[Marxism] Holding the black bloc up to scrutiny

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Fri Jul 2 15:16:19 MDT 2010


Matthew Russo wrote:
> 
> Fair enough, and if I have the time (which I quite likely won't for some
> time) I will take a look at Well.  But that doesn't my theses here, one
> minor and one major: [CLIP]

I would generally agree with Matt's theses, with one qualification.

Any account of the Anti-War movement of the '60s that does not place it
in the larger context of the Black Liberation Movement is seriouslly
inadequate. Many or most of the moving agents in the anti-war movement
first became radicalized and gained political experience in the
civil-rights movement and drew their morale or spirit from that
movement.  And the absence of such a moving force at the present time is
at least part of the cause of the weakness of the current anti-war
movement.

And there is one other element in Lou's critique and those he cites that
is missing.

The SWP insistence on large peaceful marches was only _half_ of its
strategy, and the other half was firmly grounded in the features of the
SWP that led to a Sojourner Truth Organization pamphlet referring to
them as "everyone's favaorite ultra-leftist" group: their profoun
distrust of the ability of people to develope their politics outside the
supervision of the SWP. Hence the insistence on "single-issue"
demonstrations, a policy which would prevent such independent
development of politics by participants except as they came within the
tutelage of SWP cadre. And it was thanks to the general impact and
far-reaching influence of BLM: SCLC, SNCC,Mississippi Fredom Democratic
Party,  Panthers, DRUM, and other local and regional groups that this
sectarian policy of the SWP never had a chance.

Carrol




More information about the Marxism mailing list