Postmodernism is bourgeois ideology and we support violence against it.

Our ideology, Maoism, was borne out of the struggle against revisionism. Anti-revisionism recognizes fundamentally that enemies can crop up within the revolutionary movement. If we negate this, or fail to uphold it, we cease to be Communists. The Collectives even when small must be sharply opposed to revisionism, and the trend of antirevisionism should only continue and deepen with the development of the Party, which we will accomplish. We are grateful for the comrades who have supported our work and made sacrifices for it. We cannot do it without supporters. We also have to draw lines of demarcation and not be so desperate for support that we allow anything and everything, including bad trends like postmodernism, to go unchecked.

These things cannot all be disconnected; they must be connected. The embodiment of confrontation is not unrelated to the history of the Maoists in Charlotte and their development. It is connected to the fight against postmodernism.

Following the Marxist theory of knowledge, we must use our knowledge to put things into practice, and then from that practice accumulate more knowledge, which we will put back into practice again. When a contradiction reaches antagonism, we must express that antagonism through violence. If we fail to recognize antagonistic contradictions as antagonistic, we have become revisionists.

As we theorized months ago, postmodernism negates power for the proletariat, and this is the principal problem with it. Postmodernism is obsessed with hating power. It is a perfect weapon today against Maoism, so it is completely opposed to the interests of the proletariat and the whole people. It is preoccupied with continuing capitalism indefinitely. It expresses itself in the revolutionary movement as not accepting discipline of the collective. The postmodernists yell and scream about accountability nonstop but what they really mean is accountability to them. By asking that we not have leadership, they ask that we not become a threat and materially what they are asking is that they be able to lead us—to nowhere.

Even after our founding, RGC still had postmodernism to uproot. It caused us to be indecisive, and it materially caused us to not develop strong enough consolidation and leadership, and therefore not to take enough action. It was even winning over some of our strongest supporters, because it is that ominous. To set healthy boundaries we have to take responsibility for our part in this, but also, we cannot take full responsibility for everyone around us, especially those who are in “spaces” we share but do not even support our work. We cannot take full responsibility for the actions of all individuals because when we do so we allow them not to grow.

Our collective unity was borne and consolidated out of the struggle against postmodernism, particularly against Charlotte Uprising. This is how Maoism first manifested in practice in Charlotte—the struggle against the enemies of our ideology should not cease. We have not ceased that struggle, and we have won supporters to our line on this. These supporters started with other activists who were part of the Charlotte Uprising crew with us and noticed the same problems we noticed, then the supporters of this line grew and poured over to Serve the People- Charlotte when CU tried to disrupt their serving. Now, the anti-identity opportunism line has grown outward to influence groups we’re not as close with—such as Customer 49. There are other supporters of this line further out even than this. Without our leadership there would be no fight against Charlotte Uprising, and therefore no fight against identity opportunism, in Charlotte.

We identified this postmodernist problem, starting with ourselves. We made necessary changes such as developing our line around gender, rejecting our own separation of women and LGBT struggles instead realizing that women’s and LGBT struggles both stem from patriarchy, embodied this understanding of proletarian feminism by kicking out abusers, encouraging action against those abusers, supporting women when threatened, and deepening our own understanding of postmodernism by studying it thoroughly. We defend these decisions.

For example, we made both the isolation Manuel issues of proletarian feminism (totalizing issues) because they are the underlying reasons behind both these abusers, and things that we have to fight structurally. We did this by taking hard lines against both these people when they refused discipline–leadership was part of both these proletarian feminist committees and lead both of these struggles. They determinedly opposed the soft “restorative justice” (which frame contradictions principally as individual, interpersonal conflicts instead of principally political) argument that was pushed by the group of postmodernists in both these committees. And people within both those committees were won over to our line of isolating abusers materially, which is correct. We will defend these decisions with action. We have had to be the ones to answer to these decisions and back them up. Organizations we lead and have influence in were the ones to officially release their isolation and back it up.

With Manuel we had made a tailist mistake of survivor self determination because we knew about their first sexual assault, and didn’t deal with it. We did this because the victim originally didn’t want us to and then didn’t respond to our requests that they work with us to. We take full responsibility for this mistake—and the root of the mistake of survivor self determination was actually a problem of us not taking enough leadership. Fear was also connected to this, in that we were fearful of how Manuel would react, and to correct that fear we are now taking courage. In attacking postmodernism materially we took leadership, and seized courage, correcting both these problems.

Running from confrontation is the reflection of a petty-bourgeois attitude. The bourgeoisie ultimately benefits from the working class taking a soft attitude towards confrontation. This is expressed in personal relationships within the revolutionary movement.

Without our leadership, D28 would not have happened. It was a victory that D28 started as something the Anti-Comm fascist group called an action for, and that we instead turned it into its opposite. We got experience using tactics never before used in Charlotte–certain tactics that we encourage others to take on for themselves without fear. We also learned lessons like not to chant nonstop because it stifles our energy, to oppose electoral politicians when they try to speak at these events, and so forth. If we had taken the postmodernist, in this case the “anti-confrontation” line, we would not have had this action at all. D28 was not a “perfect” action but it was, even with its mistakes, an overall success and we will defend it. No action is perfect because we are not idealists. In that situation there were two lines: one set whether or not we should do the action as dependent on whether or not the fascists would be there (which is tailing the fascists). The opposing line, pushed by our leadership and followed through to the end, said we should have the action regardless because Charlotte is our turf and we cannot allow the fascists to organize, or even threaten to organize here, that we should take control of the situation ourselves and build power against the fascists pre-emptively. The postmodernist’s line in that situation would be forgivable if they had uprooted the bad thinking that lead them to push this line, but they have not.

May Day was another action that we encouraged, uphold, and defend. Some activists were invited to plan as soon as the planning began. They declined saying they had more important things to do but would be part of the planning closer to the day of. Fine. So, we followed up with their commitment. They weren’t willing to use certain militant tactics, then they weren’t willing to even commit to certain tasks which involved no militancy, then they weren’t even willing to be part of the action AT ALL, all because leadership was asking why they were not willing to take risks.

Leadership must lead by example, because the collective is more important than the individual. Leadership is not inherently individualist and this is such a mechanical argument. This argument has been used against us by some activists, who said, “you are not leadership you are an individual and everything you touch turns to shit”. By saying this they are attacking the decisions we made against the enemies we have made along the way, when instead we uphold and defend these decisions. This argument has been used against all the great leaders we uphold—Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and also Presidente Gonzalo. Of course, we have not earned the leadership they did, but we follow in their footsteps and we have to start somewhere. Materially gains cannot be made when there is no leadership—this is true for the short term and the long term. In order to ask the group to uphold something, leadership must first uphold it themselves. That’s why we must encourage physical confrontation.

The reasons leadership is needed are used in certain examples. For example, a comrade, Comrade A, has said that we have to become more disciplined and must require each other to be on time. In a recent meeting, Comrade B was late. To correct this, Comrade C followed up with what leadership had suggested, which was that when the comrade is late, we directly confront the issue, and ask them why they are late. The late comrade’s answer was that she forgot things, etc. Comrade D followed up by criticizing her saying that was not a good excuse and she should plan better, and he was correct. This is an example of the mass line. One comrade pointed out the recurring issue. She gave a correct suggestion that we plan to be there early, and it was united with, and in addition, followed up with by leadership by adding a plan for how we enforce discipline, which is to ask why, and criticize if the excuse is bad. It worked. So here we see an example of why we need to have leadership follow up with things to correct the issue. Honestly, leadership should have instilled and followed up with this rule earlier, but that also means that people have to actually take the discipline and follow the rules which means they have to be won over to the idea of collective rules and discipline in the first place. At a certain point, postmodernists will reject even the tiniest bit of this, which we cannot tolerate.

Part of the line of us more effectively managing our time means setting healthy limits to how long our meetings go on. This also means that we need to be able to delegate without a constant barrage of postmodernist arguments and unwillingness to take action.

When a fight breaks out it is not principally a personal problem between the two individuals involved—it is principally rooted in the contradictions in class society in general, which is expressed through these two people in particular. The general is tied up with the particular and the political is tied up with the personal. The line that postmodernists push, which is that it’s between the two individuals primarily, is a postmodernist line. It confines situations to the interpersonal principally and therefore never allows us to take action against structural and totalizing issues. We acknowledge that personal issues exist. As communists, that is never the limit of the action we take.

Leadership is allowed to set a healthy boundary on behalf of the collective as a culmination of the experiences of the group up to this point with over a year of experience. We set healthy boundaries, such as concrete standards we hold that people must live up to in order to be a part of groups we are involved in, so that people understand we are serious about our time. Postmodernists in response to this have a lot of smart ass fucking remarks and cannot stand being “held accountable” without running and hiding from the action.

