Browderism refers to the variant ofMarxism–Leninism developed in the 1940s by American communist politicianEarl Browder, who led theCommunist Party USA (CPUSA) from 1930 to 1945. It was characterized by its deviations from traditional Marxist–Leninist positions onclass conflict and the role of thecommunist party. Browderism aligned the CPUSA with mainstream American politics and contemporary events; this involved incorporatingAmericanism and its nationalist values into the party's message and strategies. Moreover, Browderism embracedclass collaboration with thebourgeoisie under apopular front.
During the 1940s, the CPUSA was liquidated into the Communist Political Association (CPA) and supportedpeaceful coexistence towards the beginning of theCold War. In the communist world, particularlyLatin America, parties also began pursuing class collaboration and internal reorganization. However, in 1945, theFrench communist magazineLes Cahiers du communisme published the 'Duclos letter' (attributed toJacques Duclos), which attacked the party's policies and liquidation asrevisionist. Browder was then expelled from the party, leading to a snap election in July, whereStalinist memberWilliam Z. Foster was re-elected as party leader and reverted back to traditional policies. Since the 1940s, Browderism has remained scrutinized in the communist world byanti-revisionists (including within the CPUSA) as indicative ofAmerican exceptionalism, and accusing Browder's leadership of betraying the American labor movement.
Earl Russell Browder becameGeneral Secretary of theCommunist Party USA in 1930,[1] and served as the party's unilateral leader and public face throughout his leadership—coinciding with theGreat Depression andpresidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The CPUSA's initial hostility to theNew Deal resembled the theory ofsocial fascism, attacking Roosevelt's policies in their 1934 manifesto while claiming Roosevelt's program to be "in political essence and direction [...] the same" as that ofAdolf Hitler.[2] Browder clarified in a 1933 pamphlet on social fascism thatfascism in general was “the dictatorship offinance capital”, and therefore Roosevelt and Hitler were the same in how “both are executives of finance capital”.[3] Browder also attacked theSocialist Party of America (SPA) and its 1932 presidential nomineeNorman Thomas, accusing him of "cover[ing] up the class character of democracy by contrasting it with fascist dictatorship as if capitalist rule were not the essence of both", as well as "absolv[ing] the capitalist class of its fascist terror and mak[ing] it appear as a measure ofself-defense against Communistprovocation."[4] Yet in 1935, coinciding with the7th World Congress of the Comintern endorsing thepopular front strategy,[5] Browder in turn endorsed the New Deal, and described the political situation as between democracy and fascism, rather than socialism and capitalism.[6]
While Browder continued to serve as the Communist nominee for the1936 and1940presidential elections, he gave a public speech on January 6, 1935, outlining an alliance with the SPA.[7] Browder formally proposed a large-scale united front between the two parties, recognizing how Thomas acknowledged specific issues for cooperation.[8] Within theAmerican Left, such an alliance was endorsed byThe New Republic, arguing that a broadanti-fascist platform meant "agree[ing] with Mr. Browder that common action is imperative and that the way to unite is to unite; and with Mr. Thomas that the way to begin is on specific issues."[9] Browder also sought to form newmass organizations to unite communists with other progressive forces, including theAmerican League Against War and Fascism in 1933,[10] and thePsychologists League[11] andLeague of American Writers,[12] both in 1935.
