[Marxism] Re: Anti-imperialism?
Carlos A. Rivera
cerejota at optonline.net
Sun May 8 16:40:37 MDT 2005
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joaquín Bustelo" <jbustelo at bellsouth.net>
>The risks for a young Black or Latino are much greater. They're not nearly
>as likely to have the family/friends social network nor contacts to get
>out of jail quickly. They're not likely to have a "movement" job, and if
>they have a real job, they're likely to lose it. The cops and courts will
>treat them much more severely than the white kids. And if they're from
>another country, they're likely to lose their status as legal residents or
>be directly deported as "illegals" and be ineligible to come back.
This is ahistorical, even reacist bullshit. I don't care if your name is
Latino, you sound like a "Cameo" saying that (brown outside, white inside).
The fact is that the only huge movement in the USA to use civil disobedience
and direct action as a form of true social protest and *change* have
historically been Blacks and Latinos. From the Underground Railroad, that
while having the support of a wide-group of whites, was actually run mostly
by blacks who actually even risked going back to their former plantations as
"conductors", to the black struggles for economic justice and integration
into the union movement, to the Civil Rights Struggle. Almost anyone who is
Latino and to the left of Ferrer in NYC is in some way connected to the
If you want to tell a black person Civil Disobidience is not for them, you
have to tell them to forget about Rosa Parks and the 1,000s that followed
her to freedom.
I mean, you have everyright to believe civil disobidience is not the correct
way right now, but when you argue with such lack of historical connection it
can't help but completely undermining your argument.
>"To deny this will split the movement negatively," Macdonald Stainsby
>argues. I say bullshit. The ones who would be splitting the movement are
>tiny handful of ultralefts who would substitute venting their own
>indignation for the power that can only come from the masses of working
>people organized and mobilized around their own interests.
You mean, this "tiny handful of ultralefts" is so powerful, so incredibly
dangerous, that it can destroy a real, big, mass movement?
I mean? How come?
The logic is simply not there.
The truth is that to this day the biggest problem the anti-war movement is
not the "ultra-left" but the ABB crowd who use their economic power to turn
the anti-war movement into a base structure of the Democratic Party, and
hence objectively of imperialism.
You are being the equivalent of the ISO but from the right, you believe the
problem is the "enemy within" and not the real enemy without. Marxists, in
my opinion, should be building bridges left and right, seeking out common
ground and engaging in comradely advice and criticism (including
self-criticism) instead of sending ahistorical rhetorical demolition squads
to destroy said bridges.
"Two years ago, Out Now, was an ultra-left slogan."
This is completely true, and it exhibits the demoralization, a result of ABB
influence, in the sensible marxist movement, that they are doing the job of
the right in trying to purge the movement of the ultra-left if they dont
As I said during the Goff debate, I will defend the ISO against the real
red-baiters, and criticize them when I see disagreement. But if we forget,
in practice, who the *real* enemy is, we end up with a joke of an argument,
one that combines, as RR correctly says tired denounciations of a phantom
"ultra-left" with misguided, ahistorical, and ill-hearted use of the "race
Such dogmatism is as harmful to the anti-war movement as the ISO trying to
sell their paper at incovinient times. It shows to our real enemies that we
are easy to devide and conquer, and hence gives them the strategic upper
hand in their goal of turning the anti-war movement into an electoral base
for the Democrats.
On the other hand, the CofC and the CPUSA I am sure are very happy about
this. They all call anything to the left of the SPUSA "ultra-left".
More information about the Marxism