Follow-Up Statement of the Ad Hoc Committee

Criticisms received in the aftermath of our introductory statement has led to this follow up.

It has been almost three months since the dissolution of RSCC and the LC. To reiterate, the Ad Hoc Committee was organized by former RSCC members and unaffiliated comrades in order to discuss and develop a summation of the organization, not just in relation to gender contradictions but the entirety of its history. Additionally, we felt the need to try and answer the question of how gender contradictions in organizational spaces could be handled and resolved as there was a clear mishandling of it in the past. Some of the former RSCC members have witnessed if not first hand experienced gender contradiction and due to an absence of protocols and capabilities of the leadership, most of these contradictions have been swept under the rug or handled with little care.

Of the recent criticisms given to the Ad Hoc, one has been of our alleged lack of communications with the recent survivors.

We would like to clarify that this is partially incorrect. We did not approach the survivors as members of the Ad Hoc because Ad Hoc was yet to be made officially. Instead, some of our members approached the survivors individually as concerned parties and when it was clear that survivors did not wish to speak to us, we respected it, even after Ad Hoc was developed. Being a survivor is not easy, and if survivors request to be left alone while in their recovery, we felt we must do so with the utmost respect. 

Another criticism made has been an allegation of open communication with the right camp, namely those who have been identified as perpetrators of gender violence. We’d like to clarify that we are not in open communications with them.

Our last statement was said to have sounded authoritative and commanding by requesting submissions of former members’ experiences. This was not our intention and we accept the criticism. We had hoped to make it easy for interested parties to work with us and assumed emailing or meeting would be easiest. We’d like to correct the statement and clarify that interested parties are more than welcome to join us and work on this summation for closure. In addition to this, we plan to reach out to the majority of the former RSCC members. We say majority, because we do not want to allow the narrative to be influenced by perpetrators.

We’ve also been made aware that recent survivors have been developing their own group summation and criticisms. We developed Ad Hoc with the objective of working on a group summation. We are not trying to develop our summation as the omniscient perspective or in competition with any other summation. Our summation will be limited to the facts and subjective that is our own experiences as well as anyone else who chooses to add their voice so they don’t have to work on one alone. Considering that already a few summations have been released, ours would be one of the many. We look forward to reading the summations released by all parties, including the survivors.

Additionally, we were given a criticism for utilizing the word “investigation”. We understand that this word can be triggering to survivors and we hope to convey that that was not our intention. Some among us are survivors and we can understand how the usual definition of it can be triggering. To reiterate our previous statement, we are not trying to investigate survivors’ claims in order to discredit them in a similar fashion as the state. We seek to question and develop how to address gender contradictions in organizational spaces and resolve them. Our main objective is to develop the organizational summation but to address the gender contradictions, not just the recent ones but those that occurred since the inception of the organization. It would be untruthful if these elements are left out of the summation. We are not trying to parade these incidents to rehash wounds, or identify survivors by name (which is incredibly harmful and reckless behavior) but to identify the perpetrators and criticize them openly so people will not be blind to the perpetrators’ faults.

Currently, we are making efforts to open dialogue on this subject understanding that simply opening a women or queer caucus or studying literature is not enough to fight patriarchal behavior in an organization. We’ve seen how even non male comrades can fail one another: whether as a perpetrator, a silent bystander or an apologist.

There are different organizations/groups that already have their own ways of dealing with gender contradictions. We want to learn what we can from them to apply the relevant and effective tactics to our own practice in the future. To simply walk away from RSCC and join or develop other organizations carries the possibility of continued bad gender practice and we hope to refrain from that.  

– Ad Hoc Committee


Declaring Dissolution of RSCC and Formation of a Temporary Collective.

This is the official statement of the dissolution of the Revolutionary Student Coordinating Committee as well as a declaration of the founding of the RSCC Summation Ad­Hoc Committee. The Revolutionary Student Coordinating Committee was an advanced mass organization that was guided by the Liaison Committee for a New Communist Party(NCP­LC), particularly the NYC branch.