Some activists really do not support our work because we cannot delegate anything to them. Why can’t we delegate anything to them? Because they don’t like “authority”, just like all postmodernists. Authority is not the source of the problem–it’s who has authority within our society. In capitalist society the bourgeoisie has authority. What we are building in Charlotte is the cell of the body that will make revolution and give the proletariat authority over their oppressors. Even while small, our group has to be able to stand up on its own and we are not so desperate for supporters that we will let people talk to us in any type of disrespectful way that completely opposes our principles. And the root of the problem isn’t the disrespectful way some activists have responded to our leadership, it’s been the practice they don’t back it up with. We should not be expected to unite with attacks against us. If we’re not allowed to fight for our principles and for our ideology then we are fighting for nothing.


From our founding over a year ago to today, postmodernism has really had a hold on the groups we have influence in. Therefore, we have seized the opportunity to put into practice something we’ve been talking about for a while—upholding power and violence. For months and months these arguments have been going on, and at some point the time for talking ceases and the time for confrontation has arrived. Postmodernists speak a different language than us but violence is a universal language understood by all. We do not support all violence uncritically, but we do support justified violence. It matters not that it’s violence in and of itself, it’s what class is behind the violence. We are fighting for the interests of our class, for the proletariat. Even in a relatively small coalition, it clearly takes leadership to actually make the things needed to happen, happen. Without dedicated leadership the group will fall apart and flounder because people’s lives are busy.

There are comrades who must be won away from postmodernism, and we have “patiently” tried to do this, but it does reach a point where it becomes antagonistic. A power is growing and a postmodernist force is doing everything they can to stop that power from even budding.

As Maoists, we follow that the development of any revolutionary organization is marked by two-line struggle. There are two lines regarding leadership here. One line says we need leadership, and yes leadership must be accountable to the group, but the development of the organization will cease without leadership. And then the opposing line, which some activists are still towing, says that following the interests of the group negates the need for leadership. They say this because leadership is expressed in one person. The line upholding leadership is correct.

There are also two lines regarding boundaries. We should not mechanically negate boundaries at all; we need them to organize. However, as with everything else, we are more concerned with the collective than the individual overall. Using dialectical materialism, there is a contradiction between the collective and the individual. With any contradiction, we have to give one aspect more importance. In line with communism, the collective interests are more important than the individual interests. This is expressed in certain situations such as, if a comrade is late and does not have a serious excuse, their individual reasons for being late contradict the interests of the group, and they therefore admit this is wrong. Therefore the group which they have chosen to be part of is holding them to rectify something they also agreed is a problem. This is just one example of many.

We must be expected to follow up with the decisions we make to carry out solutions to problems. Some activists, who negate the need for leadership at all, have a problem with us following up in practice with what we believe in theory. Physically confronting someone who has for months tried to humiliate us for carrying out our lines, whether it came to our line on revolutionary sobriety, being too “serious”, who has run from even the smallest asks in practice, is justified. Destroying the property of someone who sabotages the revolution is correct. They were not going to take it seriously any other way. They were going to keep mouthing off at even the smallest requests. They would do this to any leadership that emerged in Charlotte, and this has been expressed in our collective. We say this with humility and without vanity, but standing up for ourselves. They want us to be so “humble” to the point that we let them control us. No.

The mass organizations we have influence in have also exhibited a lack of action and a lack of a fighting spirit. This is because in the past, we have chosen fear of confrontation instead of courage. What happened recently shows we are growing– we are not scared of confrontation, even within the revolutionary movement.

The Marxist theory of knowledge, leadership, revolutionary violence—all these things are connected. Winning people over away from postmodernism has been challenging. We are grateful for this challenge, as it has forced us to become better. We are grateful that we have had to face our fears, encourage people to burn the American flag publicly, confront the police, confront abusers, protect women when they are threatened for speaking out about their rape, and we are grateful that physical confrontation happens when it represents the culmination of the antagonistic contradiction between postmodernism and Maoism.

We seized the initiative by not waiting for postmodernism to attack us, instead attacking it first. We are not humiliated or ashamed for this, and instead stand by the decision. We put our principles into practice. We follow up with solutions to the problems in our group. We must be the change that we wish to see in the world, and we must be the change that we wish to see in the group.

Reject postmodernism in theory and in practice!

Build up the revolutionary movement and do not be silenced!

Stand by revolutionary violence!

-Red Guards Charlotte, May 2018

Celebrating May Day through rebellion

In February of 2018 we called on Charlotte to make May Day a revolutionary communist day of internationalism and rebellion. In the uphill battle to make Maoism a material force among the masses, we have succeeded in initiating the first steps towards revolution. We can classify May 1st, 2018 as a victory for the revolutionary forces in Charlotte. This action spit in the face of decades of liberalism in this city.

Politics in Command

We do not seek “left unity”–we seek the highest level of unity with the masses. This year we weren’t interested in building up May Day with groups who seek to take the rebellious history out of May Day.

To paraphrase La Gauche Prolétarienne, we are for partisan action and against mass inaction. Many on the “left” in Charlotte see no point in acting unless the numbers are large. While we do want large numbers of the working class to take up proletarian revolution, what we don’t want is the desire for large numbers to paralyze us from taking necessary action. The left in Charlotte is toothless, and has that way been for years now.

A protest on the enemies’ terms is a parade, nothing more. The NGO left, just like the fascists and the state, fear rebellion. Rebellion and destruction of the existing order would mean the abdication of their vaunted positions of royalty a top the kingdom of social capital they have reigned over for so long. We work in principled unity with organizations who are truly fighting for a better world, we send a huge thank you to the comrades over at Libre, Antifascists Charlotte, and Serve the People – Charlotte, we are eternally grateful for your support.

As outreach for this march, we passed out flyers in multiple proletarian neighborhoods, stuck up flyers, and did a fair share of online outreach. Though we learned the masses of people don’t know much about May Day, the passing out of literature in proletarian neighborhoods without follow up was a mistake. The mistake comes from a left deviation in our mass work, in which we believed that if we told people about why May Day is in their interests that alone will lead to the masses to spontaneously coming out. What this formula doesn’t account for is the fact that workers are still not conscious as a class in the necessity of militant action. That part takes awhile to build up. Our energy should have gone equally into steeling our forces under the line we took for May Day, while also doing outreach regularly among the working class. Educating on May Day is a crucial step but teaching the necessity of militant action, through practice and theory, is even more crucial if we want to lead the working class. What we will do next time is communicate our message by referencing our own actions–like this one–which prove to the masses that we are militant and will not be overrun. The people want action. They see talk without enough action and they don’t believe it—we don’t blame them.

Past “May Day” in Charlotte

Among Charlotte “organizing” folklore was May Day 2017, where 8,000 people marched through the streets of downtown Charlotte. This gets thrown in the face of revolutionaries who, with a materialist perspective, see that 8,000 people in the streets protesting is positive but we ask the question: where are those 8,000 people now? Who is engaging with those workers today? Where is the organization that lead that march now? The NGOs fail to analyze concrete reality from concrete conditions. They would have you believe that this march disrupted so much that Charlotte will never be the same when it’s just the opposite. Charlotte remains the same– the working class is still toiling and exploited. Many among the working class and its allies, especially oppressed nations, are fearful of being deported or murdered by the police.

Many of the sideline critics of Revolutionary May Day 2018 forget that May Day 2017 was a culmination of a national day of action known as a “Day without immigrants.” That doesn’t take away from impressiveness of the sheer numbers. Yet it can’t be forgotten that the anti-war protests of the early 2000’s, the Women’s march, Black Lives Matter marches after the Ferguson uprising, were quantifiably substantial, but qualitatively suffered the same fate—sputtering out or funneled into the hands of the Democratic party. We are not mass protests, and we are against protesting for the sake of protesting.

Marx taught us that “revolutions are the locomotives of history” and the masses are coal which light the fire needed to run the engine of history. Therefore, there is the kernel of truth that mass action is needed to move history forward but to what end? If our class isn’t being galvanized to engage in mass action against capitalism-imperialism, then protests should be for what they are: necessary tactics but not inherently revolutionary.

However, our march did share a district similarity with the much-lauded march of 8,000, they both occurred in Downtown Charlotte. Downtown is the financial center of Charlotte headquarters of Bank of America and Duke Energy. Charlotte is the second largest banking center in the US–with that comes a huge influx of capital being stored for the exploiters. Bank of America holds the active capital for the business owners to the monopoly capitalists. Without banks acting as holders of capital there can be no ownership over the means of production. Capital is the land, factory, machinery and money needed to hire labor. As production cannot happen without capital, banks are among the main enemies of the people. So, we marched through the downtown that was built by the working class all funded by the banks Charlotte holds so dearly. We specifically assembled in downtown to say, “fuck you Bank of America”, “fuck you America” for its crimes against humanity. Both of those entities represent two of our main enemies, and the masses must know this clearly.


