To be a credible revolutionary organization, the ACP should carefully address unresolved issues around Indigenous sovereignty, its “MAGA Communism” strategy, and the spread of misinformation.
a friend of mine sent me this article. i am a member of ACP California. i’m going to respond to your major points of question:
1. on violence — it is not realistic or advisable to suggest a public, above ground revolutionary Party advocates for violence. that is inviting repression and incarceration. all public services and statements of any Party that seeks to survive and grow within empire must do so within the bounds of legality, or otherwise fail to adventurism.
2. land back/decolonization — our public facing material is scant on nominal recognition of or commitment to the largely liberal movement of land back to the original stewards of what is now known to be America, but to separate our obvious anti-imperialism from decolonization is not coherent to me. imperialism and colonization are the same entity. currently, our Party is undergoing the construction of a new constitution. we have been working through hundreds of proposals from all over the Party. we will consider this criticism in our designs, which may result in more nominal representation you deem missing. but i must mention that this seems quite idealist to me, speaking only for myself. what does land back mean materially? the indigenous peoples are no longer the masses, literally. they (and we, as i am indigenous) are a very small minority in 2026. if you’re looking for the words “land back” and “decolonization” specifically represented and cosigned by us, then that’s nominal support at best and serves as an ideological signal with no material value. Chairman Haz has mentioned that if and once we become leaders of this nation, one of our first orders of business would be to honor all treaties signed with the sovereign indigenous nations. that’s a material strategy of “land back”, rather than an identitarian, ideological commitment. so i ask you, why does it matter if the words are in our Party platform? what have the orgs that do signal that support materially done for indigenous peoples? if you follow our material work, you can see that we materially support the indigenous peoples both directly where we can and indirectly through our attempt to seize the means of production and cease the exploitation of the indigenous peoples and destruction of the lands.
3. electoralism/MAGA — i invite you to investigate this further bc Haz has directly spoken to this criticism a few times. MAGA communism was, as you describe, an attempt to co-opt the populist promises Trump made to his base by showing them that communism actually offers those things to the people, like shorter work weeks and cheaper cost of living. it was a response to the rise of the New Right, who were doing the same thing (attempting to capture a dynamic audience away from the traditional Republican machine but to the neo-nazi right). it didn’t work, so we stopped doing it. we haven’t done it in a while, but leftists here don’t investigate very much. when i joined the Party myself i looked into the claim that we were somehow MAGA or Republican and found that to be not true. on electoralism and republicans specifically, that is just misinformation. we hardly conduct any electoral work at all. we are considering running for the lowest form of office for the reasons you identified in Lenin, and bc our local efforts would benefit from the funding available to Neighborhood Councils. but that’s it, and as far as i know that’s all there ever has been
4. Hinkle misinformation — not sure what you’re referring to. can you be more specific?
i can speak on behalf of my chapter and cell to some extent, but i highly advise making contact with the ACP near you. much of what you’ve written could have been cleared up with direct communication rather than speaking to the ether where there was no actual dialogue except by the happenstance someone sent this to me. so much of what people believe about us is just rumors. as communists, it is our duty to investigate and speak to people no?
Hi, thanks for engaging, and I'm glad this got to the right people. We are in broad agreement on the vast majority of these matters.
On the topic of decolonization, why avoid the term? "Land Back" may be a specific movement, but decolonization is a universal principle, not a demographic numbers game. Communists do not seek to conceal their aims, and the settler-colonial contradiction remains fundamental to the US state regardless of Indigenous population size. You are correct that merely saying the word has no material value (Western academia uses it widely), yet explicit ideological clarity in party platforms builds genuine trust.
I have not yet seen the statement regarding honouring treaties, but this is noted, and I look forward to seeing the rewritten Constitution; this should undoubtedly clear up many of the criticisms (or rumours, as you've described them) raised by comrades.
Off the top of my head, I can recall two instances of alleged misinformation-spreading on Hinkle's part, namely a photo of Syria labelled as one of Palestine and the sharing of an unverified report that a certain "Israeli" sniper was killed.
