CB - Tribal Traditionalism:
MARIPOWER716 at aol.com
MARIPOWER716 at aol.com
Tue Apr 23 04:33:33 MDT 2002
>CB: Slavery was a major subcategory of the capitalist mode of production for
the >first centuries of capitalism. It was not only colonialism, but also
slavery that >constituted the social form for which race and racism were the
bourgeois ideological >reflections. The Black race in the U.S. is derivative
of the slavery social form. Race >is as much a Marxist concept as class and
chauvinism. Bourgeois chauvinism >cannot be understood without the concept
Yes it can. There is Great nation chauvinism and in our country white
chauvinism. What's hard to understand?
What you basically state is that the social position of the African American
is unique in world history and not an authentic national colonial question
but rather a question of race antagonism. The African American National
Colonial Question has been observed over a long period of time by generations
of communist. The grasp this question in its totality requires a fundamental
grasp of the standpoint of Lenin and Stalin on the national question and
under the evolution of imperialist capitalism, its transition into a question
of colonies. The concept race denies this transition.
"slavery that constituted the social form for which race and racism were the
bourgeois ideological reflections," should read "capitalist slavery, i.e.,
slave labor used to produce product(s) that entered the market and was
concerted into capital, was the material relations from which the bourgeoisie
created the ideological rationale their class called race theory or racism."
There are no races on earth other then the human race. The "black race" in
the United States is a concept that hides the developmental process of new
peoples. The black slaves of the South were drawn from a variety of ethic and
tribal groups from continental Africa. The tendency of the "Marxist" to lump
together these various ethic and tribal groups is a chauvinist distortion,
which obscures the various level of economic exchange on Africa. The African
American people are African-American in the following sense:
Shortly after the discovery of the Americas, the Portuguese and Spanish,
probing down the coast of Africa, became involved in the already developed
slave trade in Africa. At that time the word Negro meant only "black," the
literal translation fro the Spanish. Centuries later, as slavery became a
major industry in the United States, the word Negro began to embody a new
material relations. The slaves in center of gravity of the slave market and
production of cotton had been draw from a variety of peoples in Africa.
Injected into and among the African slaves were a number of Native peoples,
and of course, tens of thousands of slaves of partial African and partial
Anglo-European descent. The "partial Anglo-European descent" represented
various ethnic groups from Europe. The slavers lash soon did away with any
distinction between the descendant of the Congo and the light skinned
"illegitimate" sons and daughters of the driver man. Based on the specific
conditions of slavery in the USNA, there arose the "Negro" people, with the
word "Negro" embracing the social process peculiar to the American South. Not
simply "black" as in the literal Spanish translation, but a chemical fusion
creating a distinct people who was formed in America. What specifically arose
and historically evolved was a socially and culturally distinct people
developed from the framework of slavery.
This new peoples designation of themselves has changed and oscillated over
the years from "the Colored Peoples of America," to Negro to African American
as an attempt to further define themselves more accurately. The sector of
the Marxist movement from which my introduction to the standpoint of Marx was
acquired is the only sector that has taken the time to define this specific
development. This is "our" formulation definitively written a quarter of a
century ago and light years ahead of the narrow concepts of the theorist of
race. (see The Negro National Colonial Question by Nelson Peery General
Secretary of the Communist Labor Party of the United States of North America,
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Peery Nelson, 1925 -).
No one escapes history and your position is understood in its totality and is
the historical position of the petty bourgeois ideologist on the development
of our countries history. Implicit in the conception of race is a
misunderstanding of the Civil War and its aftermath. The period of
Reconstruction and the overthrow of the Reconstruction governments have been
approached by generations of communist constituting two distinct wings. The
Trotskyite position - where he wrote, that the Negro workers could achieve
state power several giant steps ahead of the American proletariat, was
rejected as the receipt for absolute and immediate defeat and is not within
communism of Lenin and Stalin, and consequently not part of either wing.
One sector of the Marxist states that the overthrow of the Reconstruction
government meant the Negro masses had to complete the struggle for democracy
to relieve themselves of a distressing situation of violence, terror and
racist reaction. This is the historical position of William Z. Foster, Henry
Winston and later James Jackson Jr., - the petty bourgeois theoretical
psychopath of the CPUSA. The politics of this body of "theory" is not
apparent to one not familiar with the treasure house of Marxism and the
generational fight on this question.
Beneath this seemingly harmless concept - "Marxist concept of race" is a slap
in the face, is the political position that what is need is to complete the
bourgeois national democratic revolution and defeat racist reaction. Now the
old party was split on this question, which Harry Haywood and the West Indies
writer Claudia Jones - deported by the US government, adopting the
revolutionary position on the Negro Question. This sector of communist coined
the concept "Behind the Cotton Curtain," over a half century ago. (Access
the issues of Political Affairs between roughly 1930 - 1949).
