<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>On March 11 Jon Johanning wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>"Indeed -- this
resistance is presently most unorganized by leftist <BR>groups, and activists in
such groups generally only recognize <BR>resistance when it is of the type they
approve. (Everything else they <BR>dismiss as irrelevant or "only supporting the
system"). That's why so <BR>many of us on the left are so pessimistic; we can't
see any of *our* <BR>kind of resistance."</FONT><BR><BR>Yes, many of us
have experienced this. But what is *our* kind of resistance? I
assume the contexts for resistance are the U.S. and other "advanced"
nations where hard left modes (socialism, workers' state, etc) get quickly
extinguished by authority and knee-jerked publics. With this, left
pessimism is understandable in the absence of another plan or perspective
that responds to the times.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I found this widespread in the U.S. in the '90s
when my wife and I did over 400 oral history interviews of leading left or
peoples' activists in five large urban areas. Two of the projects (Detroit
and Oahu, HI) were published. Our goal was to extract ideas that
might be useful to the next generation of movement builders. We
weren't finding many new ideas, so we gave up on the projects.
</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>Our respondents were basically leftists (some
were hard left), but their activism was in the so-called single issue
movements (peace, women, civil rights, labor, gay/lesbian, survival, health,
environment, housing, etc.). They worked hard, many got burned
out, some believed their goals had been achieved. I suppose
they ultimately were "only supporting the system," as you noted.
And it also might be called a package of affirmative action or
liberation struggles in a wide array of institutional areas.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>But I believe also their activism bumped
headlong into the constraints and never-never land imposed by imperial
capitalism: Don't mess with the basic economic
system. Such messing would be the next step after civil
rights and environmental laws, for example, were passed with only limited
results being achieved. Such a step was so gigantic and
frightening that few were able or willing to take it. Yet, many tens
of thousands were gently or harshly exposed to this reality, and that's part of
the present population that must be (and actually are) involved in organizing
resistance.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Grace Boggs of Detroit put out this challenge,
"Actually, ideas and strategies of the past have a tendency to turn into their
opposite because history changes. What you struggle for at a particular
period, insofar as you achieve something, actually changes the objective reality
and you have to change along with it." (Mast interview with Boggs, Detroit
Lives, Temple U. Press, 1994, p 18)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Organizing resistance today has different
tactical and strategic dimensions depending on the subject.
On-the-street actions are necessary to stop or slow imperial conquest, support a
labor action, or demand that cut-off electricity be restored to families who
can't pay their bills. We all know successful actions only come from mass
organizing, and we know the whys and wherefores of the organizing process,
theoretically and practically. The major task - changing the generic
system - includes the same organizing process, in the same institutional areas,
but with different emphases and nuances. Patience, dedication, and
humility become essential. Much more can be said on this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jon also wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>"There is this
reservoir of experience, but we can't forget, at the same <BR>time, that new
types of resistance are always arising. It takes really <BR>talented organizers
to organize something new without <BR>straight-jacketing or stifling it. How,
for example, did the civil <BR>rights movement in the South in the early sixties
manage to organize <BR>itself? It seems to me a more amazing story the more I
think about it."</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I'm not sure
what you mean be "new types of resistance." Definitely, the gravity of
problems and intransigence of power holders intensifies. And refined
organizing techniques and better understanding of constituencies are
required. I may be missing something, but I don't think basic organizing
knowledge has changed much from that applied variously in past (and
present) union, civil rights, peace, and anti-poverty struggles. Surely
it's the same even if we move to the level of generic system,
thereby incorporating all the single issues.
</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>We DO need
to critique certain organizing practices of the past (and
present). Seems like too many organizers just couldn't remove
a top-down, elitist, impatient persona in favor of facilitating
leadership and recruitment from the grass roots and rank 'n file. I
believe this happened in all the high-impact movements, including civil
rights. Why the success of the civil rights movement in the
South? Part was the intensity of the problem, part was common color
identity, part was the liberation times, part was white support, part was a
rising economy, part was super organizing, and much was tremendous
sacrifice. </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>But
now the struggle has to start all over again on all fronts since the
gains made earlier were merely transitional. We have to go where
angels fear to tread. So many more of us know that generic system change
is required, but we choose our words with care in these days of induced
paranoia and confusion. There's nothing wrong with focusing on a
living wage, health care, global warming, or unionization if, at the same time,
we connect such problems to the generic system? We must consider the
newer economy and workforce, newer demographics, newer world order, etc. as we
organize resistance. </FONT></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Also, we should support struggles
to create new people-centered institutions like the Labor Party
(USA). </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Bob
Mast</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>