Flag Burning–Every Communist’s Calling

Communists have a duty to put into practice the principles we hold. When we say “fuck America” we back it the fuck up. We say it for the hundreds of years of exploitation, slavery, genocide and imperialist wars, therefore it was only fitting to burn the flag of terrorist number 1.
After taking the streets for about a block, our supporters stopped in front of Bank of America. This was across from the Omni on Trade and College. A moment of silence was held for Justin Carr, a Black man who was killed protesting during the Charlotte rebellion, and our supporters proceeded to pull out the flag of our oppressors. The pigs snatched the flag from our supporters, but those supporters ended up getting it back because of Johnson vs. Texas which says that burning the American flag is a right all Americans have. Our supporters then proceeded to burn the flag. The look of agony and disgust in the eyes of the pigs was beautiful. This was the highest point in the march–the energy was exciting, the pigs and patriots flustered, and our people were unified. The people recorded the action and some chanted with us for a bit.

Who are our friends? Who are our enemies?

Principally the pigs were our enemy throughout, but as soon as the march reached its climax—Sam Bethea, the local street preacher, came to harass us again. As he usually does, he stumbled into our crowd chanting “Jesus Saves” to detract from our action. In his actions he is attempting to show us why we are all misguided youth who need God’s light to receive our salvation.  Under “peaceful” conditions, he is a harmless street preacher who doesn’t spew hate or bigotry, but rather a person with a competing ideology attempting to usurp the need for any sort of action to end this misery. He is a blackhole, sucking the light and energy out of our marches. He has been louder, with a seemingly-unlimited amount of energy. He should have been kicked out of our presence and shut down. His chanting turned a section of the masses looking on in support of our march against us; he was able to frame us as misguided, petulant youth, while his two-word catchphrase was the actual salvation—and not communism. It was our march, and a plan of action must be taken to neutralize non-state enemies of the people. In essence, he is nothing more than an opportunist, and a snitch who in the past has gotten our comrades arrested.

Kidnapped Comrades

As the march came to an end, Sam followed us until we got to our dispersal location—distracting us the entire way. We made it to the ending location, and as we let our guard down the pigs got the orders to arrest 3 of our supporters. The pigs blindsided them, slammed a comrade up against a wall, and tackled another one to the ground. The pigs clearly had an order called in to arrest our supporters, teach them a lesson, and end the protest. They don’t actually know or understand the law, and this can be used to our tactical advantage in the future. The main lesson we learned was that the pigs are the enemies of the people. They serve the exploiters, and brutalize working class people every day. So to them we say, “Fuck you and every other pig.” We will never fear their badges, their clubs, pepper spray or guns. For every one of us who gets captured by the state, two or three more of us will come forward, inspired by the action. We seized the moment, and the morale.

To the supporters who were arrested, we salute you. We salute your sacrifice. We work and fight to develop the courage to fight for liberation of all of humanity like you all do. Two of our supporters have been placed on suspension because of arrest and are losing income as we speak. This is the state’s ploy to stop future rebellion. They want to place huge physical, emotional and mental stress on them and their loved ones, so the idea of engaging in another militant action never crosses their mind. But as communists we are fearless, we won’t back down—we will take care of our own, to continue the fight through to the end!

Please consider donating to support these comrades for their sacrifices, send money via Google pay to:

Where to next?

Despite our small numbers, this revolutionary May Day was a step in the absolutely correct direction. The planning of this action marked our independence, and a moving up from where we were before. Our supporters publicly bore the hammer and sickle for the first time in a direct action.

We flew high the red flag in solidarity with the Palestinian people who have been protesting for 6 weeks now to reclaim their stolen land. During that 6-week period over 44 people have been killed and 1,700 have been injured. We rebel in their honor. We fought for Ahed Tamimi who, as we speak, is sitting in the dungeons of the Israeli state. We fought for Janisha Fonville, Daquan Westbrook aka Donkey Cartel, Jonathan Ferrell, Lareko Williams, and Keith Lamont Scott all who have been murdered by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department. We fought for all those who came from disaster or war-torn countries protected under “temporary protective status” and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) who are under threat of deportation. We will continue the fight every day for all oppressed and exploited people who are suffering under capitalism-imperialism globally. We will not relent until our ideology—Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism—has been grasped by the masses worldwide.

The struggle is just beginning. We have a new task ahead of us: build up Red May Day 2019! With everything we have learned from this year’s action, we must push that momentum from the refreshing militancy of May Day 2018 into our plans for next year. May Day is our day, it is a day for our class. We must cherish it with celebration and righteous rebellion.

The masses scream out for revolution–heed their call!

Impose the red banner against all who attack it!

-Red Guards Charlotte, May 8th, 2018

Isolate the Abuser Manuel Fuentes from All Revolutionary Spaces

We are hosting this statement for a guest, a local Proletarian Feminist Committee.

Name: Manuel Fuentes

Pronouns: He/ they

Facebook Accounts: Ocelotl Tecciztactl and Ocelotl Nahuatl

Instagram Handle: ocelotl_tecciztactl

Phone Number: 704-605-1269



As proletarian feminists, it is our duty to take action against all expressions of patriarchal violence. We formed this committee to address sexual assault allegations against the former activist named Manuel Fuentes, who is also known as “Oce”. We find Manuel guilty of over three instances of sexual assault including one instance of rape. The sexual assaults were directed at three people total, who all experience the oppression that women experience. In this case the survivors were one woman and two comrades who are read as women.


Concrete grounds for isolation

Case 1

In the spring of 2017 Manuel sexually assaulted a person, Comrade A, in a platonic setting. Manuel was giving this person a massage and had already been firmly told what Comrade A’s boundaries were ahead of time. He violated those boundaries touching this person sexually. Immediately he was told, by Comrade A, that he must stop. This constitutes sexual assault and there is no excuse.

Comrade A informed other comrades about what happened. These comrades proposed a way to deal with it, but ultimately waited for Comrade A to approve what course of action should be taken in direct relation to this case. The result was that immediate and direct action was not taken. The Proletarian Feminist Committee (PFC) recognizes that this was a mistake, because they should have taken action regardless of what the survivor wanted. This mistake was rooted in the identity politics of survivor self-determination. It is a rotten tailism: sometimes survivors either don’t want to be a part of the process, or cannot be. It should not be up to the opinion of the victim to decide what should be done in regard to an abuser who has access to whole groups of people. This is because the political line of how to deal with abusers is more important than who it comes from. It is the duty of the organizations involved to handle sexual assault allegations correctly, and it takes correct leadership to do so. It is not Comrade A’s fault that this was not handled correctly. Some of us were part of this group and self-criticize for following the incorrect line and failing to take initiate an official process. We should have temporarily isolated him from all spaces upon learning about this, and started this process long ago.

Manuel was asked to leave Serve the People – Charlotte (STP-CLT) as a result of the knowledge of the sexual assault, but it was not made clear to him that this was what influenced the decision. Before the advent of this Proletarian Feminist Committee, he was confronted privately about the sexual assault of Comrade A and admitted to it. He has also admitted to this act in writing.

Because of the mistake of following the survivor self-determination line, Manuel was able to continue materially unchecked for almost a year, and it resulted in the patriarchal abuse of other comrades.

Case 2

In the fall of 2017 Manuel raped Comrade B in a romantic setting. The encounter began consensually but consent can be taken at any time. The victim told him to stop and he continued for ten minutes which constitutes rape. There is no excuse that he did not know, because verbally Comrade B denied consent and told him to stop. Comrade B also reported other instances of sexual coercion. He pressured them into anal play repeatedly.

The victim kept a journal of parts of their relationship and was able to tell us the date of one of the assaults. The Proletarian Feminist Committee found out about the rape once we had already temporarily isolated Manuel.

Additionally, Manuel’s relationship with Comrade B included gaslighting, which is emotional abuse. Although gaslighting is a term that can be misapplied, it is a real thing and Manuel was guilty of it in this relationship. Here we define gaslighting as doing or saying something, especially during an argument or antagonistic moment, and later denying that it happened. This denial that it happened causes the person who experienced it to question their own sanity although they are correct. When confronted about these behaviors by the PFC, Manuel denied them and tried to make himself the victim.

Comrade B is concerned that Manuel could possibly release private video or photos in an attempt to seek revenge on this comrade for speaking out. This would do nothing but show him for the abuser he is.