The other section of Marxist understood the so-called "two state revolution"
radically different and called the Foster group petty bourgeois who advocated
a bourgeois democratic revolution in a center of world imperialism. What was
involved these Marxist demanded was the formation of the first fascist state
structure and the overthrow of world capitalism hinged on this question of
the defeat of Reconstruction and its subsequent history.
Not completion of the democratic revolution but proletarian social
revolution. The "two stage" revolution did not mean "democracy as such" but
rather the proletariat completing the formation of the proletariat and
charting its historical revolution under all stages in the quantitative
evolution of the industrial infrastructure under the dictatorship of the
proletariat as a form of rule. The democratic aspects of the social
revolution most certainly involve political democracy, whose highest
expression is the emancipation of labor from its status as a commodity. This
is the most standard and basic Marxist position.
"Racist reaction" and the fight for bourgeois democracy on the one hand
versus the need to overthrow a fascist state structure - not racist, and the
dictatorship of the proletariat is how the question evolved in our collective
communist history. Calling German fascist primarily "racist" is an insult to
the millions of European workers crushed under terrorist capital in power.
You are aware of aspects of my personal development as part of a political
group that constituted the highest form of organization of not simply black
workers, but the entire proletariat and our passing over to communism three
decades ago. The revolutionary position of Marxism and the National Colonial
Question in our country will be defended, even if the bourgeoisie in the
ideological sphere defeats us - again. We most certainly stood along and s
uffered defeat in trying to bury the conception of the "Third World." We
screamed until our lungs threatened to burst, "Don't go in there, there is no
such thing as a third path. It's a trap and our history and colonization by
Wall Street Imperialism proves it's a trap." We watched Lumumba and Cabral
assassinated and the revolution in the Congo Brazzaville gutted. The
Ethiopian Revolution was detoured and the Marxist selectively assassinated.
Out right tribalism and executioners of the African masses came to power
under the banner of the "Third Way" or "Third World."
A section of us had families that lived under fascist rule since
Reconstruction so it was clear that there is only one path open to the
proletariat under colonial relations - the path of Lenin. This is the reason
we fled the South and became national-minorities in the Anglo-American nation
proper. We fled the terror that all colonial workers flee when given the
first opportunity. There is a slim chance that we may be able to defeat the
concept of "Neo-liberal capital" in this period, which is a petty bourgeois
formulation. Clearly there is nothing liberal about capital to the world
Comrade, the conception of race and racism is undergoing a world historical
defeat because it is no longer needed by the bourgeoisie as the primary
ideological weapon - not matter how much you cling to it. Once again the
Marxist position concerning the overthrow of the Reconstruction government
will be put forward.
The Hayes Tilden Agreement - 1876, and the withdrawal of federal troops from
the South in 1877 was only a big event in a well-defined trend. To the degree
that Wall Street imperialism subdued the landlord planters did the monopolies
drive the Negro masses back into slavery - sharecropping. This offense of
imperialism had a distinct fascist character and wrote the book for the
planetary fascist movement including its ideological structure. The
withdrawal of federal troops from the South was the single for the so-called
"revolt of the poor whites." This was not a revolt of the poor whites. In
Germany this process was called the "revolt of the petty bourgeoisie and
What actually took place at the birth of Wall Street imperialism and fascism
was a skillful maneuver, which relied on white supremacy to co-opt the
Populist movement, grab it in the mantle of the Ku Klux Klan and push it onto
the stage of history as the hangman of democracy and the violent executioner
of toilers. In the pamphlet "The Economics of Barbarism" Kuczybski and Witt
point out how the rule of Hitler's Slave State were copied from the black
What made up the fascist character of the counter-revolution was not simply
its brutality or violence, but the fact that the "revolt" of the "poor
whites" cloaked itself in the mantle of saving the "South." The
counter-revolution attacked and overthrew the Reconstruction bourgeois
democratic governments. To complete the bourgeois democratic revolution is by
definition - for communist, the demand for proletariat revolution, but this
was not formulated until Lenin took power and won the ideological campaign.
However, we lived the process in America but the color question and the
concept of race obscured the question for 150 years. Comrade, you speak of
race when we speak of the birth of the world fascist movement and imperial
Comrade, a political force, constructed and funded by finance capital, which
overthrows a legal bourgeois democratic government and substitutes as a state
form the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most
chauvinistic elements of finance capital is the historical definition of
fascism. Such a political state we communist call fascism. Take off the "race
glasses" and what we face and the political alignment needed immediately
comes into focus.
