[Marxism] Moderator's note

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Sat Jul 3 14:49:32 MDT 2010


Right, I do not understand the importance of having Ted Kennedy or John 
Lindsay on the platform.  I argued against it in the 1960s along these lines

1) their presence obscures the fact that the war is not an aberration, a 
mistake of policy, the product of "bad" choices or "bad" programs,  but a 
necessity of capitalism

2) the presence of a Kennedy or Lindsay is not what is attracting people to 
the movement. The movement was growing and growing rapidly well before any 
Kennedy ever thought of speaking at a rally.

What's attracting people to the movement is that nobody wants to go over to 
Vietnam and die fighting people who are poorer than they are.

 It is the fact that the US had lost control of the battlefield that is 
attracting Kennedy and Lindsay to the speakers' platform.

 3) Nothing that Kennedy or Lindsay will say will have the slightest impact 
on how the bourgeoisie conduct the war.  Nixon proved that, didn't he?  More 
casualties were recorded after Congress banned direct combat by US ground 
troops than before 1970.  Recently released communications between Nixon and 
Kissinger show they were convinced right through 1973 that they could win 
the war despite protests, demonstrations, congressional inquiries etc. and 
that they had no intention of "changing" course no matter how many Kennedys 
spoke at rallies

4) The movement needs to distinguish itself from the "liberal" disaffection 
with the war and provide a radical opposition, otherwise liberal Democrats 
will run for any number of offices on "anti-war" platforms and the movement 
will have no effective response.  Well, if Nixon proved [3], McGovern proved 
[4], didn't he?

5) Finally, there's no shortage of outlets, media access for people like 
Lindsay and Kennedy.  Why would we provide them with a platform when they're 
goal is to contain the movement within the established political 
organizations?  Let them make their appeals in the NYT.  Let them march like 
anyone else.  Their goal in speaking is to influence, recuperate the 
movement.


I think it's ironic that LP and others want to point to Dellinger and Davis 
and others and dismiss the entire body of demonstrators in Chicago based on 
those "leaders's" romance with liberal Democrats when the anti-war alliances 
in which the SWP was so active offered platform after platform to those same 
types of liberal Democrats.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com> 





More information about the Marxism mailing list