Manuel has dismissed Comrade B, and we are sure he will continue to dismiss them, using a classic misogynist trope. He has portrayed Comrade B as the vengeful ex-partner who is making this up out of spite or because Manuel “doesn’t want to be with” them. This is not true. These are not lies made up out of spite, and the PFC investigated and has concluded that the things listed here did occur.

Case 3

Manuel admitted to gaslighting a woman with whom they were involved sexually in the fall of 2017. This intimate partner, Comrade C, was coerced. In this assault, Manuel put his hand down her pants, to which she replied, “stop”. He continued to put his hand down her pants.

Comrade C said that the two had spoken after this first sexual assault and Manuel admitted that they should not have “done that.” He denied this when confronted about it by the PFC.

She also told us about a second situation that also constitutes sexual assault in which Manuel exposed their genitalia to her non-consensually.

The PFC found out about these sexual assaults  in the days leading up to the temporary isolation of Manuel.


Intervention of the Proletarian Feminist Committee

Part of the consequence of following the line of survivor self-determination was that women victimized by Manuel were objectively pushed out of revolutionary spaces. Correcting the mistake of the handling of the first sexual assault, as well as upon learning about the second, two members of the PFC told Manuel to remove themselves from political and social spaces. This confrontation happened in person, in mid-March at the last Revolutionary Study Group (RSG) session.

The following day, the committee nominated a liaison to communicate directly with Manuel. The liaison re-stated what was happening and explained to Manuel which spaces he was isolated from. He responded negatively. This screenshot is being shared to show Manuel’s reluctance to accept discipline from the PFC.

At this time he had already admitted to one sexual assault so the allusions to “not being given clarity as to the accusations” are lies. He also called us “fascists” for standing up to him and handling him.

On the following Monday, Manuel attended a social event that one of the victims had been promoting publicly and was attending with mutual friends. Upon arriving, he walked straight up to them to greet the mutual friends. At this point he had already been told not to enter social spaces shared with the victims. He disregarded the isolation and the victim in the situation felt intimidated as a result.

Manuel was also asked to meet with the PFC. There was difficulty finding a time he was available, but he agreed to meet on the following Sunday, 12 days later. When this day arrived, the PFC was unsure whether Manuel would show or not. They informed Manuel that they would only wait 30 minutes from the set start time for him to arrive. He arrived 29 minutes late. During the meeting, which was recorded, Manuel admitted to sexually assaulting Comrade A and gaslighting Comrade C.  The entire time he attempted to change the focus onto wrongs done to him and denied all of the behaviors experienced by Comrade B (the sexual assault of this individual was not known at the time, and Manuel did confirm the events of the interaction when asked a few days later). Toward the last ten minutes of the 2-hour meeting, the committee tried to convince Manuel to participate in rectification, explaining why it’d be beneficial to him and the people around him. In the last two minutes Manuel stated, “I am just being petty… y’all have had control of the situation the whole damn time… And the fact that y’all need a concrete answer knowing that I’m going to say yes anyways”. Manuel was asked repeatedly for verbal confirmation or denial of the process, and as the PFC stood to leave he said yes therefore agreeing to acknowledge his behaviors and participate in a 3-month re-education process. This was going to include meeting with two PFC team members once a week to read about proletarian feminism as well as read about consent.

Manuel was given one week to write a statement on his actions to share on social media and with local revolutionary groups. During that week representatives of the PFC met with him once to assist with writing the statement and he sent a first draft to the liaison.


That weekend, the PFC was informed that Manuel had contacted one of the victims—Comrade B–after being told explicitly not to do so by the individual as well as the PFC as a concrete condition of his rectification. In his message, he stated “…if I owe anyone anything and need to be held accountable then it would be to you and only you”. This contradicted his earlier denial, to us, that he had done anything wrong to them.

At the same time Manuel reached out to one of the PFC members individually to inform them that he was not going to do the process. This emotional manipulation towards a woman read comrade and the use of his kids and class background to gain sympathy is disgusting.

Regardless of his own willingness, Manuel violated the terms of rectification by reaching out to a victim, and we are isolating him as a result. The choice to isolate Manuel is a choice to put the safety of women over abusers who commit patriarchal acts such as rape, sexual assault and harassment, emotional abuse, and physical abuse.

We anticipate that some may object to the choice of the PFC to proceed with isolation as opposed to prolonged engagement with Manuel, due to the fact that his behaviors have not been rectified or transformed.

We do acknowledge that abusers can be transformed. However, we have limited time for transforming people who we have found guilty of abuse, and who don’t meet the bare minimum requirements for rectification. Due to the reality of our limited time, we must make the distinction between comrades who can be struggled with and those who cannot be. This choice must be made decisively because we are not idealists and we cannot devote all our time to one person especially someone who sexually assaulted multiple women. We reject restorative justice which prioritizes the abuser.

Manuel was given multiple chances. He violated multiple terms of the rectification process knowingly. Therefore, we urge everyone reading this to isolate Manuel Fuentes. We must unite to protect women wholeheartedly, and we must choose to stand on the side of women oppressed by patriarchy across the world.

Do not allow Manuel in political or social spaces, and do not respond to them if they contact you. Please reach out to if you have information or questions.

Struggle against survivor self-determination!

Protect women at all costs!

Apply proletarian feminism without fear!

-Proletarian Feminist Committee, April 2018


Solidarity with the Palestinian Land Day


On March 30th, 1976, thousands of Palestinians marched from the northern region of Galilee all the way down to Negev in the south, protesting the Israeli government’s decision to steal a massive amount of Palestinian owned land. Before the decision had been made to forcibly displace the remaining Palestinian population, Palestinians already faced discrimination and intimidation for taking up space that the Israeli government wanted to steal for settlements. During this fateful demonstration, six Palestinians were murdered by the Israeli Defense Force (IDF). The anniversary of this demonstration is celebrated every year as Land Day, a reminder to Israel and the world that Palestinians are still fighting for their right to their ancestral home.

This past Friday, March 30th, 2018, over a thousand Palestinians returned and marched towards the illegal settlements occupying their land in a march of return. The day before the demonstration, the IDF set up barbed wire fences to lock the protesters in. Around 200 Israeli snipers shot live rounds into the crowed of marchers, shooting 400 people, many of which are in critical condition, and killing 16 people. The number of casualties will continue to grow as time passes and more people are discovered or pass away due to their wounds. The names available of those martyred are:

Wahid Nasrallah Abu Sammour, age 27

Mohammed Kamal Najjar, age 25

Mohammed Naim Abu Amro. Age 27

Amin Mansour Abu Moammar, age unconfirmed

Ibrahim Abu Sha’ar, age 22

Abdul-Fattah Bahjat Abdul-Nabi, age 18

Mahmoud Sa’adi Rohmi. Age 33

Sari Waleed Abu Odah, age unconfirmed

Hamdan Ismael Abu Amsha, age unconfirmed

Jihad Ahmad Freina, age 34

Ahmad Ibrahim Ashour Odah, age 16

Abdul-Qader Merdhi al-Hawarjri, age 42

Jihad Zoheir Abu Jamous, age 30

In Charlotte our supporters are involved in Palestinian solidarity organizing, engaging in education events about the incarceration of Ahed Tamimi, al-Nakba, the history of Zionism, and the history of Palestinian resistance. This is important to do on a campus where Zionism is rampant, and organizations recruit students to attend birthright trips to Israel. Currently, our solidarity with the Palestinian people is on an educational basis but their struggle deserves for our solidarity to be taken to stronger levels of concentration. Communists in the imperialist core need to be leading the active boycott against buying Israeli made goods funding the occupation, make distinct connections between the plight of Palestinians and all oppressed, colonized and displaced people around the world to awaken the masses for revolution in this country.

Every year since 1976, exiled Palestinians commemorate and remember the martyrs of their struggle for land and national liberation. Every Land Day demonstration Palestinians have been murdered and attacked by Israeli forces. Palestinians still come out in the thousands, knowing that their fight for return to ancestral lands can end in death. To many Palestinians, death is freedom; freedom to die on their land while fighting the occupation in a final act of resistance, to die for the struggle of your people’s liberation. The Palestinian people’s connection to their homeland is the driving force behind their national liberation struggle. Survivors of the first acts of occupation and al-Nakba are still fighting for a free Palestine. There are people who were born and raised by the dead sea, now barred from setting foot on the beach, not able to get close without risking being shot by the border or outside of check points. These are justifications of why the Land Day demonstrations have not and will not stop until every Palestinian refugee and descendent can enter their homeland as a free independent nation of Palestine.





–Red Guards Charlotte, April 2018



From the old, the new shall be born—Announcing RGC

Queen City Maoist Collective, from this day forward, is Red Guards Charlotte.

In our year of practice we have reached a qualitatively higher level of unity with the Red Guards collectives, principally Red Guards Austin.