RSCC dissolved for a combination of factors in the short term:

A. the absence of a guiding organization while the sharpest yet of gender contradictions within RSCC arose

B. contradictions that RSCC members did not know how to address since proletarian feminist handling of gender contradictions was incorrectly never prioritized to be developed,

C. at the same time RSCC secretariat disintegrated as four out of five members got suspended,

D. voting new sec member, although attempted, was the last of the general body’s concerns where mistrust grew and fear of being ashamed publicly for non­antagonistic remarks grew each day,

E. the RSCC internal page became a showdown of anarchy and members started resigning(to be explained within the summation).

As a result of all this we agreed to dissolve the organization and everyone, with chaos fresh in their memory scattered for the next few days. As weeks went by, people started sharing concerns with each other over the way RSCC dissolved and acknowledged that we cannot simply dissolve and walk off. Members of the Ad­Hoc group united with the unity of summing up the organization for the masses so that the next student movement can learn from our successes and even more, learn from our failures to build a better movement.

Our Assessment of the Current Situation

In the wake of RSCC collapsing, we are witness to the response of the two deviating forces of the last gender contradictions within RSCC (having to do with LC members): The right deviating group of identified perpetrators and the “left” deviating group, consisting of individuals surrounding the survivors and who are opportunistically using the gender contradiction to wreck organizations who are external to the very contradictions. The right deviators have been engaging in threatening tactics to shut down survivors and aggressively pushing their version of events on multiple people, including showing up where they’re unwanted and harassing ex­mass members of RSCC and members of other orgs they worked in. The “left” deviators have been focused on publicly shaming every person not in agreement with their way of handling the contradiction, which includes opportunistic use of non­antagonistic contradictions even those that are resolved, some that have nothing to do with patriarchy, and a number of times twisting facts to fit the intent.

With hopes to further deepen and sharpen our analysis of the handling of gender contradictions, we plan to investigate all the data and statements collected to gain insight on how patriarchal behavior within the organization occurred, was allowed to take root and flourish unchecked. To clarify, we do not intend to carry out an investigation the way the state would. The goal is not to question the validity of the survivor’s trauma or to discredit survivors in any way but to address and attack patriarchy directly and immediately among our ranks. In this process, we hope that the investigative tools that we utilize through trial and error can provide a proper foundation in addressing gender contradictions for ourselves and others in the future. Furthermore, the purpose of an investigation is to stay accountable to the masses by abiding by our political line. As Mao said, ” Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense.” Unless a full investigation takes place we will not be able to come to a permanent conclusion on the matter.

Although we are external to the contradiction between the survivors and the abusers, we are aware of the failure to properly develop Proletarian Feminism which led to the many internal contradictions that we witnessed. As mass members of RSCC it is our failure to not have correctly combatted these liberalism’s (including our own) sooner. For this we will self­criticize in our summation.

What We Understand as the Correct Feminist Line and Our Intentions and Next Steps

RSCC identified as an Anti­Capitalist, Anti­Imperialist and Proletarian Feminist organization. In theory we understood that class is the fundamental cause of oppression and that patriarchal oppression is part of class oppression. We know that in order to smash the system of patriarchy we must eliminate classes and all oppressive social relations. We understand that working class, oppressed genders and nationalities are a section of the most oppressed and to organize them against class oppression, we must maintain a revolutionary line of Feminism, as in Proletarian Feminism. The NCP­LC failed to uphold Proletarian Feminism thus they were not able to provide Proletarian Feminist leadership to their mass organization, RSCC. Of course this does not absolve us from self­criticism as (non­LC) RSCC members and this is where we realize the importance of initiative, even if this means questioning directives. The last gender contradictions are the most severe but certainly not the only contradictions that took place since the birth of the organization. RSCC, like many left organizations had plenty of gender contradictions. The bad gender practice included but are not limited to: male chauvinistic behavior, encouraging hook­up culture, and finally, n on­prioritization of developing non­men in leadership.

