In light of this discussion about the Black Radical Congress, perhaps a personal experience of mine might be of interest. Two years ago, I participated in a meeting at Wayne State University on African Americans and the Labor Movement, sponsored by Wayne State's Africana Studies Dept. and, believe it or not, the AFL-CIO. There were lots of people in attendance, many of them black trade unionists, including most of those with high ranks in their unions. The sessions were provided with presentations by both union folk and scholars. The discussions were lively. It was the most radical group of union people I've ever been involved with. And I gave the most radical talk I've ever given.
The interesting thing is that I was the only white paper presenter. I really do not know if the conference organizer, the fine economist Patrick Mason, knew if I was white when he invited me to participate (I had previously expressed interest after he sent out an appeal on Pen-L). But in any event, if the conference was originally conceived as involving only black presenters, no one made any issue at all with me being there. Quite the contrary, I was treated with a respect and kindness unknown at academic conferences. A lot of people asked for copies of my paper. I left the meeting full of optimism.
Now, to put the meeting in context, the "New Voice" leadership of the AFL-CIO had done little by way of making race a central isue in the rebuilding of the labor movement, and it still has not. This rankled most of the participants at the conference. Now the question is, how could racial issues be brought to the forefront of the AFL-CIO? Would it not have made sense for African Americans to first organize a meeting of black unionists and scholars to thrash out the main issues, try to forge some sort of unity and then strategize on how to lead the labor movement in the right direction? After these things were done, then alliances with other workers could be made. It's much the same as when black workers form a separate caucus in a union. This is often the best way to push racial issues in the union and to build alliances with white workers. That way, race does not get submerged into a deal in which labor organizations push now for the working class and deal with the race question later. Instead race is raised as an issue of fundamental importance for the working class at the same time as the working class is waging the struggle against employers.
In summary, I cannot see how the BRC can be anything but positive for the development of a radical labor social movement. I doubt that black radicals want to repeat the errors of the nationalists like Garvey much less Farrakhan, so i really do not understand the problems some on this list have with the conference.
Let me end by saying, in response to some other posts on reds and race, the view that the CP had to be pushed kicking and screaming by the Soviets to fight for racial justice is surely too simple.
michael yates