“The Communist Party must lead that which it creates, and that which it does not create, it must aim to lead it.”

The Red Guards Collectives are the Bolsheviks of today. Through practice RGA has proven their ability to lead what has been created because of their example—the newer collectives rising to uphold and defend Maoism. Those collectives and projects who have not recognized the correctness of RGA’s guidance have suffered as a result—they have either stopped existing or have become revisionist. You are either with us or you are against us. The Red Guard movement is the only Maoist movement in the US.

All human history has culminated in the formation of the singular path to human liberation—Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which is principally Maoism. Maoism is a science that was consolidated through PPW lead by the Communist Party of Peru (PCP), and it must impose itself or capitalism will continue.

Because of the example of Protracted People’s War in Peru, taken from China where it was first theorized, we hold that PPW is universal. Protracted People’s War can be applied anywhere on Earth to overthrow capitalism, including in the imperialist countries. We know that today there is no way to make revolution except PPW—it is the expression of struggle itself.

Militarization is a key component of the leading role the Party must play in initiating PPW. If militarization is not prioritized, then it will not happen. Concentric construction states that the Party is the highest form of organization, that mass work is done through the army, the principle organization, and spreads out to the united front. Militarization with politics in command is the thread running through all three instruments. We seek to establish a New Power—therefore we must build the Party along the lines of concentric construction.

We are proud to hold high the banner of the Red Guards and share it in principled unity with Red Guards Austin, Red Guards Los Angeles, Red Guards Kansas City, and Red Guards Pittsburgh. These are our sister Collectives who we are humbled to accept criticism from and learn from.

Build up the Red Guard cells!

Plant the seeds of the Party!

Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism!

—Red Guards Charlotte, March 2018

another new thing

The italicized quote above is from We Are the Continuators

Defend Comrade Dallas and Fight for His Freedom!


Photo sent in by a supporter.

For the comrade who has sacrificed his freedom for Maoism.

For the comrade who carries the burden of the oppressed and exploited worldwide.

For the comrade who has spilled blood, and broken bones.

Our comrade Dallas has been locked up in the dungeons of the state. He was jailed on March 9th with bullshit charges and remains incarcerated as we write. Our comrade Dallas means to the world to us. He lives every day knowing that his life is not his own, and instead dedicates it to the masses of people, who ache for political power. He teaches us unceasing struggle against our enemies, and the art of transformation of our friends. He shows us how to defend our women and LGBT comrades like our lives depend on it. Our comrade Dallas has shown us what it means to be a servant of the people.

Anyone who genuinely serves the people can experience a fate like Dallas, but he has never cowered. He fights every day against the terrorism our class is facing and is being punished by the state for defending our class. In these hard times while our comrade is locked up, we need more defenders of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to rise from the seeds he has planted in all of us. Until he gets out and we can rejoice in his freedom, we will fight tirelessly in the same struggle he carries in his heart every day. This comrade’s example has given our hearts tremendous purpose. Many of us are recovering drug addicts, who have wandered through life aimlessly for years, yearning for a reason to live. To live and to die for our class—there is no greater purpose. To live among a person so unflinchingly dedicated, we are sincerely grateful.

Dallas is an expecting father; his fiancée will be left alone to raise their child if the state keeps him kidnapped. Now the impetus is on all of us. Comrades, if you like and follow our work, please write any inspirational or kind words you would like sent to him and send them to We urge you to donate generously to the cause by sending money to PayPal: Study the work of the organizations he supports. Learn from them and our great teachers, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Gonzalo.

Become the fighter that Dallas is!

Nothing less, freedom for Dallas now!



– Queen City Maoist Collective, March 2018


 If you have not already, please read this piece from RGA detailing what’s going on with comrade Dallas.

If you’ve already read the one above and want to be even more up to date on the campaign for his freedom, read this update.

Revolutionary May Day in the Queen City!

Towards Revolutionary May Day

*Note: One slight edit was made to this piece after being published. The content of this piece has remained the same otherwise.* 


The world proletarian struggle must intensify. On this May Day 2018, we call on all forces—communists, anarchists, anti-fascists, anti-imperialists and all those who want to see a better world—to join us in Charlotte.

The world revolution is the duty of all those who seek freedom. Internationalism is never secondary. This revolutionary May Day we must raise the red flag of the proletariat to fight imperialism. Our fate as one multinational class lies in taking up our ideology as an indestructible weapon, to arm the masses in waging a relentless war against the exploiters. Anything less than an overthrow of the existing order is not a revolution, and without a revolution our class can never be free.

The proletariat is faced with relentless attacks—from profit extracting and soul sucking jobs, to murderous pigs, unyielding deportations, the war on reproductive rights, domestic violence, jails for social control, vacant homes, and imperialist wars, to continued occupation. The plight of the proletariat will never cease under capitalism-imperialism.  Unequivocally, we say that the only way to ameliorate these problems is revolution. This will take a theory that can guide the international proletariat and a united front of all those who can be united in crushing imperialism. We call on all those ready for revolution (and those still not sure) on May Day to bring the struggle to the ruling classes’ front door.


The beast that is US imperialism

“Ever since the monster of imperialism came into being, the affairs of the world have become so closely interwoven that it is impossible to separate them. We Chinese have the spirit to fight the enemy to the last drop of our blood, the determination to recover our lost territory by our own efforts, and the ability to stand on our own feet in the family of nations. But this does not mean that we can dispense with international support; no, today international support is necessary for the revolutionary struggle of any nation or country.” – Mao, “On Tactics Against Japanese Imperialism”

There are innumerable examples of terrorist number 1—the US, led by the proto-fascist Trump—causing misery for the masses of the world. Continuing the legacy of this capitalist-imperialist beast, Trump named Jerusalem as the location of the US embassy to “Israel,” spitting once again on the face of the occupied Palestinian people. Jerusalem represents the Palestinian crisis of continued settler-colonial domination of their historic land. The US is the largest contributor to the Israeli defense budget that is used to terrorize Palestinians, like Ahed Tamimi, daily.  By moving the location of the embassy, the US further demonstrates that it will be Israel’s biggest guarantor in finalizing the theft of Palestinian land. Revolutionaries in the US are obliged to resist this imperialist machine and support the national liberation struggle of Palestine.

The US has always shown a complete disregard for the lives of people in third world countries. Lest we forget that the US is also a settler colonial project that conducted the genocide of the indigenous people.  Recently, Trump’s administration also ended “temporary protected status”, where immigrants from around the world were able to migrate to the United States because of dilapidated economic conditions, civil wars, or unlivable infrastructure in their home countries. This change in policy will result in a massive deportation of people from oppressed nations. Deportations on occupied territory. The largest group affected is from El Salvador, where hundreds of thousands of Salvadorians were admitted into the US because of a devastating earthquake in 2001. El Salvador, due to dependency on imperialism, couldn’t fix the serious damage resulting from the earthquake, so instead they allowed many of their citizens to seek refuge in the US.

All this links back to imperialism, where the imperialist nation reaps the benefits of war and creates a volatile economic condition, forcing the oppressed nation into dependency from the oppressor, and resulting in poor infrastructure that can’t withstand any natural disaster. Because of economic deprivation and civil wars people seek a ‘better life’ escape from the uninhabitable nation to the imperialist nation. Though the bourgeois media claims immigrants come to the US to escape their homeland and find the “American dream,” we know that this dream was built on the backs of Indigenous people who were victims of genocide, African slaves, and the super exploitation of the third world.  For stability to exist in an imperialist country, the rest of the world must be in ruins, and our consciousness of that destruction must be nonexistent. Much like how Marx described commodity fetishism as a process where the consumer only sees the product for itself and not the labor that went into making that commodity, imperialism separates us daily from the benefits we reap. The further we are separated from the labor needed to create the cheap commodities we cherish, the easier it becomes for us to be complacent in a worldwide exploitative system.


Our comrades in the struggle

We send our deepest solidarity to all the comrades around the world struggling for a liberated humanity. As Red Guards Austin, the leading force in the US Maoist movement, did last year, we extend our hand of solidarity to all MLM collectives around the US: Red Guards LA, Red Guards Pittsburgh, Kansas City Revolutionary Collective and Revolutionary Association of Houston. Here in North Carolina, we send our revolutionary greetings to: the IWW, Shelby Redneck Revolt, Charlotte Antifascists and all those in NC fighting for revolution. Finally, we send our humble solidarity to those around the world waging people’s wars and those fighting for humanity: Communist Party of India (Maoist), Communist Party of the Philippines, PCR-RCP (Montreal), DHKP-C, TKP-ML, Parti Communiste Maoiste and many more genuine revolutionary forces around the world! We are indebted to you and your dedication.