We sincerely want to apologize to those impacted by the horrendous patriarchal behavior in RSCC and failures to properly address these matters as they arose. We understand that it wasn’t only leadership that is guilty of failing to address the bad gender practice and will strive to confront this in our summation.

RSCC disintegrated in the span of a few days for the short­term reasons we laid out beforehand. In the long term, however, RSCC dissolved for lack of development and practice of the ideological line, a contradiction that overflowed from the NCP­LC and into the student org as they (LC members) were at the helm of RSCC leadership. This is a point we will expand on in our summation. The Ad­Hoc committee’s objective is to create a historical materialist summation of the 4 years of RSCC to specify this point. In the summation we will identify the revolutionary practices and the backwards practices, put forth thorough Criticism­Self­Criticism for backwards practices, and outline a plan as to how those errors could be rectified for the future of the movement.

It needs to be stated that rectification does not necessarily mean simply writing a statement and being temporarily banned from engaging in events or overall political tasks. It’s a process in which one self­criticizes, admits to their actions to their comrades and understands their backwards ideas/practices to transform them into ideas/practices that are revolutionary. Rectification is not a process of serving “community service” and moving on when their time is served but rather a long term method of breaking the patriarchal behavior. We understand that patriarchy doesn’t disappear overnight, and for those who can be rectified, it is a long road of unlearning the bad habits and maintaining proper gender practice that must be undertaken by the perpetrator for the rest of their lives, as well as everyone else who sincerely strives to smash patriarchy. A process through which a higher unity is reached and ideology would be put into practice both on a political and personal level. This process is done collectively as an organization.

In order to put forth revolutionary politics amongst the masses we have to uphold the processes of Criticism­Self­Criticism and Rectification. If we reject these processes, we won’t learn how to address contradictions and we won’t learn from them. If this is so, then how can we guide the masses through these same contradictions? We are not separate from the society we live in and we as revolutionaries hold on to many of the backwards practices that exist in this exploitative system. Many of these practices are rectifiable (non­antagonistic contradictions), e.g. an inappropriate remark, and many are not rectifiable (antagonistic contradictions), e.g. rape as a form of sexual violence. When someone in our ranks engages in reactionary behavior, we must identify through investigation of what type of contradiction we’re dealing with and how we should proceed with either a rectification plan or permanent isolation. Without addressing gender contradictions in a principled manner, no organization will develop oppressed genders as revolutionaries. By upholding Proletarian Feminism we will be able to organize oppressed genders and build a movement that fights class oppression as the root cause of all oppression.

Before we sum up our experiences, we will specifically re­evaluate the past mishandlings of the gender contradictions within RSCC and highlight the failure of the NYC branch of the NCP­LC in providing guidance to their mass organization to carry out theory into practice which built a weak foundation for the organization.

We will be performing an investigation but do not want to limit the summation to ourselves. Therefore, if any former RSCC members or individuals/organizations who worked with RSCC would like to present their experiences of the organization to us, we are open to hearing their account and adding to the summation. If you have criticisms or want to share your thoughts with this group, please forward your name, contact information and former/current organizational affiliation to and we will reach out to organize a meeting with you. We understand the importance of and will maintain your anonymity if it is requested.

Furthermore, we recognize that this investigative process will be one of trial and error, as mentioned above. For this process to be effective, those involved in the investigations will be open to constant criticism and self criticism of the themselves and the investigative process, just as we believe any revolutionary group should be. 


Contradiction: The basis two­sideness of all things, opposites, their birth, growth and development and transformations. There are different kinds of contradictions internal to a collective and external to it. F or more understanding check out M ao’s On Contradiction 

Historical Materialism: The dialectical and materialist approach to understanding the history and development of society, understanding the source and origins of social ideas, theories, political philosophies and institutions. Life of a society is determined by the conditions of the material life of society.

Criticism: The practice of principled self reflection of oneself and the collective in order to correct behaviors, actions, habits that may begin to erode the organization.






Dan C 




Daniel D 

Asha C 

Danny S 

Michael B 


Kevin K 

Marisa D 

Akash R