“broad agreement” should be our catch phrase lol. most people seem to be when they engage us!
we don’t avoid the term decolonization. i highly doubt it was intentionally left out. the Constitution was written from the ground up and the concept exists so the authors probably just talked about it in different terms. i personally don’t see why the term being on our platform or not matters much (as long as we are decolonial in our material practice, which i’d argue we are more than most parties here), but i’m sure many in the Party will argue for it during the Congress.
as for the numbers, to clarify i was referring to “the masses”. indigenous people are unfortunately literally not the masses, despite that we live among the masses. the masses are largely (66%) social conservatives entirely or nearly entirely captured ideologically by the empire. which is why ACP uses legible symbols like their flag, to show them we care about them rather than work against them (see Hampton on fighting hate with love). any ACP member is necessarily decolonial, as again, that’s a prerequisite of being anti-imperialist.
your point on trust building is both valid and something of much conversation internally. we are aware that our prioritization of and engagement with the actual American masses isolates many on the left. but those leftists aren’t really building much and imo aren’t on the path towards liberation. we (self proclaimed leftists) are between 4-7% of the American population (depending how loosely you measure “left”), we don’t get along, constantly fight one another, and form myriad splinter groups instead of uniting. ACP is attempting to form a popular front by simplifying entry into the struggle — namely, being anti-imperialist and anti-Epstein (legible to the average American, more so than imperialism). again, speaking for myself, the question rises: if we are being asked to choose between the “right” (American masses) and the left (4-7% of Americans), who does it make more sense try to develop into active communists? or, asked otherwise; assuming success in organizing, which of these groups is more likely to actually seize the means? that being said, we are trying to unite everyone, so there is a lot of discussion about the very trust building you’ve mentioned. ideally, we’d unite everyone across the right and left against the ruling class. but materially and realistically, the left positions itself in opposition to the majority of people who live here. so when we speak in terms legible to the right, the left feels attacked/isolated. if you recognize this contradiction, what would you suggest as a solution?
Haz’s streams are a bit masculine and internet edgy for me (as a trans ex-ultra leftist, or perhaps hyper leftist, as i see myself as more left than the ultras), but it’s a good place to see what our politics are really like. Garrido is more approachable for the average leftist and will speak on much of the same issues. Haz may be interested in clarifying the ACP position on decolonization if that’s in question.
as for Hinkle, i must say those seem like pretty small potatoes to me. i’ve shared things that ended up being untrue. i understand the importance of being factual, but those examples seem like simple and unaware mistakes with very little real impact. to contrast, Hinkle is on Israeli and Ukrainian kill lists on behalf of the US, lives in Russia for his safety, and was personally invited by several nodes of the anti-imperialist bloc — Nasrallah to a massive rally in Yemen, Iran to the late Ayatollah Khamanei’s funeral, and Venezuela (i don’t remember why). here in America he is controversial but out in the real anti-imperialist movements, he is respected and beloved
Regarding your comments on building a united front, I am aware of some past AMA-style sessions to clear certain concerns with leftists, which seems to be a good first step (though as I'm sure you're aware, many do not engage in good faith).
I can confirm that in terms of causing material change, many are willing to get involved provided real material change is brought about, while the Western left and liberal centrists typically opt for status-quo "soft" imperialism. I'm Christian myself, and despite the church itself leaning conservative, certain churchgoers I spoke to individually still hold relatively open views of China and communism. (You can see https://voiceoftheproletariat.substack.com/p/reflections-on-discussions-toronto-youth-churchgoers/ if you're interested.)
I do follow Garrido and several other ACP-linked accounts on INS, and I can attest that the content is often theoretically sound. Thank you for the specific explanations, especially regarding the ACP's use of symbols like the US flag; I believe that making this content more accessible would be highly beneficial, since the website is fairly basic, though I understand wanting to keep things simple and easy to navigate. (Perhaps an FAQ page, or adding one to the "More Information" page?)
I'm happy to see people honestly engaging with this, both from ACP and elsewhere.
Criticism and Self Criticism is bread and butter to making positive steps in every direction that is of merit, and for assessing those that aren't.
I live in Canada now, and am surrounded by indigenous people, and very left oriented people. Coding ACP as "right wing" has made it difficult to attract many in my community, but there is nothing alienating about bringing people together in a principled way against struggles we all face.
In my mind, ACP are incredibly principled and reliable in their anti-imperialist stances. That they are doing great ground work that will keep disproving misinformation campaigns and poor PR in alienated leftist spaces.
