[Marxism] Re: UPFJ-ANSWER Debacle: Malcom X didn't ride in the back of the bus.
carlwebb at gmail.com
Tue Aug 9 13:10:29 MDT 2005
It's not realy effective trying to engage and influence the *ordinary
masses* who are not UPFJ leadership from the back of the bus. And yes
it wasn't Malcom's route but rather the MLK route the Civil Rights
movement and the vast majority of Blacks embarked on which effective
deradicalized the movement in the interest of capitalism. The UFPJ
event will not open newly anti-war people up to radical perspectives.
That's exactly what's it's designed not to do. The UFPJ event is NOT
going to have a greater political impact on America's ruling class.
It's purpose is to distract most working class folks away
On 8/4/05, M. Junaid Alam <alam1 at lefthook.org> wrote:
> The ANSWER segregation analogy is interesting because if you follow it
> to its natural conclusion the logical thing to do is the opposite of
> what ANSWER is doing. UPFJ leadership isn't saying, "no radicals allowed
> on the bus." It's saying, "no radicals allowed in the luxury seats on
> the bus." Well, how do we respond to that? Do we do them a huge favor by
> getting off the bus to travel in a fucking Pinto? Or do we get on the
> bus anyway, engage and influence the *ordinary masses* who are not UPFJ
> leadership who will be on the bus, and then make a move toward deciding
> which way the bus is headed?
> Some cats like Fred have gone out of their minds trying to Malcolm X-ize
> the ANSWER position, which is somehow anointed as some kind of "national
> question." The amusing thing about this is that, for all the greatness
> Malcolm X represented, it wasn't his route but rather the MLK route the
> Civil Rights movement and the vast majority of Blacks embarked on; a lot
> of Blacks supported what Malcolm said but damn few joined the NOI; and a
> more developed post-NOI Malcolm understood that he was wrong to stay
> outside the struggle.
More information about the Marxism