The fights these comrades are waging are bound up in our fight as well. Only social chauvinists cannot see the inextricable link between the proletariat throughout the world. It is no coincidence that the height of anti-revisionist communist organizing in the US happened when socialist China was leading the world proletariat to new heights in The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. As people around the world were rising, the impact on communists throughout the world was tremendous.


May Day means fight back!

What does May Day mean? In 1886 in the US, workers were demanding an 8-hour work day with no cut in pay. In the culmination of months of agitation by workers across the country, the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor called for a general strike on May 1st, 1886. An estimated half-a million people went on strike on this fateful May Day. In Chicago, workers at a McCormick plant, known for their militancy and their opposition to greedy bosses and sell out scabs (those who go into work when the plant is on strike) became a leading force in what became known as the Haymarket Riot. On May 3rd, after being locked out of the McCormick plant since early February, the striking workers rushed a group of scabs as they were leaving the job. Subsequently, the police fired into a crowd of indignant workers, killing a confirmed 2 civilians, with reports of up to 6. The next day, a group of anarchists and other revolutionaries called for an action at the Haymarket Square in Chicago to avenge the martyrs from the day before. They set off bombs into a line of pigs, and the pigs began to fire back into the crowd. Six pigs were killed, and four people were martyred, with at least 70 other workers and civilians injured. In honor of the courage our class has always possessed, we continue our fight until we reach our goal: communism.


Our ideology from the furnace of class struggle

Our revolutionary spirit is borne from a rich history of class struggle—lead by the greats Marx, Lenin and Mao. In their footsteps we fight for revolution in our lifetime. Marx and Engels brought to light capitalism’s gory exploitation, dialectical materialism, and scientific socialism. Lenin grasped their teachings and pushed them further to analyze the world under the grip of imperialism, elucidating on the theory of the state and the need for a vanguard party and an international revolution to destroy imperialism. He was among the leaders of the Great October Socialist Revolution, which led to the first socialist state, following and advancing the lessons of Paris Commune. Stalin concretized the principles of Leninism and lead the first socialist state while under attack from imperialists and enemies within the USSR. Mao, following in the footsteps of Marx and Lenin, lead a quarter of the world’s population to liberation in the mid-twentieth century. Mao was an expert communist philosopher and military strategist— he led the Chinese people through the agrarian revolution, the Long March, the anti-Japanese war and the final war against the nationalist Kuomintang. He led in continuity of the great teachers before him to develop the law of contradiction, the theory of protracted people’s war, and the theory of class struggle continuing under socialism, demonstrated in the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Stalin synthesized Lenin’s great teachings as a higher stage of Marxism, Marxism-Leninism. Like Stalin, Presidente Gonzalo lead a raging people’s war in Peru from 1980 to the late 1990s, coming very close to seizing state power; Gonzalo, and the Communist Party of Peru, formulated Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the 3rd and highest stage of revolutionary communism. These are our great teachers, and we firmly believe that Maoism in the hands of the proletariat creates a weapon no enemy can defeat.


Raise the red flag, unite in Charlotte—fight for revolution!

On this International Workers Day, we take up the red flag! We are fighting for the world. We orient ourselves to the world revolution, principally. Too many “communists” before us have fallen into the same great nation chauvinism indicative of revolutionaries in the imperialist countries. Our solidarity is with the global proletariat and those fighting for revolution. We must fight on May Day to bring the revolutionary fervor of the masses to the imperialist bourgeoisie’s front door. We can’t rely on the most oppressed and exploited throughout the world to carry the world revolution – it is our duty as revolutionaries to make revolution here as the truest sign of solidarity with the third world. If you believe capitalism-imperialism cannot be reformed and that it is a plague on the entire world, that must be destroyed—join us on May 1st as we bring the ruckus to the Queen City in the service of the world revolution.


All out for a revolutionary May Day!


Move Heaven and Earth for the world revolution!


Self-determination for all occupied people! 


Solidarity with the third world by making revolution in the first!


 -Queen City Maoist Collective, 2018




Further Reading:

  1. “On Tactics Against Japanese Imperialism”:

Make the leap from knowledge to practice: Summation of D28

As we described here and here, an anti-communist group said months ago that they would come to Marshall Park on December 28th. What really happened was that they soon cancelled their march citing “safety concerns”, and no anti-com group showed on the day December 28th. The following is an analysis of this experience.

Summary of events

Antifascists in Charlotte propagated an event to de-platform fascists at 4 PM at the Martin Luther King statue in Marshall Park and arrived there at that time. From 4:00 until about 5:30 they stayed at that location, which is on some high ground near the perimeter of the park. During this relatively long amount of time a fascist, who was recording this group, was identified and run out of the park by local antifascists. Antifascists in Charlotte did not move the perimeter down closer to the other antifascists, as well as the Indivisible crowd that was gathering, until it was getting dark and the rally was starting by the pond. In total there were about 45 masked antifascists and probably another 55 liberal attendants there. During the rally there were some uniting points among all those present, but there was also some back and forth between antifascists and Indivisible when the organizers of the Indivisible march promoted electoral politics and the murderous protectors of capital, CMPD. After this a sidewalk march lasting about 45 minutes went on throughout downtown, leading back to the park. About half way through the march the liberals separated from the larger group of antifascists (which consisted of both Charlotte and visiting comrades). The reasons that the march split are not completely clear to us. The march ended back at Marshall Park and it was over at that time.

During this demonstration there were things that went relatively well, and things that need great improvement. The best things that antifascists in Charlotte did represented a refusal to compromise politics. These good aspects principally derived from unity in strategy, and manifested in two ways: physically driving out the one fascist who showed, and shutting down the politicians who made statements in support of the police. The errors that occurred here, which were serious and many, were due principally to mechanical materialism and also manifested in lack of thorough planning.

Success or failure?

To put Thursday’s action into context, this was the first antifascist action we have had disciplined participation in. Concealing one’s identity is a misdemeanor in the state of North Carolina. What can be said is this experience put into practice the slogan, “dare to struggle, dare to win” because for once in Charlotte a group united by a common enemy used the masking tactic and encouraged sympathetic onlookers to join with flags and masks. Legalism is very popular in the US left today, and our city and state make no exception to this. Legalists would insist that we in practice tail the anti-mask law— in facing this question they often show up to antifascist protests unmasked using the argument, “it’s not worth risking arrest this time.” But to get arrested for this would’ve been worth the benefit of showing some relative degree of militancy, however modest. For what’s one misdemeanor charge compared to the risk of posing absolutely no threat by not incorporating even the most basic tactic in militancy?

This demonstration had to happen so that we did not continually hold our heads down and let the fascists dictate our confrontations out of fear. On the bright side what was proposed to happen on this night was an anticommunist march and what really happened was an antifascist march. In this way, the enemy’s threat was largely turned against him and so in some respect antifascists in Charlotte were successful.

However, overall we cannot claim yesterday’s action as a complete victory. It had relatively progressive aspects that needed to happen and be tested out. But if we measure the success by the fact that only one fascist showed up and that no one was arrested, then we are only using factors determined by outside forces. To do this would neglect the necessity for antifascists to take on responsibility for internal things that happened, and be accountable to our ideology: Maoism. The analysis of this action comes down to one fundamental question: can all the shortcomings be blamed on outside factors, or can we learn from these failures, synthesize them into more knowledge, and in the future make the leap from knowledge to practice again?

The Peruvian Communist Party (PCP) writes in its Fundamental Documents, when speaking about Mao, that:  

“In Marxist philosophy he developed the essence of dialectics, the law of contradiction, establishing it as the only fundamental law; and besides his profound dialectical understanding of the theory of knowledge, whose center are the two leaps that make up its law (from practice to knowledge and vice versa, but with knowledge to practice being the main one).”

The last set of emphases here is our own. To us, at first, this emphasized part seemed backwards. This was because we understood materialism mechanically, which most of the mistakes made on Thursday reflect. What the above is truly saying is that lessons learned from practice mean nothing if those lessons cannot be incorporated back into practice again. Indeed on Thursday we did not incorporate the lessons we have theoretically learned from the International Communist Movement (ICM) into practice. In order to correct this error we must truly make this leap and not dogmatically emphasize practice without its contradictory aspect, theory.

Communist organizing in street demos

In this document the PCR-RCP provides a great framework as to the way demonstrations should be organized.

