[The following came from the "RCP-USA" website
www.2changetheworld.info]

Aftersorrow raises an important question: "You could do well to 
learn about surplus value. Where does surplus value come from in 
Amerika? Is it extracted from the white nation as well as the New 
Afrikan nation? No the case is that it actually is extracted from 
the "third world" and the white nation is the recipient of it- (as 
well as the New Afrikan nation though clearly to a much smaller 
degree) thus to claim that there is a proletariat comprised of the 
different nation in Amerika and thus to suggest that one party 
should be the vanguard for Amerika as a whole is to succumb to 
revisionism and to ignore the right to self-determination for 
oppressed nations."

Let me give you a quick answer:

The ruling class in the U.S. extracts surplus value from people all 
over the world. The bulk of surplus value is extracted internally, 
from the multinational working class (inlcuding from millions of 
white workers, who labor along side oppressed nationalitie workers 
in the fields and factories and mills). A large and highly 
significant part of the surplus value is extracted outside the 
borders of the U.S. -- including in the form of "superprofits" that 
arise from the extreme exploitation that is possible in semi-feudal 
semicolonial countries.

These superprofits are extremely important for the profitability of 
capital -- even if they are not mathematically the majority of the 
profit absorbed by the U.S. monopoly capitalists.

If you look at the workers inside the U.S. who are exploited (i.e. 
have surplus value extracted and live more or less, off and on, at 
the value of their labor power, i.e. earning barely enough to make 
it back to work and raise their kids) -- then you see millsions of 
workers of all nationalities. 

For some reason, aftersorrow (and some others in the discussion) 
think that Black workers in a textile mill in south carolina are 
exploited, and have surplus value extracted. But they insist that 
the white workers, laboring alongside them for the same wages, and 
living in roughly comparable conditions, are not workers 
but "parasites" -- simply because they are "part of the white 
nation."

I don't think that makes much sense. And i suspect that anyone who 
argues this, has not examined much the lives and conditions and 
numbers of the poorer sections of white workers.

****************************************************************

maoist3@yahoo.com replies: 
The key statement from the "RCP-USA" above is
"The ruling class in the U.S. extracts surplus value from people all 
over the world. The bulk of surplus value is extracted internally, 
from the multinational working class (inlcuding from millions of 
white workers, who labor along side oppressed nationalitie workers 
in the fields and factories and mills)."

As aftersorrowcomesjoy pointed out in the same web space quoted
above, the "RCP-USA" is an organization used to arguing by
analogy. It has no PROOF of the above-mentioned statement, which
if true would make MIM wrong. Not only do they have no proof 
at the "RCP-USA," but they don't care they don't have it.

The "RCP-USA" is a neo-colonial sectarian organization busy running
around the world intervening in various exercises such as
to what extent Hoxhaism is hiding amongst people calling themselves
Maoists. It is also intervening in situations where some Third 
World Maoist parties are having struggles over what percentage
of the population is peasant/industrial/urban/rural and whether
a country is still semi-feudal or not. Yet while those are
important questions they are hair-splitting compared with what
the "RCP-USA" does not answer about u.$ conditions--
and a lot of organizations have noticed this, that
the "RCP-USA" attempts to answer MIM by claiming credit
for People's Wars. First, of all the "RCP-USA" has to know its 
own conditions, and it is revealing that it makes opportunist time
to get publicity from People's Wars outside U.$. borders
but does not have time to calculate exploitation by 
u.$. imperialism. Second of all, the problem of the size of 
super-profits is a question separating the proletariat from the enemy. 
The question of whether someone is an exploited peasant and inaccurately 
being counted as an exploited urban dweller is nonetheless an error WITHIN the
exploited camp. The question of the labor aristocracy is a question
of separating from the ENEMY.

Below is a listing of the various essays we have published
providing proof of our position:

MIM Theory #1.
We had a follow-up to some theory aspects of that in MT#2/3.
There was a little more in MT#4 and MT#7.
MIM Theory #10 was again, like MIM Theory #1 all about
the labor aristocracy and again included articles on how you can
account for the surplus-value. That was already 1996, six years ago 
with no parallel investigation by the "RCP-USA."
Finally, we went so far as to put a whole book online on the subject 
and there is no "RCP-USA" response. 

http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/mt/imp97/index.html

The above from the "RCP-USA"
is also typical of the kind of ignorant responses the Black Panther
Party used to receive from hysterical opposition.
First of all, our position on internal semi-colony exploitation is 
inaccurately stated. It is here:

http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/contemp/internalclass3.htm

Second of all, within the "RCP-USA" view above we see again a lack
of seriousness. So what if two people work in the same factory?
The Black will have less seniority, a lower chance of working
in management, less in pensions, a higher chance of being fired
/laid off and much less in assets handed down than the white. The 
white is the historical owner of land stolen from the indigenous 
peoples, and traded within the white nation, such that the average 
white has more than $40,000 greater assets in home ownership alone--
and homes are half the monetary value of assets in the united 
$tates. That $40,000+ is more than 20 years of wages at the average
Third World wage.

Again, the main point though is that the "RCP-USA" is simply
wrong about: "The bulk of surplus value is extracted internally, 
from the multinational working class (inlcuding from millions of 
white workers, who labor along side oppressed nationalitie workers 
in the fields and factories and mills)." While Mao Zedong
had to go into the countryside and understand things like the
price of salt, umbrellas and clothing--this "RCP-USA" is
running around globally telling people things about u.$.
imperialism that it does not know about. Yes, Mao had
to figure out who the "main force" of revolution was going to be,
and tally up the percentages of people in various classes
and where they could be found, and even so his arguments over that 
were an argument WITHIN the exploited camp. The job for communists
within u.$. borders is first to separate from the enemy and to
do that it won't be possible without calculating super-profits
first.

Understand that the "RCP-USA" is telling white nationalist
fairy-tales about u.$. imperialist surplus-value mostly coming from 
the white working class and you will understand the profound split
within the imperialist country communist movement caused by 
revisionism. This explains why internationalist reparations
do not play a decisive role in the "RCP-USA" program. It also
explains why the "RCP-USA" and their German comrades the "MLPD"
do not think the imperialist countries are more than a minority
petty-bourgeoisie. All other questions arising are relatively easy
by comparison. Grasp this one and you can sweep away 
imperialist country revisionism.