Where I see room for growth is the self acknowledgement that the US is incredibly fractured ideologically, but what humans need to build reliable trust has not. We share in our needs around trust building, self reflection, and in our material reality. The things that are a unifying message are stripped of values that cause folks to code the ACP in modern culture war nonsense. They are virtues by their very nature, and a willingness to address concerns through criticism and self criticism. There are real humans, and life on Earth at stake. We have no time for divisive nonsense. There is a very old saying and I often feel it applies to the ACP except where the very public members are stepping on people for idealogical things of little worth in engaging:
"It is a royal privilege to do good works and be illtreated for it"
Principled comrades have no reason to attack people for their personal lifestyle, but merely to identify what benefits exist in addressing over indulgence in nonproductive arenas. If your stances on things are good, it cuts through noise and is educational criticisms to those who disagree, packaged in a way they will want to make good of auch advice. We can endlessly debate things, but acknowledge that some things can't be allowed to divide us, but only so far, and remain principled.
And Sun Tsu said, when we lead by exaulting virtue and good treatment and reasoning, we beckon the forces of our opposition to relish the idea of joining our ranks, and the leadership- to adopt all that we are doing right.
which leads us to Zeno of Citium: that all the good are friends of eachother.
I agree with the essence of a patriotic socialism, but in the context of a settler-colony, why should Communists represent their patriotism through a colonial flag?
Solely for the symbol. Do you honestly think Americans would support a party that tramples or burns their flag? If I were haz I’d use the fan wennan us flag but regardless this is a pretty pointless debate. Only lefties care about bs like this. The fact that ACP anti imperialist first and argues for a 20 hour work week makes them the most revolutionary party in America
I don't know too much about them. In order to learn anything, one must join the Party, not only paying dues, but swearing an oath to obey Party leadership who I don't know and have never met.
There is no way I will do that for ANYTHING. One must also set up a Telegram account. The ACP doesn't even have a website people can google and read their policy stances on. To my knowledge, they don't even have a public newsletter.
BTW, Turtle Island is a real place. It's called Mackinaw Island on maps, and it never, ever meant the whole continent. That's a recent made up thing by Indigenous "advocates" who've never met a real, live, Indigenous person in their lives.
a friend of mine sent me this article. i am a member of ACP California. i’m going to respond to your major points of question:
1. on violence — it is not realistic or advisable to suggest a public, above ground revolutionary Party advocates for violence. that is inviting repression and incarceration. all public services and statements of any Party that seeks to survive and grow within empire must do so within the bounds of legality, or otherwise fail to adventurism.
2. land back/decolonization — our public facing material is scant on nominal recognition of or commitment to the largely liberal movement of land back to the original stewards of what is now known to be America, but to separate our obvious anti-imperialism from decolonization is not coherent to me. imperialism and colonization are the same entity. currently, our Party is undergoing the construction of a new constitution. we have been working through hundreds of proposals from all over the Party. we will consider this criticism in our designs, which may result in more nominal representation you deem missing. but i must mention that this seems quite idealist to me, speaking only for myself. what does land back mean materially? the indigenous peoples are no longer the masses, literally. they (and we, as i am indigenous) are a very small minority in 2026. if you’re looking for the words “land back” and “decolonization” specifically represented and cosigned by us, then that’s nominal support at best and serves as an ideological signal with no material value. Chairman Haz has mentioned that if and once we become leaders of this nation, one of our first orders of business would be to honor all treaties signed with the sovereign indigenous nations. that’s a material strategy of “land back”, rather than an identitarian, ideological commitment. so i ask you, why does it matter if the words are in our Party platform? what have the orgs that do signal that support materially done for indigenous peoples? if you follow our material work, you can see that we materially support the indigenous peoples both directly where we can and indirectly through our attempt to seize the means of production and cease the exploitation of the indigenous peoples and destruction of the lands.
3. electoralism/MAGA — i invite you to investigate this further bc Haz has directly spoken to this criticism a few times. MAGA communism was, as you describe, an attempt to co-opt the populist promises Trump made to his base by showing them that communism actually offers those things to the people, like shorter work weeks and cheaper cost of living. it was a response to the rise of the New Right, who were doing the same thing (attempting to capture a dynamic audience away from the traditional Republican machine but to the neo-nazi right). it didn’t work, so we stopped doing it. we haven’t done it in a while, but leftists here don’t investigate very much. when i joined the Party myself i looked into the claim that we were somehow MAGA or Republican and found that to be not true. on electoralism and republicans specifically, that is just misinformation. we hardly conduct any electoral work at all. we are considering running for the lowest form of office for the reasons you identified in Lenin, and bc our local efforts would benefit from the funding available to Neighborhood Councils. but that’s it, and as far as i know that’s all there ever has been
4. Hinkle misinformation — not sure what you’re referring to. can you be more specific?
i can speak on behalf of my chapter and cell to some extent, but i highly advise making contact with the ACP near you. much of what you’ve written could have been cleared up with direct communication rather than speaking to the ether where there was no actual dialogue except by the happenstance someone sent this to me. so much of what people believe about us is just rumors. as communists, it is our duty to investigate and speak to people no?
