Hail the Hitler-Stalin pact!

Charles Brown CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Wed Nov 15 13:38:35 PST 2000



>>> nathan at newman.org 11/15/00 03:54PM >>>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>The proximate cause ( as in torts,cupable cause) of the weakening and
division and more conservative working class movement in the US >was the actions of the Reutherites, the rightwingers and the chatty, moralizing , naive Left who criticized the CPUSA for its policy of >supporting the German-Soviet non-aggression pact, etc.

The opposition is always the cause of the other side losing. That is tautological, but tells us little about the strategy mistakes leading to their victory. Rigidly promoting even the right position that leads to losing on all positions is not praiseworthy action. It is irresponsible and shows poor strategy and leadership.

(((((((((

CB: I'm referring to the "opposition" causing the weakening and division, etc, of the working class movement, not the lose of the CPUSA to the opposition. I am not referring to the tautology.

It was not rigidly promoting a position that caused a lose on all position. You yourself point to the rapid changes in position before the war. That's the opposite of rigid.

((((((((

Since I disagree with you on the CPUSA having the right positions on all issues, especially on their rigidity over the no-strike clause, I criticize their positions on substance as well as strategy. As to the Hitler-Stalin pact, I have less problem with the support for the pact itself than with the ideological reversal of their anti-fascist line. The latter was not needed to support the former as a reluctant necessity in light of Munich.

-- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list