>Marvin Gandall wrote:
> >
> > Certainly, the
> > indictment of his critics is that he has drawn a one-sided and misleading
> > picture of US labour - one resembling the caricature of it by the right. If
> > this is so, in Fitch's case would be unintentional, but it would flow from
> > the same questionable starting point where much of the left begins its
> > analysis: that all contemporary problems are reducible to deficient leaders
> > in the unions and the mass parties who are seen as somehow at odds with
> > their members, when, in fact, it is conditions which produce leaders who,
> > for the most part, reflect the consciousness and values of their base.
>
>This emphasis on leadership tends to characterize many followers of
>Trotsky, as well as those who worry about who the DP will nominate in
>2008, but is it really widespread enough to justify your phrase, "much
>of the left"? I don't think so.
But it doesn't even apply to Fitch, who constantly emphasizes structural issues that make even the best leaders go bad. He never questioned the good intentions of TDU - he's known Ken Paff for more than 30 years. I wish people would read the damned book before commenting on it.
Doug