Hi, thanks for engaging, and I'm glad this got to the right people. We are in broad agreement on the vast majority of these matters.
On the topic of decolonization, why avoid the term? "Land Back" may be a specific movement, but decolonization is a universal principle, not a demographic numbers game. Communists do not seek to conceal their aims, and the settler-colonial contradiction remains fundamental to the US state regardless of Indigenous population size. You are correct that merely saying the word has no material value (Western academia uses it widely), yet explicit ideological clarity in party platforms builds genuine trust.
I have not yet seen the statement regarding honouring treaties, but this is noted, and I look forward to seeing the rewritten Constitution; this should undoubtedly clear up many of the criticisms (or rumours, as you've described them) raised by comrades.
Off the top of my head, I can recall two instances of alleged misinformation-spreading on Hinkle's part, namely a photo of Syria labelled as one of Palestine and the sharing of an unverified report that a certain "Israeli" sniper was killed.
“broad agreement” should be our catch phrase lol. most people seem to be when they engage us!
we don’t avoid the term decolonization. i highly doubt it was intentionally left out. the Constitution was written from the ground up and the concept exists so the authors probably just talked about it in different terms. i personally don’t see why the term being on our platform or not matters much (as long as we are decolonial in our material practice, which i’d argue we are more than most parties here), but i’m sure many in the Party will argue for it during the Congress.
as for the numbers, to clarify i was referring to “the masses”. indigenous people are unfortunately literally not the masses, despite that we live among the masses. the masses are largely (66%) social conservatives entirely or nearly entirely captured ideologically by the empire. which is why ACP uses legible symbols like their flag, to show them we care about them rather than work against them (see Hampton on fighting hate with love). any ACP member is necessarily decolonial, as again, that’s a prerequisite of being anti-imperialist.
your point on trust building is both valid and something of much conversation internally. we are aware that our prioritization of and engagement with the actual American masses isolates many on the left. but those leftists aren’t really building much and imo aren’t on the path towards liberation. we (self proclaimed leftists) are between 4-7% of the American population (depending how loosely you measure “left”), we don’t get along, constantly fight one another, and form myriad splinter groups instead of uniting. ACP is attempting to form a popular front by simplifying entry into the struggle — namely, being anti-imperialist and anti-Epstein (legible to the average American, more so than imperialism). again, speaking for myself, the question rises: if we are being asked to choose between the “right” (American masses) and the left (4-7% of Americans), who does it make more sense try to develop into active communists? or, asked otherwise; assuming success in organizing, which of these groups is more likely to actually seize the means? that being said, we are trying to unite everyone, so there is a lot of discussion about the very trust building you’ve mentioned. ideally, we’d unite everyone across the right and left against the ruling class. but materially and realistically, the left positions itself in opposition to the majority of people who live here. so when we speak in terms legible to the right, the left feels attacked/isolated. if you recognize this contradiction, what would you suggest as a solution?
Haz’s streams are a bit masculine and internet edgy for me (as a trans ex-ultra leftist, or perhaps hyper leftist, as i see myself as more left than the ultras), but it’s a good place to see what our politics are really like. Garrido is more approachable for the average leftist and will speak on much of the same issues. Haz may be interested in clarifying the ACP position on decolonization if that’s in question.
as for Hinkle, i must say those seem like pretty small potatoes to me. i’ve shared things that ended up being untrue. i understand the importance of being factual, but those examples seem like simple and unaware mistakes with very little real impact. to contrast, Hinkle is on Israeli and Ukrainian kill lists on behalf of the US, lives in Russia for his safety, and was personally invited by several nodes of the anti-imperialist bloc — Nasrallah to a massive rally in Yemen, Iran to the late Ayatollah Khamanei’s funeral, and Venezuela (i don’t remember why). here in America he is controversial but out in the real anti-imperialist movements, he is respected and beloved
Regarding your comments on building a united front, I am aware of some past AMA-style sessions to clear certain concerns with leftists, which seems to be a good first step (though as I'm sure you're aware, many do not engage in good faith).
