This article discusses the definitions and methods of achieving political power in any revolutionary setting. To start, we will develop a few basic assumptions that can be made from a study of history. Those assumptions will then be justified in detail before outlining a developed method for organizing based on them.

1. Definition: “Politics” is the power to influence society. This includes both economically and socially.
2. Means: Influence on society can be achieved by either peaceful (electoral) or violent (revolutionary) means.
3. Influence: All political power is the ability of a smaller group to exert influence on the whole of society (or a larger group).
4. Proportionality: The larger a group is in comparison to its opponents, the easier it is for that group to achieve and maintain political power.
5. Successfulness: As the smaller group is successful, they tend to grow in proportion to that success (or perceived success).
6. Methodology: A method for organizing revolutions should be created and tested from the basis of these assumptions, and refined as necessary.

Means

First, we should understand that all the methods of a smaller group to grow their power are ultimately legitimate as long as they are in keeping with the general principles of that group. For example, as Communists, we should not use methods advocated by our enemies such as becoming landlords or appealing to fascist groups for their support, even if our enemies often couch themselves in rhetoric similar to our own in their attempts to appeal to the working class.

When we do things such as give ourselves over to capitalist methods of gaining power such as landlordism or speculation, it both reveals desperation and delegitimizes our cause. We must always stand up for our principles, especially when it is hard. By maintaining our integrity, we demonstrate both that capitalism is not inevitable or necessary, and that we are the most fitting inheritors of the cause for which we fight. Furthermore, it helps fight against the ever-present threat of revisionism. None will excuse our actions if they are seen as in bad faith, and we should not ask for such excuses.

As such, Communist organizations, while not being overly concerned with the decorum of methods, should be constantly concerned with their own ideological “purity”, or the reasons and justifications for their methods. This will go against liberal notions against so-called “purity tests”, but we have seen in them where such laxity leads to. So too should liberal aversions to violence not be replicated in our concepts of political power, as refusing to acknowledge violence as an often unfortunate necessity of gaining power makes other efforts toothless[1]. Historically, even those campaigns so often held up as demonstrative of the power of peaceful protest were supported by the potential for armed struggle (or in some cases started by violent efforts[2]. This motif can be seen in the statue of Abraham Lincoln at his D.C. memorial, where he presents an open right hand held in peace, countered by a closed fist to demonstrate the readiness to fight for that peace[3]. In any event, we have all seen the most peaceful demonstrations countered with violent armed opposition (even instances of that insistence for peace used against us[4]), and we must be able to defend both ourselves and our cause from such attacks, no matter what the more squeamish might say about it[5]. The cause is ultimately more important than any one person’s personal aversions. We must remember Malcolm X, who declared liberation must be achieved “by any means necessary”[6]. Malcolm X was restating a concept demonstrated throughout history, and that whenever a group limits themselves to the rules laid out by the dominant forces in their society, they fail to overcome those forces.

Conversely, nor should we confine our efforts for liberation solely to the violent, as Mao in his speech went on to say [that] “the gun must never be allowed to command the Party”. (Id at 1). This is a problem we see demonstrated when the drive for armed struggle becomes a group’s sole focus, often devolving their reputation or means to mere terrorism as they engage in kidnapping and other crimes[7], rather than using a structured approach to revolutionary warfare supported by and in support of the masses (even if not all the members of those masses personally support the group, in their ignorance).
Every facet of “political power” needs to be exploited for our ends, including the traditional spheres dominated by the powerful, such as electoralism and media/ propaganda. The Bolsheviks whom we so often see as our ideological ancestors did not limit themselves to armed struggle, with Lenin himself advocating for participation in elections (even if there is lively debate on why he advocated for it), at one point being quoted as saying “building the party depends very much on the outcome of elections”[8]. Lenin used elections as a means of spreading the message of Communism to the masses, and elections provide an effective way of doing so, as demonstrated by our erstwhile comrades in such organizations as the PLS and the Green Party. In these uses of electoral politics, it is not important to win as much as to provide a forum to educate the general masses of both our existence and our message, which is the same purpose I would argue that Lenin used electoral participation for, as ultimately it was the gun, and not the ballot box, that liberated the Russian people.