As this popular front strategy progressed leading up toWorld War II, Browder further de-emphasized Marxist rhetoric by utilizing American patriotism to appeal to a broader audience in U.S. politics. This coincided with Comintern policy underJoseph Stalin, which still supported the popular front strategy worldwide up until theMolotov–Ribbentrop Pact and the beginning of World War II. Due to the undermining of the Soviet Union'santi-fascist reputation, the CPUSA's ranks and recruitment numbers diminished.[13] Browder was imprisoned in 1941; following his early release a year later, he returned to the general secretary position strongly in support of the American war effort, contrasted by the accusations of "imperialist war" the party had previously made. This led to the brief end ofclass conflict and beginning ofclass collaboration in Browder prioritizing the popular front in the party's appeal above all else. These tendencies of Browderism, emphasizing an uncompromising popular front and aim to popularize the party with Americans culminated in 1944, when the CPUSA was officially dissolved for a short time and was restructured into the Communist Political Association (CPA).[14] This decision from Browder, though receiving unanimous support from the National Committee as a constitutional convention for the new organization was planned for May 1944,[15] there was bitter opposition to this change in the form of the Foster-Darcy letter, co-signed by CPUSA factional rivalWilliam Z. Foster and Philadelphia District OrganizerSamuel Adams Darcy. Limited circulation of the letter was tolerated within the party leadership, but it would later lead to Darcy's expulsion by a CPA committee headed by Foster,[16] who submitted to party discipline as emphasized by Browder.[17]
Following theTehran Conference in 1943, Browder hoped for the alliance between theAllied powers to continue after the war inpeaceful coexistence,[18] yet with the beginning of theCold War andMcCarthyism, Browderism became open to scrutiny.Jacques Duclos, Comintern member and leader of theFrench Communist Party (PCF) published an article in the party's theoretical magazine,Les Cahiers du communisme, attacking Browder's positions in what became known as the "Duclos letter". Quoting the Foster-Darcy letter, Duclos criticized Browder's beliefs about a harmonious post-war world as "erroneous conclusions in no wise flowing from a Marxist analysis of the situation", and that liquidating the CPUSA constituted a "notorious revision ofMarxism".[19] In retrospect, the article was found by historiansHarvey Klehr,John Earl Haynes and Kyrill M. Anderson to have already been written in Russian and initiated by Moscow, after they determined post-war relations would become hostile. With the end of thePacific War, Duclos was instructed to publish the article under his own name.[20]
The article had major consequences for Browderism (sealing Browder's fate within the party) and the American communist movement, as the article had circulated worldwide among Comintern officials. The Communist Party USA was re-established at a snap election in July 1945, and Browder was removed from his position as general secretary, with Foster, who led the effort against Browderism, appointed as chairman andEugene Dennis appointed as general secretary.[20] Browder remained in the party, continuing to espouse Browderism in the form ofDistributors Guide: Economic Analysis: A Service for Policy Makers, a weekly newsletter outlining his own vision forSoviet–American relations in contrast to the unfolding Cold War. This was considered to breach party discipline, and Browder was formally expelled from the CPUSA on February 5, 1946.[21]
Browder died in June 1973.[22] At this point, the Communist Party USA was under the leadership ofGus Hall, Browderism was fully removed from the party platform, as the party remained committed to traditionalMarxism–Leninism. However, within Hall's policies, there were similarities with Browderism. This included a brief attempt to forge a "broad people's political movement", aligning the CPUSA in a new popular front with thecivil rights movement andanti-Vietnam War movement to amass support amongbaby boomers. This would've tied the CPUSA, a by-product of theOld Left, with theNew Left, yet was unsuccessful.[23] Hall also coined the term "Bill of Rights socialism", advocating for socialist ideals to be incorporated into theU.S. Constitution.[24] However, Hall did not cite Browderism as inspiration for these policies, as there are notable differences which reflect a different era, particularly as Hall was more restrained when deviating from tradition, being a committed Soviet ally. Joseph C. Mouledous noted how Hall advocated in 1961 for aunited front policy, allying with different groups around certain political issues. Moreover, Hall stressed elsewhere the party's necessity not to take over such organizations, which Mouledous attributed to how "[t]he dangers of the united-front policy were made manifest during the Browder period, when the Party dissolved itself."[25]
Browderism supported the organization of apopular front, attracting middle-class forces towards socialism amidst the influence ofreactionaries andfascism.[26] This strategy was adopted by the Comintern from 1934 until the signing of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact in 1939,[13] with examples of popular front governments briefly holding power in the 1930s includingSpain,France andChile.[27] Browder's push for such a broadanti-fascist coalition was due to the rise offascism in Europe and the popularity of theNew Deal, which Browder was initially hostile to, but then came to seek an alliance with the New Dealers, despite orders from Moscow in September 1939 to oppose Roosevelt, leading to conflict within the CPUSA.[28]
Under Browderism, the need forclass conflict against thebourgeosie by theproletariat was de-prioritized and downplayed by the necessity for as broad a popular front as possible. This evolved intoclass collaboration, where distinctions between socioeconomic classes were put aside in favor of cooperation for an underlying goal, feeding into the need to resist fascism during World War II, as Browder justified in his 1942 bookVictory and After.[29] Browder's leadership made use of softer rhetoric more in line with terms used by the Roosevelt administration, such as "economic royalism".[30][31]
Browder utilizedAmericanism to promote the CPUSA's platform in accordance with traditional values ofliberty andrepublicanism. In aNew Masses article in June 1935, Browder positioned communism as part of the American revolutionary tradition:[32]
We Communists claim the revolutionary traditions of Americanism. We are the only ones who continue those traditions and apply them to the problems of today.We are the Americans and Communism is the Americanism of the twentieth century.