For security purposes we will not go deeply into how this was expressed on the ground. Suffice it to say, we could have had much better planning and solidification of roles ahead of time. In many ways the direction of this entire demonstration was scattered and confused. If one person knows exactly what their role is in relation to the greater collective of people on the ground, they are less likely to be confused, looking to the next person for answers they should be able to provide, and more likely to be decisive. If a person knows their role and sees a situation that is not their job to handle, they should know who to look to for that answer because that representation is decided ahead of time and no one leaves their post generally. Not having a thoroughly-enough planned division of labor, for the leadership of this group, represents a remnant of last-minute type planning which, while acceptable for the revisionists, is unacceptable for serious revolutionaries. Truthfully the lack of planning comes from a deeply-rooted inability to accept the necessity to be thorough and apply a dialectical materialist analysis to concrete conditions. If we had understood the gravity of the situation more deeply, we amongst local antifascists would have planned more thoroughly.

Though we did not have enough follow-up and dedication to make it really happen, the plan was to have “unity in strategy and autonomy in tactics“. Something good that ended up coming out of this was that the group of people representing Charlotte were united in action while standing around the statue. In general Charlotte’s antifascists did not leave to take breaks, nor did they give up in maintaining this post as a whole unit. This represented a relatively higher stage of development because rather than being spread out and on individual time, they were united in one purpose: defending the people who had gathered in the park against fascism. This type of unity and relative discipline is something we have no choice but to strengthen in the future. The vast majority of people involved in this bloc did not move and did not stop chanting (the errors of which we will elaborate), but it did take an amount of dedication that was unprecedented in our experience. Out of the good and bad aspects of this period of time spent chanting around the MLK statue, the good aspect can be attributed to a relative amount of discipline.

However, with all this said, the call to remain around the statue for over an hour was inappropriate and did not take into consideration the changing conditions. We could have done a better job in uniting all those who can be united on the ground.

Later in the demonstrated we marched. Quite frankly in this march we lacked militancy. The lack of militancy was reflected in not taking the streets at any time and instead being on the sidewalk. This stemmed from weak leadership. We did not truly confront our enemy at that time: the police. Exhaustion from having chanted for too long played into this. This error had some remnants of legalism to it, but mostly was a failure to identify and act on the contradiction as it existed at that time. We had prepared for an anti-fascist march and did not think far enough ahead to the specifics of carrying out a degree of militancy in the march in case they did not show. But to blame lack of planning alone would be an excuse; the true problem is we did not act swiftly and take advantage of the fact that there were people there that may have been militant if the bar for militancy had been raised by locals. Instead of making a powerful act of actual resistance we basically followed the police throughout downtown. This amount of timidity veered to the right of the revolutionary thing to do in that situation. This is because the population of the march about half way through was thoroughly antifascist.  In this situation, objectively, we let our enemy guide our resistance. We ourselves would never get a permit but this was the rally of another group, who we were there to protect, and that group had been in contact with CMPD. In the future, we will learn from this mistake, to be able to apply the necessary amount of militancy for a given situation. Something that will be useful to us in the future is using dialectical materialism to figure out how to analyze a situation and be confident enough to take the streets, while being organized enough to effectively resist the police to the point where we won’t immediately be shut down for doing so. We do not have the answer to this yet and surely avoiding arrest at all cost will not give us this answer. Though we did not avoid arrests at all costs, this particular instance of not taking the streets still represented a rightist decision because in this contradiction between antifascists and the police, the police had the actual power of the march itself the entire time. 

Revolutionary Thanks

The call to action for D28 was concretely put out only around two weeks ago, and with such short notice it was likely that not many groups would show. We are grateful that comrades from the IWW, Redneck Revolt, and other organizations (who we will not name here because we don’t have their permission yet) came out with the anticipation of confronting fascists with us. We extend our deepest thanks to these comrades for taking up the call for all antifascists to come out and set a precedent for what’s not welcome in Charlotte. Without them we would have been a very humble group and we recognize that when fascist presence is a threat, that threat unites revolutionaries and communists. We also are grateful to have been in solidarity with the advanced masses who came out to the Indivisible march.

There were a couple of missed opportunities for the communist presence to lead and lay the foundation for more principled unity among all those present. Since we were the first force there, we could’ve spoken before the liberals got the chance to, and let those in attendance know how reformist their leadership was about to be. In this way we could have united with the intermediate and advanced masses that were attracted to the more liberal protest by showing them ahead of time the difference in the tailist methods of the liberals and those of the antifascists, and letting them decide for themselves. This would’ve been proactive, honest about political differences, and thorough. This also would have allowed for more unity between the antifascists representing Charlotte and those who took up the call to travel here. Failure to do this specifically represented the mechanical materialism and failure to analyze concrete conditions.

Antifascist Chants

When it comes to the chanting it is clear that we made a mistake in using certain chants at inappropriate times. We basically kept chanting nonstop for over an hour while we were not moving. For example we said, “Whose streets? Our streets!” at a time when we were not at all taking the streets. We also said “Nazis go home” when in fact the only fascist who came had already been pushed out, and run off. This reflects a thoroughly movementist error in that chants were being said for the sake of doing so, without critical application to the existing conditions.

Planning chants and thinking ahead of time about the amount of time necessary to chant–and take short breaks in between–would’ve helped significantly because our nonstop chanting reflected a sort of panic and confused direction. We also needed to be able to get our message across without reaching exhaustion. If more politically sound decisions had been made ahead of time about the content of the rally we had planned starting at four, then this aspect would’ve gone much more smoothly. But more planning is not the whole answer because there are deeply rooted political mistakes being reflected in this error and others from Thursday’s demonstration. The movementist impulse to keep on doing what you know time and time again rather than correctly applying what you know in given changing situations is a trademark of the revisionists and our mistake in this way reflects the fact that we have not yet fully ruptured from this in practice. Though the chants we did were more catchy, original and more radical that those the revisionists use, our dogmatic application of this previously decided tactic without taking notice to the contradictions present at the given time was very similar to their dogmatic application and inability to change things when necessary. We mistakenly relied on a previously decided list to keep afloat the entire time spent surrounding the statue. The charge of “dogmatism” is commonly misused by revisionists in situations it doesn’t belong in, but for this particular example dogmatism is to blame for the error of the incessant and inappropriate chants. It seems like an ultra-leftist error but truly it is right in essence. This also reflected mechanical materialism because it did not make principal the necessary leap from knowledge to practice. This same error also showed up in the lack of militancy that later manifested in our march ending up on the sidewalk. There is some understanding of the theoretical backing for leadership, yet in practice we are falling back into the old ways that we know how to do which is incontinent action. This represented incontinent action because theoretically we approved of what was was good (militancy), but in the moment following habit desired what was bad (safety and repetition of the same thing over and over again), and following desire we did what was bad. For more clarification on this idea please read On Contradictory Action by Red Guards Austin. In this way the necessary theory and the concrete practice are still in contradiction and the key of learning how to really do the thing–through doing the thing– has not yet been realized. For this mistake we cannot blame the revisionists who taught us these ways as they are long gone, but can only take responsibility ourselves and commit to rectify for it.

The content of chants must appeal to the masses, not just existing left groups. While genuine originality in making chants is admirable, it is necessary to criticize chants like “Every nation, every gender, throw a Nazi in the blender,” and, “…the right can’t meme” which came up on Thursday. These particular chants were proposed and continued by forces who were more anarchist in tendency and we did not participate in them not out of sectarianism but for principled reasons. The reason these chants aren’t particularly good is because they remind one of a joke which is more likely to make other leftists laugh rather than truly attract the non-left masses to the seriousness of the need for antifascism. These seem harmless but take the shape of leftism-as-subculture which was thoroughly criticized in Everywhere a Battlefield by Red Guards Austin. The intent here is not to attack those comrades who made these chants but to criticize the theoretical backing that is not represented in them. Again the creativity aspect is definitely a good thing that can be united with, but that creativity could be better channeled into chants which are not comedic and instead reflect the serious threat of fascism with a serious message. If anyone who liked these chants has questions about this criticism please contact us directly and securely at  so that we can elaborate on this criticism more deeply.

Running out the lone fascist

As soon as it was confirmed that there was a fascist present, about 15 antifascists gathered around him, not letting him escape without following. Soon, he pretended his phone had “died,” hid behind the police, and left like the coward he is.

This fascist, Manuel Luxton, who was in camo pants on the day of, had previously been recording the antifascists at the top of the hill. On his twitter page, he confirms his presence at the rally, as well as, refers to himself as a “National Socialist.” He also reposts Hitler “memes” as well as retweeting multiple fascist sources. He is not welcome in Charlotte.


Manuel Luxton, who was present that day, is a fascist. 

