Regional Differences and the US Left

Carrol Cox cbcox at
Sat Mar 17 08:06:48 MST 2001

Louis Proyect wrote:
> Tony Abdo:
> >In some sense, how to relate to the White worker, is just as much a
> >dilemma, as how to relate to the deeply religious worker???      What
> >success would Lou, Jose, Carrol, Mark, and some of the other
> >'hardliners' have, if they started talking to the Christian worker,
> >about how the Christians deserved to be thrown to the lions?

Lou's reply to this covers the religious red herring. As to how to reach
the white workers, two points: We won't, _ever_, reach _all_ of them,
perhaps not even a majority, until very late in the struggle, probably
within a post-revolutionary society. But one paragraph in a book review
current MR tells the _whole_story of hwo we will ever reach large
numbers of white workers, south or north:

        The last chapter of the book, "Solidarity and Other Desires" devoted to
specific reports of such movements throughout the United States. These
are movements where inter-racial groups of black, brown, yellow, red and
, yes, even white working people have joined to demand their place in
American life. Our own city offers an outstanding example: 60 percent of
the super-exploited taxicab drivers in New York are _desis_. These have
been particularly targeted for persecution by our racist,
anti-immigrant, anti-worker mayor so a group of _desis_ took the lead
two years ago in forming an inter-racial taxi drivers association. . . .
                (MR, March 2001, p. 44)

A "group of _desis_ TOOK THE LEAD." In the U. S. any organization which
_begins_ all or mostly white will _remain_ white. Leadership must
_visibly_ consist of the non-white for a group to become multi-racial.
If Tony wants to reach whites first, he will never have any success
reaching _either_ whites or non-whites. This debate was fought out to a
conclusion in the '60s. There is nothing really to debate, only
established principle to reaffirm.


More information about the Marxism mailing list