— Earl Browder, What Is Communism?8. Americanism—Who Are the Americans?, 1935
During therecession of 1937–1938, Browder re-affirmed his "full and complete support" of Roosevelt as an anti-fascist who could be relied on to prevent World War II, despite Roosevelt's reputational damage within the American Left. This caused tensions with Foster, who judged it as ill-timed with the recession.[33] The CPUSA's liquidation into the CPA further exemplified the notion of a uniquely American approach to communism, disregarding the relevance ofvanguardism and prioritizing electoral politics going forward.[34]
The Browderist approach torace relations was unique within the CPUSA'shistory of strong relations with African Americans. According to Mouledous, the CPA diverged from theLeninist principle ofself-determination for African Americans, instead advocating forsocial integration; Browder cited World War II as the opportunity, writing in 1944 for theCommunist that "[t]he immediate achievement in this period, under the present American system, of complete equality for the Negroes, has been made possible by the war as a peoples' war of national liberation." Mouledous argues this approach amounted to class collaboration based on progressive tendencies.[35]
Browderism achieved a brief layer of international support, particularly inLatin America. Communist parties inColombia,Cuba andVenezuela "most openly accepted the ideas of Earl Browder [and] quoted him by name" according to historianManuel Caballero; this included class collaboration.[36] In addition to Colombia and Cuba, communist parties inJamaica,Puerto Rico andGreece reorganized under the CPA's model.[37]
Under the leadership of Augusto Durán, theColombian Communist Party (PCC) was renamed as the 'Socialist Democratic Party' and committed itself to a popular front. TheUnited States Department of State—recognizing the similar approach of the CPA—speculated that the 1943 dissolution of the Comintern would have led to the party being absorbed into that front.[38] Similarly to the CPUSA's support for Roosevelt under Browder, Durán led the PCC's support ofliberal Colombian presidentAlfonso López Pumarejo, and would later be criticized at the Communist Unity Congress in July 1946 following the Duclos letter.[39]
ThePopular Socialist Party (PSP) adopted its own Browderist position on class collaboration with the publication ofColaboración entre Obreros y Patronos byLázaro Peña [es], PSP executive member and general secretary of theConfederación de Trabajadores de Cuba (CTC). Based on a speech he gave to the National Association of Industrialists (ANIC), Peña argued that such collaboration between employees and employers was inCuba's national economic interests following WWII.[40] Soon after the CPA's formation in the U.S., PSP general secretaryBlas Roca Calderio announced that he would begin cooperating with British and American investors, citing Browder as inspiration.[37] When the Duclos letter was published, the PSP—along with the PCC—censured it in the Venezuelan communist newspaper¡Aquí Está!. The PSP claimed that unlike in the U.S., their class collaboration was necessary as an "anti-imperialist alliance" due to Latin America's underdeveloped conditions.[41] However, during Foster's address to the PSP's 3rd National Assembly in January 1946, Browderism was formally repudiated by the party.[40]
Outside of Latin America, Browderist influence in theCommunist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) was partly a grassroots effort by the CPUSA, with Browder sendingNew Masses editorJoseph North to London to attend aWorld Federation of Trade Unions founding conference in February 1945 to advocate for its policies. A statement from the CPGB's leadership claimed that "advocates for the Browder line for Britain, including some enthusiastic adherents from the United States and other countries" supported the party's liquidation, akin to that of the CPUSA in 1944.[42] Additionally, the party's response to the Duclos letter caused similar debate in Latin America as to whether its condemnation of Browderism was applicable to them.[43]
During its 18th Congress in November 1945, the CPGB criticized Browderism, yet in contrast to the Latin American examples, denied any notion that the ideology had significantly infiltrated party ranks. General secretaryHarry Pollitt—a Stalinist—argued in his political report to the congress that Browder's proposals "assumed a basic change in the character ofimperialism, denied its reactionary role, and held out a long-term perspective of harmonious capitalist development and class peace after the war, both for the United States and the world." Furthermore, Pollitt justified the CPGB's favorable portrayal of the CPUSA during the Browderist period as informed by camaraderie amid anti-communist political attacks, and that:[44]
The line of Browder did exercise a limited influence in our Party, although in view of the statements of some comrades in our pre-Congress discussion that the Executive Committee of our Party succumbed to "Browderism", it is necessary to state publicly that we resisted definite attempts to import Browder's basic ideas into our Party by some of our own comrades.
— Harry Pollitt,Communist Policy for Britain, 1945
Historian Neil Redfern challenges Pollitt's portrayal of events by noting how his "theses had not been essentially significantly different from Browder's ideas", pointing to Pollitt's revisionist position on war as an example.[45] Furthermore, trade unionistArthur Horner claimed in 1960 that, in retrospect, certain party members sympathized with de-prioritizing class conflict.[46]
.jpg)
According to Steve Ellner,Juan Bautista Fuenmayor—elected general secretary of theCommunist Party of Venezuela (PCV) at the 1st National Conference in August 1937—pursued a similar position to the CPUSA's liquidation into the CPA. In 1945, his pamphletThe Role of the Working Class and Communists in the Current Era argued for a "party of a new type" to form, uniting progressives around the then-clandestine party. Fuenmayor justified this course of action by alluding to "demagogic organizations" opportunistically appealing to the socialist identity themselves; this likely referred toDemocratic Action, whosereformist politics Fuenmayor sought to confront during his tenure.[47]
While publishing the Colombian and Cuban censures of the Duclos letter in¡Aquí Está!, the PCV debated whether they should likewise publicly denounce it, with concerns that Browder was hindered in adequately responding against Duclos' charges.[41] During the Communist Unity Congress, dissidents from theUnited Venezuelan Communist Party (PCVU) attacked the party's close association with Browderist policies, includingPompeyo Márquez.[48] Rodolfo Quintero opposed the re-entry of former Browderists from the former PCV leadership, declaring that "[w]e have been fed the excrement of Browderism from Cuba."[49]
Unlike other variants of Marxism–Leninism likeMaoism andHoxhaism, Browderism has not retained relevance within American communist politics, and its international influence was predominantly confined to the 1940s. It has, in retrospect, been criticized byanti-revisionists, a position within Marxism–Leninism which remains ideologically committed to Stalinism. Anti-revisionists argued that Browderism was indicative ofAmerican exceptionalism, insinuating that the circumstances of class conflict didn't apply to the U.S. Furthermore, they argued that the broad popular front Browderism envisioned subordinated the CPUSA to the interests of the bourgeoisie via theDemocratic Party, and that the threat of fascism used as justification was non-existent.[50] During theSino-Soviet split, the editorial departments of thePeople's Daily andRed Flag claimed the revisionism ofNikita Khrushchev can be traced back to Browderism, even calling Khrushchev "a disciple of Browder".[51]
Within the CPUSA,John Gates attacked the ideology along withTitoism andTrotskyism in a 1951 pamphlet, declaring it to be "a valuable instrument in the hands of U.S. imperialism in its plans for world war and counter-revolution."[52]Claudia Jones was critical of the Browderist political line on race relations as "strengthening [...]bourgeois nationalism among the Negro people and [...] undue reliance on the Negro reformist leadership."[53] In a 2020 article, the CPUSA criticized Browderism as "opportunistic", accusing it of confusing and abandoning the party's principles and constituencies.[54]