Influence

The influence of a group grows with its member numbers, but it is not confined to that metric alone. Political power is the ability of a smaller group to influence the larger society, and as such, all politics of any nature is a small group exerting an outsized influence. Both the wings of the capitalist uniparty in the U.S. are examples of this, in that while they use the voters to gain formal positions of power, it is party insiders of both groups that dictate their policies (as dictated to them by the oligarchs), irrespective of the will and needs of the people they purport to represent, as studies conclusively prove[9]. While many people likely consider themselves a Democrat or Republican, the average voter has little to no influence on the decisions made by the politicians they vote for. This is repeated even in more democratic nations like modern China or Vietnam, as members of the party have increased influence in the path their respective nations take. This is therefore not something that must be disparaged as inherently undemocratic, but simply acknowledged as an inevitable part of governing any large society.

Influence is also affected by how “loud” or assertive a group is, as compared to their opponents or general society, as we see confirmed in recent times by the rise of Far-Right groups such as the MAGA movement. Trump was an obnoxious but loud businessman who gained power simply by manipulating the media into giving him free air time[10] for the ridiculous things he would say and due to his DNC opponents underestimation of the threat he presented (along with their behind the scenes support for a fellow capitalist they saw as a better opponent for their chosen candidate[11]). Whether it is fair or otherwise, the louder or more active a group is, the larger and more important it is seen to be.

This “loudness” is not necessarily confined to media exposure. Community efforts and other ways of “getting out in to the streets” is an important consideration for groups such as ours, especially considering that we are unlikely to receive the same attention from the traditional, corporate owned media than the traditional parties. Instead, our efforts to raise noise must be made directly to the people we seek to liberate from capitalist oppression. By being loud, we force the public to accept our presence and our opponents to expend resources in vain efforts to confront us. This does nothing but legitimize our efforts to the public and create a wider audience for our message, as was done when the Democrats, seeing the danger that MAGA was becoming, gave even more attention and airtime to that movement, stupidly creating an attention death spiral and speeding their own failure[12].

Historically, this has played out in the government response to such groups as the Black Panther Party, whose food program success gave rise to states founding their own, government backed programs[13] in an attempt to reduce the influence of the Communist group. The Smith Trials of the 1950’s may have decimated the ranks of the CPUSA[14], but the final outcomes of the legal battles eventually provided us with the ability to openly state our revolutionary intentions[15], and the more secret attacks[16] that the government later used against other similar organizations were arguably far more destructive to the cause.

Specific and efficient uses of limited influence increases its effectiveness, just as a person may survive a wild attack while another dies from the aimed thrust of a small knife. We may focus efforts wherever in small and seeming insignificant way that provides a later large payoff. One example of this is the way a widespread worker strike may be ignored[17], while a concentrated strike in key industries has an outsized effect[18]. This consideration is especially important when we consider our limited resources compared to our opponents.

Eventually, the organization will accumulate enough members and make enough noise that it will become as inescapable political force, even if that force in contained within a local area. When it reaches this point, the traditional media reservations against giving attention to such groups will conflict with its desire for compelling headlines. Attention will breed attention, and a “death spiral” of focus will begin to benefit our own group.

None if this will occur if we refrain from acting openly and publically, which will of course take bravery of all members to go out in public as openly Communist, potentially facing aggressive or angry opposition forces. We must keep in mind, however, that our cause demands no less than bravery to put our lives and reputations on the line. By acting publically, our group has come to the strange position in which other local activists are actively seeking us out for our support and assistance in developing their own influence, including liberal organizations seeking in vain to pull us back into their useless capitalist party. As long as we maintain our own ideological strength and refrain from revisionist attitudes, alliances with ideologically similar groups strengthens the cause.

Proportionality

It is not a novel idea that whenever a group establishes itself as the larger of the competing factions (or most “noisy” or effective), it becomes easier for that group to maintain its position over that competition. Larger, well-funded and historically storied groups have a much easier time establishing control over others.

