Reply to Doug

Apsken at aol.com Apsken at aol.com
Sun May 7 05:16:29 PDT 2000


Doug wrote,


> Which ones? Surely you're not about to join the Michigan Militia or
> the Christian Coalition, which are mass movements in at least some
> sense.So you are choosing the tasty one over the tasteless one. The
> Million Man March would be a bit more problematic, but you'd have to
> think twice about it at least, no? Compared to, say, Justice for
> Janitors, which is pretty hard to say no to. Queer Nation? Would you
> have joined that mass movement, when it was one? You're acting as if
> the definition of "mass struggles for proletarian emancipation" were
> self-evident. I'll bet there were lots of non-proletarians in the
> anti-Haider marches; I'll bet too that lots of proletarians voted for
> him, and got a thrill when pointy-heads denounced Haider. I'm just
> guessing, extrapolating from the way folks like George Wallace and
> David Duke work here, but I'm also guessing I'm right about this. So
> where does the true proletarian come down?

This seems like sophistry to me. It's true that no constructive discussion can occur if the participants are not agreed on the meaning of words. But with the exception of Alexander Cockburn, Jeffrey St. Clair, and a handful of tiny sects, I can't recall many socialists having difficulty sorting out which struggles reflect the true interests and aspirations of workers and oppressed people. All such struggles attract the participation and solidarity of others who sympathize with and support their aims, and often involve contradictory pressures, and even some parasitic participants. Not every proletarian impulse is progressive -- witness the chauvinistic currents at the Seattle mobilization, for example -- and participants in genuine mass struggles often fiercely disagree on tactics, but those are always the realities of authentic struggle. Not every mass protest of proletarians reflects the actual interest of the class, either, and some have to be actively opposed, not ignored, such as racist strikes.

The abstentionists on this list remind me of the liberals who deserted the civil rights movement after SNCC raised the slogan "Black Power!" I can't recall any Marxists who departed, although there were many who opposed SNCC's turn to self-reliance and separatism as the road to Black liberation.

That does not mean that every specific action of emerging movements require endorsement, especially when internal conflicts within the movements are still playing out, but that is a far cry from abstention. As far as I know, I have never been gay, but every year in Jackson I joined the Gay Pride march and gave a speech in solidarity at the rally. This did not oblige me to choose among the conflicting currents within the Mississippi Gay Alliance.

Ken Lawrence



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list