It is clear that he was recording those he saw as a threat and also who were the first line at a common entrance to the park. With all our mistakes, we were united in action and masked somewhat uniformly, and therefore this is who in particular he saw as his biggest threat. He was right that it was these antifascists who opposed him and ran him off. Charlotte antifascists were ultimately successful in running him out and away from the park, but we could’ve taken much better advantage of the situation. Here was the one person that represented everything we came out to shut down. To put it plainly if we had moved closer to the spot where Indivisible and the visiting antifascists were gathering earlier on, the fascist would’ve surely moved closer, and even more of the liberals as well as the revolutionaries could have been active in outnumbering and isolating him. This would’ve taken more decisive guidance on the part of leadership to make happen. Even though this situation particularly of handling the antifascist was overwhelmingly positive, the reaction of antifascists to this Nazi’s presence could have been much more swift and decisive.

In the current antifascist movement it is common to appear only where fascists and other reactionaries appear. This is noble resistance. However, this is not the only capacity that antifascist action should be present in. If antifascists only show up when fascists are present, then objectively we are tailing them and allowing them to be the only ones who make the first move. Again our experience in this struggle is completely new so in no way should the necessity to confront fascists be belittled. Rather, anti-fascism needs to start addressing two sides of this thing rather than one side of it. Fascists by their very existence are making an offensive attack on many oppressed groups. Therefore for antifascists to only organize in reaction or defense is not correct. The only force that can truly defeat fascists is one that takes offensive measures when necessary. Even in their infancy, and at every step along the course of their development, they must be concretely opposed. In opposing them we not only send them a message, but we learn through practice and consolidate our own forces as well. In the future we must consider situations like Thursday’s demo to be serious practice for future demonstrations where we will not get so lucky.

Contradiction between antifascists and reformists

The contradiction between the united front and fascists disappeared along with the fascist walking away. With the material exit of this contradiction the other contradictions already at play re-emerge as dominant. In this case that meant between the police (and politicians who support and give them power) and the antifascists, who are anti-police. Once the Indivisible rally began it became clear that many of their lead organizers are either in office, or are running for office. Clearly this became just another platform to push their line of integration back into the existing system. Yes, they were against fascists, but their ultimate answer for how to end fascism will ultimately get people killed if followed, and it also can’t materially destroy the soil out of which fascism will always regrow. The people who were there because of being attracted to the liberal rally were objectively being manipulated by the politicians. However, we know that many have the possibility of being won over to genuine antifascism which is necessarily anti-police. The forces of Charlotte’s antifascists shouted over a politician as she made pro-police remarks shouting, “Fuck the police,” as well as the name of Keith Lamont Scott, who was murdered by CMPD last year. To be clear this was overwhelmingly the right thing to do, and we will do it and encourage other groups to do it in the future. Arguments that are generally against this opposition to electoral politics should be correctly identified as liberalism and torn apart. It is absolutely necessary to oppose politicians when they crop up trying to turn the rage of the people, and the defense of the people, back into the existing capitalist system. What we can work on and improve in the future is winning over the intermediates who were standing with them. In this instance we could have put more thought in recruiting them over to our side and reaching their hearts and minds earlier on by emphasizing our propaganda and outreach and really having one on one conversations with people. It would have been appropriate to start this before the liberal rally began. Hopefully the fundamental difference that came to a head around the existing system reached some of them and planted seeds of the possibility for an entirely new system; certainly it is good that politicians were publicly opposed. We encourage those with doubts in the existing system to challenge electoral politicians at demonstrations where they are given a platform. Their phony “answers” encourage the maintenance of the existing, rotten system. They do not deserve the people’s trust.

In Conclusion

In their initial propaganda, the anti-communists even went so far as to propose a “torch rally” reminiscent of the white nationalists in Charlottesville. But in Charlotte, NC, we will do everything we can to stop this from happening. Local antifascists hope to develop the struggle against rising fascism because left unchecked the fascist movement will continue to attract people and become even more serious, not less. We cannot capitulate to the rising threat of fascism because it puts the people at risk.

We will steadfastly work to correct the mistakes made here, and will continue and develop further the good things that Thursday’s demo contained within it. We will do this at any action in the future, certainly not perfectly, but are committed to thoroughly correcting mistakes and listening to criticism completely to dissect its correct and incorrect aspects. It is necessary to have a deeper understanding and correct dogmatism by putting theory into practice then back into theory again, in an endless spiral that describes the development of the world.

The practice necessary to make this happen will have to be another street demonstration; if we avoid street demonstrations for too long we run the risk of repeating all these mistakes again, and just as bad, the next time pushed to take action. Another street demonstration will take place in Charlotte, NC. It will manifest in a revolutionary May Day action on May 1st, 2018.

Mask up to protect yourselves

Correct mistaken practices

Get serious about antifascism

—Queen City Maoist Collective


Defend Charlotte!

Today is the day! All antifascists out to Marshall Park at 4pm! 

Queen City Maoist Collective is re-posting a call to action made by a local group of comrades called Antifascists Charlotte. We encourage anyone in the area to come out and defend Charlotte. Though we are not sure if the fascists will show or not, we will not be caught on our asses. Solidarity with all antifascists in Charlotte! 

Embrace Rev Print Color Full-page-001


Marshall Park (near the statue)
800 E. 3rd St

Earlier this year, a so-called Anti-Com group posted a call for a “rally against communism” in Marshall Park on December 28th. This event was originally going to feature America’s sweetheart of emerging fascism, Richard Spencer, until the whole thing was abruptly called off a couple of weeks later over “security concerns”.

Since then, the proposed counter-rally events that had popped up online were also dropping off of the radar. It seems that the crisis is averted, right?


Unfortunately, this increasingly organized, emboldened alt-right has hatched and these proto-fascists cannot be wished or ignored away. If anything is to be learned from the many encounters with them already endured by brave anti-facist protesters over the past year, it’s that it’s not enough to try to stop them once they’ve set up in whatever space; we must prevent them from starting to begin with. There is no reasonable discourse to be had with them, no “exchange of ideas” or appeals to understanding. Love will not fix this. They must be confronted, shut down, and forced out without further ado.

For these reasons, this is a call for everybody who is fed up with the alt-right to come out to Marshall Park (near the statue) at 4pm on December 28th and show why the alt-right shalt not fuck with the Queen City.

By showing up en masse, we can pre-emptively deprive them of any platform they try to use to spread their messages of hate. We can prevent them from inspiring the misguided casual racists in this town and from ever thinking that they can thrive here.

If they don’t turn up, great. We would prefer that.

Assuming they won’t turn up just because the internet said so is irresponsible and wishful thinking. So we shall plan for the worst, be prepared to stand up for our city, and flex the power of our numbers and our drive for a better world.




– Queen City Maoist Collective (December 2017)



Fly high the red flag for Comrade Pierre!


From the Queen City we send our solidarity and condolences to the Parti Communiste Maoiste (PCM) as they lost comrade Pierre. He was a tremendous beacon of revolution for all Maoists throughout the world, and this loss is huge.

Comrade Pierre’s passing happened on the birthday of Presidente Gonzalo, the greatest living Maoist in the world, and the 48th anniversary of the FBI murder of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark. Fred Hampton was one of the greatest revolutionary to come from the US.

Comrade Pierre was one of the most dedicated revolutionary communists in Europe. Right before the accident leading to his death, he had been attending a protest. Though we never knew him, his loss hit us hard. The loss of a comrade dedicated to the liberation of humanity is a loss for all. From the grand stories of his unwavering dedication to Maoism, to his mentoring of revolutionary youth throughout Europe, without a doubt the loss of comrade Pierre is a loss for the entire international proletariat.

Our collective deeply cherishes the lives of those we have lost serving the people, comrade Pierre among them. His uncompromising dedication should serve as a lesson to all revolutionaries across the world. The fight for world communism must now be sharpened. Comrade Pierre was a militant until the day he died, and we must continue his struggle for the liberation of the world proletariat. 

Words from a comrade on comrade Pierre:

Today, a great comrade is gone. It was a man that inspired generations of communists, that gave his whole life at the service of a greater idea of mankind, at the service of a future of justice and freedom. He represented the transfer of knowledge, and he transmitted the fire from the Proletarian Left to the Maoist Communist Party with a tireless energy, being the living memory of struggle. More than a comrade, many of us saw him as a brother, a father or a grandfather, smiling and sharing good advices. He struggle against all kind of deviations, against renouncing, sometimes almost alone against the tide. Comrade, we wont forget you. For us, you’re an example, and you’ll live forever in our struggle. You’re is still among us, wherever flies this flag you loved so much, this red flag with the hammer and the sickle on it.

Long live marxism-leninism-maoism.

Comrade Pierre, present! Honor and respect

Comrade Pierre is immortal!

Fly high the red flag in his memory!

Long Live the PCM!

For revolution in the imperialist centers!

– Queen City Maoist Collective


  1. PCM, “Comrade Pierre is immortal!”
  2. Red Guards LA, “What, to the Maoist, is the significance of life and death?”