We must acknowledge that our party (or any Communist Party) will never have the numbers necessary to change the structure of American society using the meager power of the ballot box. Not only would we have to overcome an immobile political system but the power of the entrenched oligarchs that maintain it. Were the U.S. an actual democracy[19], this may be different. This problem is made more severe by the fact that so many who hold Communist ideals are concentrated in the larger cities, where their votes are more diluted and their ability to distinguish themselves from their liberal opponents is more difficult. Given our resources, it would be foolish to confront opposition groups directly. Instead, we should seek to establish absolute control in limited areas, such as more rural communities long abandoned by the ruling class parties (as I’ve previously discussed[20]) or cutting out our own spaces in the dispute between the two sides of the uniparty[21].

That is not to say that proportion is not important when it comes to political influence. As discussed previously, as the number of group member’s increase their level of influence grows, especially in regards to comparable or antagonistic groups. When we grow sufficiently strong enough, such as when we achieve victory over the world capitalist forces, our numbers will grow further and help us maintain our victory, even if the number of “true Communists” will likely not be very high until much later.

Even if Communists have achieved great victories[22] with few actual fighters, our true strength comes from the masses, opposed to the elites which provide the foundation for our enemies in the GOP and the Democratic Party. If we remember the source of our strength, we realize that the comparably small size of the forces against us, even though they currently exert more influence due to the way they arranged our system.

Successfulness

Success breeds success[23]. Not only through the intangible ways of eliciting confidence in members, but also in creating public notoriety for the organization.

While failure is often the best teacher, when a group achieves set tangible goals[24], it creates the likelihood of future success as a group develops methods and strategies to replicate that feat. The main way a group benefits from achievement, as well as failure, is by demonstrating to both the public (including potential comrades) that your methods are effective, or that you have learned from past mistakes (in failure).

This all requires an effective way of evaluating the value of any projects to which the group puts itself towards, which must be an ongoing and methodical process[25]. One aspect of understanding that value must be how it publicizes the group behind the campaign, as an even wildly successful activity that goes unnoticed rarely adds any members or influence to be exploited.

Methods

A method of achieving revolution can be codified from these assumptions in the following phases. Note that we should in no way be bound to maintaining one phase or another, as it will often be required to shift between them or have several active at a time.

1. Phase 1: Building the Party Numbers
2. Phase 2: Education of Party Members
3. Phase 3: Engagement with the Masses
4. Phase 4: Overcoming of the Forces in Power
5. Phase 5: Defense of the Revolution

Phase 1: Building the Party

The overarching lesson from our basic assumptions is the necessity of our cause being taken up by a maximum number of people, even if that group is ultimately small in proportion to the masses as a whole. This means that our first objective in any organization should be to increase our numbers by open actions among the general population, such as the elections, rallies, and parades so often detested by the more extreme of our comrades. Doing these things alert the masses to our existence, and gives us the opportunity to bring in likeminded individuals or organizations to our cause, as it may be one they advocate for as well (even if secretly).

For lack of a better alternative concept, the revolutionary group needs to engage in concerted marketing or propaganda campaigns to spread its message. This may involve things like “swag” and other seemingly silly items. It should certainly include electoral participation and the publication of a party newspaper (even if ultimate victory should never be expected from voting and news articles). The power of having your organizations name being worn on a shirt in public or your theory read by people via a paper copy newspaper cannot be overstated.

Part of this effort may include unifying the disparate groups within a community that share our ultimate cause. Ad nauseam I have railed against the divisions within the leftist and Communist communities, and more often than not they are the result of the actions or words of leadership far away in both distance and time. It is long past the moment for us to seek out those in our communities and share in the struggle with them, even against the wishes or aims of any national leadership. You may find, as we did, that there is more to be gained in both knowledge and numbers from such unification than we lose in the inevitable decline in our individual voices[26].

When a local group reaches a crucial threshold number of members[27], it should transition to the second phase (while maintaining the growth of phase 1).

Phase 2: Education of Party Members

The smaller political group must also be well educated in revolutionary theory in order to better advocate for that new society to the masses, as Lenin first outlined in his proposal for the “Vanguard Party”. This will also assist in creating greater numbers of party members for phase 1 and should be an ongoing process.

Not every member will be suitable for educating others, for a variety of reasons, but there is a place in the Vanguard for all people. Those who are suitable should be recruited and developed from the membership at large, and further trained in teaching theory to others by teaching the members of the organization. It is for this reason that this phase comes after the first, building phase. The wider the membership pool, the more teacher candidates may be found, and the more people they can develop with their instruction. We cannot expect educators well trained in theory to come to us without first demonstrating that we are the group to which they belong.

Theory should not be the sole focus of this phase, but one that in includes praxis (including armed struggle) and politics. This may involve activities involving proper sign making and “marketing techniques” used to engage with the general masses, or seemingly innocuous group events like paintball tournaments to train for combat. This should also be considered a good way to attract people to the group who may not be interested in the classic “book club” model of socialist education.

Once a solid core of highly educated members is created, who are practiced in teaching Communist principles to others, the organization should move on to phase 3.

Phase 3: Engagement with the Masses

As so many in the present masses should be understood to be both completely ignorant of our existence and of “Communism” in any real sense outside of Western propaganda, we should seek to educate them in such matters in such a way that does not assume their stupidity. Ignorance should also not be taken as to mean that they are in any way against us, as we remember the differences between ignorance and maliciousness. Even those who profess to be our enemies may, with careful education, be the greatest advocates for our shared cause (when they realize that this cause is one shared with them). A better understanding of their new Communist society may also soften the blow to those who unwittingly find themselves in it after the revolution, providing a defense of that revolutionary society.

This phase is distinct from phase 1 in that it concerns a more deliberate and targeted approach to organizing people. Rather than trying to alert the masses to our existence, we will be trying to educate specific groups in Communist theory and turn non-Communists in to Communists. Put in another way, phase 1 is about gathering those who are already Communists, while phase 3 is about creating new communists.

The importance of this moment in the Revolution cannot be overstated, as here we lay the groundwork for our success. While it is not necessary to put ourselves in positions of power to achieve a successful revolution[28], it is necessary to establish some good-will in the communities that we fight for, or at the very least a lack of hostility. We cannot achieve anything if we are seen as outsiders. Therefore, we must develop ties with each community demonstrating our commitment to their needs, even if those ties are tenuous or fraught with tension at first.

Also in this phase is when we begin to prepare the physical forces of the Revolution. This is done by establishing organized cadres and groups specially trained in different aspects of covert warfare, as done by previous liberation movements.

Phase 4: Overcoming of the Forces in Power

Once a threshold of influence has been established, it will be time to directly engage the capitalist forces. History shows us that if we rush to this stage to quickly, without first establishing ourselves in some way among the masses, the project is doomed to degrade into mere terrorism rather than a struggle for liberation[29] (note that we can ignore the classification of “terrorism” so often used against us[30]). But neither should conflict be put off in exchange for the crumbs thrown from the capitalists in the form of electoral concessions, even if such crumbs should not be ignored, but exploited as an example of the fearfulness the ruling class have for our mission.

Although we need not go too far into this aspect of the process, given the amount of ink dedicated to the art of war, a single remanding I was once given after a spectacular loss in a chess match should be remembered. “Do not make your first move until you are prepared to make your last”. Success is something created through preparation, rather than wild attacks.

Phase 5: Defense of the Revolution

Successful defense of a revolutionary movement is achieved by laying the proper groundwork for that success as much as by having control over major institutions, Even if some of those institutions should be eliminated as tools of bourgeoisie oppression[31].

Members highly trained in the different aspects of governance[32], especially in regards to industrial management and resource allocation, should be ready to step in to those roles as soon as the last bullet fired or ballot cast. Practical guides of how to construct an economic and legal system, based on Communist theory, should be made in the time leading up to the revolution itself, similar to the work done in capitalist think tanks[33] created to facilitate ruling class domination. This preparation is just as important as any stockpiling of weapons and training of armed cadres.

Not only do we need an organized system ready to be put in place at a moment’s notice, but members trained in speaking to the masses about that system. These “orators” should be ready to describe the benefits of the new world to the potentially hostile masses will find themselves in, in order to garner the support of those masses.

Conclusion

Achieving liberation relies on a careful planning of actions based on previous attempts and analysis of our current condition. While history has given us guidebooks, the examples from theory must be taken as one does a very old map, in that the terrain and surroundings may have changed a great deal, even if the destination remains the same. As such, we follow what paths are still clear, but we must also at times strike out into the unknown in order to find our way.

We can find that destination if we apply scientific principles to our work, including careful measuring of “success” and the processes we use. However, we should never dismiss the passions that inspire us to this cause, and should understand its place in our movement. We must be passionate in our execution of the methods that we dispassionately create and evaluate.

[1] “Political Power grows out of the barrel of a gun”. Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, Vol. II, pp. 224-225. (accessed 2025).

[2] See: Stonewall riots – Wikipedia (accessed 2025).

[3] Abraham Lincoln Statue Hands (accessed 2025).

[4] Don’t Let Cops Join Our Protests – The Appeal, Derecka Purnell. Jun 02, 2020 (accessed 2025).

[5] MLK himself carried a gun.

[6] (1964) Malcolm X’s Speech at the Founding Rally of the Organization of Afro-American Unity. October 16, 2007. (accessed 2025).

[7] See: The Rise and Fall of the Symbionese Liberation Army | American Experience | Official Site | PBS (accessed 2025)

[8] Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 35 (1976), Pg 58, as quoted in Lenin, Elections & Socialist Hegemony, Seán Mitchell (both accessed 2025).

[9] Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens | Perspectives on Politics | Cambridge Core, Martin Gilens & Benjamin I. Page, 18 September 2014 (accessed 2025)

[10] $2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump – The New York Times, Nicholas Confessore & Karen Yourish, 03/15/2016. (accessed 2025)

[11] How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately “elevated” Donald Trump with its “pied piper” strategy – Salon.com, Ben Norton, 09/09/2016. (accessed 2025)

[12] More attention to the MAGA movement gave them more influence, which in turn brought it more attention.

[13] Bending the Bars of Empire from Every Ghetto for Survival: The Black Panther Party’s Radical Antihunger Politics of Social Reproduction and Scale, Heynen, Nik, 04/22/2009. (accessed 2025)

[14] Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders – Wikipedia (accessed 2025).

[15] Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)

[16] See: COINTELPRO – Wikipedia (accessed 2025)

[17] Thousands of US workers are on strike today. Here’s a rundown of major work stoppages happening now | AP News, 10/05/2023. (accessed 2025)

[18] Dockworkers strike suspended, tentative agreement includes 62% pay raise over 6 years – ABC News. Max Zahn, Meredith Deliso, & Soo Youn. 10/03/2024. (accessed 2025)

[19] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy – BBC News. 04/17/2014

[20] Re-Building Rural Radicalism – Red Prairie Perspective, S. G. Grillot II, 04/28/2025.

[21] Poll: A sizeable chunk of Americans think neither party ‘fights for people like you’. Bridget Bowman & Ben Kamisar. 04/25/25. (accessed 2025)

[22] Castro led an estimated 200 men against the Batista Regime. Citing Park City Daily News. 01/01/1959.

[23] See: Does Success Breed Success? | Psychology Today, Faith Brynie Ph.D., 05/09/2014.

[24] Requirements for Effective Activism – Red Prairie Perspective. S. G. Grillot. 06/04/2025.

[25] A process our own group is still working out, especially in regards to personal issues.

[26] Remember that we must advocate for democracy, which often means that we may be subject to supporting decisions we disagree with.

[27] Such a threshold is location dependent, and not currently set, but may be determined by thing such as Political party registration requirements, for example.

[28] See: Revolution in the Revolution. Régis Debray. 1966. (accessed 2025).

[29] See: Che Guevara’s Foco Theory Explained – by BlackClaude, 04/13/2025; quoting Philosophy of the Urban Guerrilla, Abraham Guillén.

[30] Why Marxists Oppose Individual Terrorism (1911). Leon Trotsky. 09/1911.

[31]The Senate Cannot Be Reformed—It Can Only Be Abolished | The Nation. Elie Mystal. 11/12/2021.

[32] Remember what our opponents fear: COMMUNIST LEGAL SUBVERSION – THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNIST LAWYER. CIA Report to the House Un-American Activities Committee. 02/16/1959.

[33] See: The Heritage Foundation. 08/12/2025