[mbs] In the context of the anti-WTO campaign, talking about racism/nationalism/xenophobia (RNX) is a distraction. It is not relevant. It's like walking into the middle of an industrial action and saying, what about the way worker Louie mistreats union maid Francis. Louie may abuse Francis, but that's a different subject.
The issue of Buchanan is not a distraction, but he is not, by and large, retailing RNX in this context. There is some retrograde rhetoric about sovereignty, which deserves criticism.
People are antsy about labor action because it entails at least temporary denial interests of other workers. IT ALWAYS HAS. So counter-posed to concrete actions (shut down WTO), we are told workers should invoke their universal, internationalist rights. But where? How? Once again, it's a distraction, in terms of the concrete inaction it implies.
>>>>>>>
RG: A critique of what
(admittedly from about 10 000 miles away) seem to be very real problems in
the US labour movement is taken by Max as a liberal attack. Where I come
from, fighting against bourgeois prejudices amongst working people is part
of a long and honourable tradition. Pandering to them would be the worst
kind of economism. But unfortunately, there's a long tradition of that too.
Russell
>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no bourgeois prejudice at issue, in the context of WTO. Seeing what is not there is a liberal trip. The header points this up. Vincent Chin did not die in the streets of Seattle. Nothing remotely like that happened.
We used to call Weathermen 'liberals with bombs.' Now we have liberals with metaphysics. I guess that's progress.
mbs