gay liberation

Robert Malecki malecki at
Sat Apr 20 02:13:05 MDT 1996

>>The danger of single issue politics like sexual oppression always
>>leads to trying to reform this society for one particular group or the
>>other. As a worker i am prepared to defend people against sexual oppression
>>but in return i demand that they see and fight for the liberation of the
>>whole class..
>   Is it dangerous to try to reform society for this or that group? Should the
>Black-led civil rights movement have pointed out that they were not fighting
>for civil rights for Blacks, but for everyone, and that, coincidentally, they
>wanted a little freedom for themselves as well? It seems that they would have
>had to argue their case that way in order to get Malecki's support.

No Jim you are wrong again. Communist would naturally fight in the
civil-rights movement. We would have tried to draw the trade unions into
this struggle. Against the racist terror we would have purposed building a
workers and black defense guard to combat terror-this is counter-posed to
calling federal troops (the deadly enemy of both blacks and workers) We
would have said that everybody has the right to education free! We would
have called on bringing the heavys in like the UAW and the Teamsters. And we
would have called on a workers government which is the only garantee for
full integration...We would have drawn women into the struggle

I did not say it was a danger to reform society for this or that group. I
said there is a danger of organising around single issues which lead to
reformist conclusions.I thought that Communists try to understand that it is
only by a proletarian revolution led by the working class that the various
reforms for special groups can be solved. Our duty must naturally point this
out to people who consistently put there own interests before the interests
of the whole class. Naturally one fights rascism or sexual oppression, but
the point here is that unless there is a proletarian revolution led by the
Vanguard rascism nor sexual oppression will be erased..That is why it is our
duty to tell people engaged in single issue struggles the horrible truth.
i.e. reforms will and can not solve your problems only revolution and the
dictatorship of the proletariat can do that. That is also why we fight in
trade unions.You know a series of traditional demands leading up to and
including the formation of Soviets and a workers government.

Jim writes:
>   Malecki demands that "they" fight for the liberation of the whole class
>as a condition for winning his support. But communists support all the
>democratic struggles of oppressed people regardless of the consciousness
>of the participants at the time. We understand that most people who are
>fighting for freedom don't share the farsighted social and political analysis
>that Marxists expound. But we expect them to learn--partly as a result of
>their own experiences in fighting, and partly as a result of the efforts of
>the Marxists to educate them.

I do not. I say that i demand that they see the neccessity and fight for the
liberation of the whole class. This means concretely saying; Yes we support
you, however that is not enough...

JinM writes:
>   We support progressive struggles without conditions and without
>condescension. We do not demand that oppressed people pass some sort
>of Marxist literacy test before we certify their movements as worthy of
>our support. We know that people enter into fights with all sorts of
>prejudices and bourgeois notions, whether they be gay liberation
>activists or workers on strike. We want to be with them, a part of their
>actions, in order to be able to play a leadership role, and to recruit to
>the revolutionary party. But to do this, we have to learn how to avoid
>being sectarian snobs.

This last is usually the reason and arguements that reformist and
opportunists of various different shades use so that they can time and again
tail various movements, which at present appear on the political horizon. It
usually means lidquidating any kind of revolution intervention on the side
of communists to fight for its veiws while at the same time fighting around
various issues that appear on the political horizon.

Those who would raise the banner of proletarian revolution while at the same
time are prepared to join the battle in the concrete question are accused of
being sectarian.

Communist do not unconditionally liquidate there program in order to give
unconditional support for progressive struggles.Because if we did we would
not people helping these people forward but backward.

So if i am accused of being sectarian because i say to gays in this case. If
you want your liberation that you have to understand the neccessity of
building a Bolshevik party for leading a proletarian revolution. You accuse
me of being sectarian, i say that you are doomed to destruction, unless i
clearly state  the hard truth...This does not mean that one ignores single
issue events and struggles. But it means that it is the duty of communists
to tell the truth and raise the banners and slogans of proletarian
revolution in these movements. Yes we are the foremost defenders of various
progressive struggles. No we do not liquidate our program in order to take
part in these struggles.

Warm Regards

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list