[Marxism] The incredible disappearing Latino (was: David Bacon...)

Carlos Petroni cepetroni at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 22 04:06:37 MST 2006


--- Carlos Petroni <cepetroni at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Racism is not more than the ideology of devaluing the economic and social
> strenght and cultural values of an ethnic, racial or national segment of
> society.
> This is to say, in the specific case of US Latinos, the systematic
> destruction
> of their value as workers.

Steve Palmer:

No, as people. This is precisely the condescending workerism that Joaquin is
complaining about.

Me:

Condescending my ass. What do you think
"the ideology of devaluing the economic and social
strenght and cultural values of an ethnic, racial or national
segment of society" means?
This mania of discussing and arguing over false points of
divide is stupid.

Steve Palmer:

"Racism does not only oppress workers, but small shopkeepers,
professionals etc etc all the way up. Nobody's immune" 

Me:

Sure, unless you own Telemundo or Televisa or you are requested
with special visas to perfom specific technical stuff or
you got the money to invest in the US.  Class, my friend,
is linked to the degree of racism you're exposed to in US
and every other society.

Same with sexism.  There is not the same with Margaret
Thatcher than Liliana Flores.

Steve Palmer:

It *divides* workers, a point that gets completely lost here.

Me:
I think the only thing lost here is your ability to read.
Nobody ever challenged that in this list that I'm aware of.
That's the ideology of the ruling class embedded in white
workers.  Oh, wait, but ideology are ideas, right? Based
on the material needs of the ruling class to divide workers,
right? Shouldn't we fight against them as well?


Steve Palmer:

How about against police oppression? I'm tired of the cops pulling over my nieces
on suspicion of being hookers, just because they're black.

Me:

Did you do something about it other than rant? I spent
more than 20 years doing something about it. Against
cops, immigration services, public officials, bureaucrats
and you name it. So, your advise came a little too late.

Steve Palmer:

Glue to gum up the works. Why is it that Latinos and black people are always
supposed to join somebody else's struggle? How come it's seen as some special
separate struggle, something away from some kind of 'real' struggle being
conducted the unions.

Me:
As I said, you need to read what is written.  I was talking about
Marxists not limiting themselves to the tradeunion question
but tackling all the struggles of opressed peoples.

Steve Palmer:

The great danger is that the white 'left' is going to try to hold this movement
back by insisting that it submit to the labour aristocracy and let the most
privileged sections of the working class dictate its pace.

Me:

There is no danger of the white left, nor any other left
to hold back any struggle in the US any time soon.
You gave them too much credit.
Nor I saw anyone advocating such views in this discussion.

 
Steve Palmer:

This is a directly political struggle, because it involves a direct
confrontation between the state and the working class, outside the workplace.

Me:

This is nonsense.  The struggle of Latinos took place and will continue to take place
INSIDE and OUTSIDE the workplace. Last spring there were tens of
thousands of Latino strikers, remember? With unions and
without unions, but they used the workplaces, as well as the
communities and the streets.

Steve Palmer:

What do unions have to contribute to this? Their idea of political struggle
is electing Democrats. How about ALL the unions pulling their members out when
there's an immigration raid and keeping them out until detained workers are
released? When you get that organized, Latinos will welcome it. Until then,
they'll somehow manage to get along without.

Me:

Labor bureaucrats do that, sure. But the question of union
work not only involves the unionization of workers but the
organization of workers to control their own institutions.
That means throwing out the bureaucrats and fight for
political independence.  You seem to imply that Latinos
should not be involved in that struggle and wait for the
unions to get reformed by others.  Oh, by the way, most Latino
community organizations also support the Democrats... and
the churches... that's the place you seem to advocate they
should be, not the unions?

I have news for you, no matter where they go they will encounter the
Democrats waiting, the priest salivating for their contri-
butions on Sunday and the careerists and lawyers who
control their community centers and, of course, the
bourgeois reactionaries of Telemundo and Televisa...

Latinos, and for that matter all oppressed communities,
have no easy way out. They will have to fight for 
independent organizations of their own, reform or take
over other existing organizations and yes, look for
allies outside the Democratic Party's control centers.

Me said:

> It is a big difference between union organizers in the Latino and immigrant
> communities and Samuel Gompers, after all.

Steve Palmer:

Well, yeh. Gompers is dead,while they're alive and fighting. That's quite a
difference.

Me:

Wow! We agree on something.  You see, it's not hard.





Lea todos los días análisis y articulos de izquierda y un servicio de noticias que se actualiza cada hora. Lea Izquierda Punto Info
  

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


More information about the Marxism mailing list