I can confirm that in terms of causing material change, many are willing to get involved provided real material change is brought about, while the Western left and liberal centrists typically opt for status-quo "soft" imperialism. I'm Christian myself, and despite the church itself leaning conservative, certain churchgoers I spoke to individually still hold relatively open views of China and communism. (You can see https://voiceoftheproletariat.substack.com/p/reflections-on-discussions-toronto-youth-churchgoers/ if you're interested.)
I do follow Garrido and several other ACP-linked accounts on INS, and I can attest that the content is often theoretically sound. Thank you for the specific explanations, especially regarding the ACP's use of symbols like the US flag; I believe that making this content more accessible would be highly beneficial, since the website is fairly basic, though I understand wanting to keep things simple and easy to navigate. (Perhaps an FAQ page, or adding one to the "More Information" page?)
is always good to encounter other faithful communists. your suggestions are sound, i’ll carry them to the Party!
I'm happy to see people honestly engaging with this, both from ACP and elsewhere.
Criticism and Self Criticism is bread and butter to making positive steps in every direction that is of merit, and for assessing those that aren't.
I live in Canada now, and am surrounded by indigenous people, and very left oriented people. Coding ACP as "right wing" has made it difficult to attract many in my community, but there is nothing alienating about bringing people together in a principled way against struggles we all face.
In my mind, ACP are incredibly principled and reliable in their anti-imperialist stances. That they are doing great ground work that will keep disproving misinformation campaigns and poor PR in alienated leftist spaces.
Where I see room for growth is the self acknowledgement that the US is incredibly fractured ideologically, but what humans need to build reliable trust has not. We share in our needs around trust building, self reflection, and in our material reality. The things that are a unifying message are stripped of values that cause folks to code the ACP in modern culture war nonsense. They are virtues by their very nature, and a willingness to address concerns through criticism and self criticism. There are real humans, and life on Earth at stake. We have no time for divisive nonsense. There is a very old saying and I often feel it applies to the ACP except where the very public members are stepping on people for idealogical things of little worth in engaging:
"It is a royal privilege to do good works and be illtreated for it"
Principled comrades have no reason to attack people for their personal lifestyle, but merely to identify what benefits exist in addressing over indulgence in nonproductive arenas. If your stances on things are good, it cuts through noise and is educational criticisms to those who disagree, packaged in a way they will want to make good of auch advice. We can endlessly debate things, but acknowledge that some things can't be allowed to divide us, but only so far, and remain principled.
And Sun Tsu said, when we lead by exaulting virtue and good treatment and reasoning, we beckon the forces of our opposition to relish the idea of joining our ranks, and the leadership- to adopt all that we are doing right.
which leads us to Zeno of Citium: that all the good are friends of eachother.
The ACP isn't good, but they do more better than DSA honestly despite its countless of controversies.
The DSA is not a Communist party.
I know, the ACP is good at one strategy, being a party to run in it where as DSA is just a Democratic Party org.
Haz has said re: patriotic socialism that the US is already dying, but America continues
I agree with the essence of a patriotic socialism, but in the context of a settler-colony, why should Communists represent their patriotism through a colonial flag?
Solely for the symbol. Do you honestly think Americans would support a party that tramples or burns their flag? If I were haz I’d use the fan wennan us flag but regardless this is a pretty pointless debate. Only lefties care about bs like this. The fact that ACP anti imperialist first and argues for a 20 hour work week makes them the most revolutionary party in America
I don't know too much about them. In order to learn anything, one must join the Party, not only paying dues, but swearing an oath to obey Party leadership who I don't know and have never met.
There is no way I will do that for ANYTHING. One must also set up a Telegram account. The ACP doesn't even have a website people can google and read their policy stances on. To my knowledge, they don't even have a public newsletter.
BTW, Turtle Island is a real place. It's called Mackinaw Island on maps, and it never, ever meant the whole continent. That's a recent made up thing by Indigenous "advocates" who've never met a real, live, Indigenous person in their lives.
Haz would have a good laugh about this oath swearing lol. if you didn’t know we had a website, did you bother investigating these claims at all?
I knew you had a website. I’ve visited it. It positively sucks. Get your shit together.
Their site is acp.us, and they have a publication called Red America.
I’ll look into the Turtle Island matter.
Oh, I know. I’ve looked at it. It doesn’t say very much.