By Musa T. Bey

The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) once positioned itself at the forefront of the Black liberation struggle, embracing the radical Black Belt theory, which framed African Americans in the South as an oppressed nation with the right to self-determination. However, over time, the party abandoned this revolutionary stance in favor of a more integrationist and class-reductionist approach. This shift was not just a strategic pivot—it was a clear example of revisionism, a betrayal of the Leninist principles the party once upheld.

The CPUSA’s retreat from Black self-determination reflects a broader trend of revisionism within the party—one that waters down the revolutionary demands of oppressed people in favor of assimilation into the American political system. As socialists and freedom fighters, we must confront this historical revisionism and ask: Can a socialist movement that refuses to center Black self-determination ever achieve true liberation?

The Black Belt Thesis and Its Revolutionary Potential

The Black Belt thesis, developed in the late 1920s and early 1930s under the guidance of the Communist International (Comintern), was rooted in a Leninist analysis of the national question. It recognized that Black people in the South, subjected to semi-feudal conditions and state-sanctioned terror, formed a distinct oppressed nation with a legitimate claim to self-determination.

This position was not a mere theoretical exercise—it was a call to action. By advocating for the right to self-governance, land control, and economic sovereignty, the CPUSA aligned itself with global anti-colonial movements. This approach was a direct rejection of liberal reformism, which sought to integrate Black people into an inherently white supremacist and capitalist system rather than dismantle that system altogether.

However, as the CPUSA became more invested in American labor struggles and mainstream civil rights advocacy, it began diluting its stance on the national question. The shift was gradual but deliberate, reflecting a broader revisionist tendency within the party—one that sacrificed revolutionary demands in favor of political expediency.

CPUSA’s Revisionism and the Abandonment of Self-Determination

By the mid-20th century, CPUSA had abandoned the Black Belt thesis, shifting its focus toward multiracial class unity while downplaying the distinct oppression of Black people. Instead of advocating for self-determination, the party pushed for integration into the U.S. system, aligning itself with the liberal civil rights movement rather than revolutionary Black nationalist struggles.

This revisionist shift was influenced by several factors:

1. The Rise of McCarthyism: The CPUSA faced intense repression during the Red Scare, leading to internal purges and a retreat from radical positions. Rather than standing firm on Black self-determination, the party sought legitimacy by aligning with mainstream civil rights organizations.

2. Electoral Opportunism: As CPUSA increasingly engaged in electoral politics, it abandoned demands that were seen as too “divisive” or threatening to American liberal democracy. This opportunism led to a betrayal of the radical principles that once distinguished the party.

3. Class Reductionism: CPUSA increasingly framed Black liberation as a subset of the broader working-class struggle, failing to recognize that Black oppression was not just a matter of class but of national subjugation. This revisionist approach ignored the specific needs and demands of Black revolutionaries who sought self-determination rather than mere economic equality.

By rejecting the Black Belt thesis, CPUSA effectively dismissed the Leninist principle that national oppression requires a national solution. Instead, it promoted a revisionist framework that reduced Black oppression to a secondary issue within the larger struggle for socialism.

The Consequences of Revisionism

CPUSA’s retreat from Black self-determination weakened the socialist movement’s ability to engage meaningfully with Black liberation struggles. It alienated revolutionary Black organizers who sought real autonomy, leading many to turn toward nationalist formations like the Republic of New Afrika, the Black Panther Party, and the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement.

Today, the consequences of this revisionism are still felt. CPUSA continues to advocate for anti-racism within a broader socialist framework, but it fails to center Black self-determination as a primary demand. This approach mirrors the liberal tendency to acknowledge systemic racism while refusing to support real structural change.

Reclaiming a Revolutionary Approach

If we are serious about Black liberation, we cannot accept a revisionist approach that downplays self-determination in favor of integration into a fundamentally oppressive system. Instead, we must return to a truly revolutionary framework—one that recognizes that Black people in America continue to face national oppression and that their liberation must include the right to self-governance.

This does not mean a mechanical return to the 1930s version of the Black Belt theory, but it does mean re-engaging with its core principles: land, sovereignty, and self-determination as necessary components of Black freedom. The fight for socialism must be inseparable from the fight for Black power, and any movement that fails to recognize this will inevitably fall short.

CPUSA once had the potential to be a vanguard in the Black liberation struggle. Instead, through revisionism and opportunism, it chose to abandon its most revolutionary positions. The question now is whether today’s socialist movements will repeat that mistake or finally embrace the full reality of Black self-determination.