Save us from 60s Nostalgia (RE: Sweeney Defends Gore Endorsement

Nathan Newman nathan.newman at yale.edu
Tue Feb 15 17:35:01 PST 2000



>On Behalf Of Peter K.
>
> Whoa Nellie, there was a lot of self-indulgence from what I've heard -
> having been born in '70 - but it's advisable to guard oneself
> against being affected by the Right's constant demagoguery about the
> period. You forget to mention the
> Vietnam War and the unprecedented accomplishment of a citizenry of a
> democratic nation who forced it's government to halt an imperial
> war.

I am much more affected by the leftwing critiques of the period (both Old Left and Next Left/Gen X).

One of the best histories of the Vietnam War I read was entitled "The US's Longest War" which pretty much summarizes the "success" of an antiwar movement that couldn't stop the launching of genocidal bombing of Cambodia as late as 1973. It was the Vietnamese armies, not antiwar activists, who defeated the US military. If anything, it can be argued that the New Left contributed to a lengthening of the war by alienating a lot of the American public that was already turning against the war by 1968. The fact that a war that had lost majority support by 1968 kept going for another five years is hardly a "success" I would tout.

The AFL-CIO under Meany was pretty bad, but there were unionists willing to move toward the antiwar position (notably Reuther and a few others), but there was an ultraleft and antiworkerist faction of the 60s left that seemed intent on belittling organized labor across the board. I respect a lot of the folks like the International Socialists who went into the unions to fight for democracy and a more militant agenda, but a large chunk of the Left took great joy in creating as many divisions between different progressive forces as possible. And that contributed to divisions that the New Right exploited in expanding and deepening the corporate assault that devastated all our communities.

What bothers me is that a lot of the post-Seattle discussions about labor's role seems to be recreating that ultraleft attitude, where cool student anarchists are "pure" leftists as opposed to clunky, stupid working class union leaders who are just out to sell-out the "movement." I would be the last to argue that labor's leaders make the right decisions all the time, but I also find self-appointed left intellectuals belittling leaders representing millions of workers to be truly destructive hubris. And that is the sin of the 60s that I don't want to see return.

-- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list