The reason time is taken to attack the remaining body of petty bourgeois
"racism" is to resurface the Marxist presentation of the question and began
the propaganda campaign to alert the communist first, and the vanguard of the
proletariat second, that a shift - a new qualitative juncture has been
reached in our history and the form of the social movement is undergoing a
revolutionary leap - a transition, where in the fascist movement will not be
dominated by the ideology of color. The leap is by definition an abrupt
transitions involving polarity - in this case revolution and
counterrevolution. The polarity in the ideological realm is fought out as a
struggle to consolidate the new subjective factors for the transition to that
which is new in the social process.
We are running behind because we pigeon hold class concepts, believing that
the workers are stupid. Actually, the petty bourgeois intellectual views the
Anglo-American workers as a mass of racist reactionaries. This kind of
thinking will be our undoing.
The ideological features is coming into view and fighting to take shape on
the part of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. One aspect is the campaign
against terrorism but this is not enough for the bourgeoisie. There has taken
place in our country a 20-year campaign to seek out the proper "religious"
ideological form to supercede the brutal white chauvinism of the old period.
This does not mean that discrimination vanishes. It is elementary to state,
"If you don't hit it, it won't fall."
The idea that "Race is as much a Marxist concept as class and chauvinism" is
the petty bourgeois ideologist who are scared to death of the Anglo American
workers as such, because the class can only be organized on a class basis to
fight for material survival and political power. If anything what is called
"racism" by the petty bourgeoisie is a bourgeois expression of white
chauvinism, not as you state simply chauvinism. It of course must be stated
clearly that the black petty bourgeoisie seeks the womb of protection of
racial theory and find all this talk about the social revolution of the
proletariat rather upsetting.
What have been put forward are revolutionary conclusions concerning the
Marxist presentation of the question, which I did not invent but inherited
from generations of communist looking at this question. Comrade, what you put
forward is utterly devoid of class configuration. Blunting the fascist
movement requires a class program that is profoundly simple and clear.
The so-called Negro Question has been the rock on which every political
organization and social movement in our country have become shipwrecked in
history except for the organizations from which my activity evolved. Why is
this? This is not a subjective question concerning any special insight on the
part of the individual. What is involved is the direction that the communist
are forced - compelled by the logic of development, to move. The African
American workers are prevented by the history of the economic development of
our country from ever moving any significant degree in advance of the general
working class movement. Therefore the unity of the forward moving sector of
the class is paramount. This unity cannot take place on the basis of any
concept of race because everyone - at any rate the proletariat, already
understands "race" is a hollow concept devoid of class striving. The fight
against discrimination and violence should never be framed as a racial fight
- I this period, because discrimination and violence is a form of capital
rule no longer buttressed by the white chauvinism of the past era.
The black workers cannot but move as a class of workers and the Anglo workers
will do the same I this period. It is elementary to state that workers form
unions to end the inequality of their members. When black workers form a
union it is no longer a union movement but a "black workers movement." When
Polish workers formed unions in the early part of the century it was not a
Polish union movement. These old formulations are spent.
Let us examine the concept of the Black Workers Congress from the past
period, which I am familiar with. What is operational - fundamental in this
concept is not Black or race but a "Congress." Within the context of the last
reform movement - called the Civil Rights movement, the workers physically
separated themselves from the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie and were
rapidly moving into party formation, hence a Congress! This formulation was
historically different from the period leading to Reconstruction when the
social movement was called the "Negro Peoples Convention Movement." The
petty bourgeois ideologist cannot see the obvious class configuration and
shouts "racism." Black Workers Congress means Workers Congress. This is the
reality the "destroyed" the "black."
Tell the mother suffering the pain of losing her son by the bullet of police
violence that what she suffers from is not police violence but "racist police
violence." "Racist police violence" is a slogan from an era that no longer
exists, because the political superstructure has long ago been fundamentally
altered. Surely, you must see that various black faces at the highest reaches
of government. I could give less than a damn about the equality within the
bourgeoisie and black capital. A sector of the social movement left this
petty bourgeois concept about "all African Americans" with the defeat of
Reconstruction. Communist will make certainly make compromises with the
ideologist of the non-sovereign peoples and always take into account specific
class alignments that dictate the "possible."
However the October Revolution created a new political realignment.
Comrade, there is no such thing as a Marxist concept of race. It is not as if
a new sector of Marxist in the field of anthropology have step forward to
prove the existence of races as such. Then of course we are not African as
such but formed from a variety of peoples. In this sense we would be the
anti-thesis of "race." Nor are we an ethnic group as such but new distinct
Communist are the advanced detachment of the working class charting the path
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism