This centenary year has seen a resurgence in publishing of books and pamphlets by the Communist Party. 📚
A vibrant struggle of ideas; communists as builders of peoples movements and of struggle for improvement in the daily lives of workers, their families and communities.
We are proud that the following publications, in addition to clearly setting out our line of march, are of a high standard of research and are well-written and designed.
If you have not read them, I urge you to do so, confident in the belief that you will find them thought-provoking. They make a powerful case for socialism.
Please do not leave your decision too long as postal delays are having an effect on delivery times.
https://t.co/NYbrb5fWOB
Red Lives
https://t.co/h7wGRwUWCz
Revolutionary Communist at Work
https://t.co/4z1IaOzfqp

https://t.co/SqXwGPuCNM
The Political Life and Times of Claudia Jones
https://t.co/ucXXNtUxZz
The Real Jessie Eden
https://t.co/XHS2lGOpSF
Unemployment fightback
https://t.co/ol9mLmwN1O

More from Politics
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x