers need our own party!

Insisting on the need for class independence is not an individual act of “protest,” or a way of salving our consciences. When we refuse to support candidates of the Democratic or Republican Parties and put forward the need for a class-independent workers’ party, it is an actionable message to the working class: we must trust only in our own strength.