Last week, Gordon Lafer wrote an atrocious, misleading opinion piece for the Nation that seemed to either slander or wholly misunderstand Doug Henwood, Matthew Rothschild (editor of the Progressive), and others who were critical of Wisconsin's recall elections. Lafer suggested that Doug and the others were selling out rank and file union members and the labor movement in general by engaging in "left anti-unionism" ...
Left anti-unionist: one who thinks that unions could support their members and the working class better by weening themselves from electoral politics and spending their resources on building a more dynamic, inclusive, even militant movement.
Lafer appears completely clueless to the dynamics of the parties and unions and the contradictions between and among members and leadership that helped reshape and distract the movement. His interjection of himself in the post-recall analyses makes John Nichols seem temperate and modest. Lafer's original essay was offensive (he has since back-pedaled on the name calling but stands by the main thrust of his argument) to this rank-and-filer and I hope he never again tries to be my knight in shining armor, proud left anti-unionist that I am.
here are a few links to the debate - this is Lafer's original essay and Doug's response (however, Doug's response is posted above Lafer's essay): http://www.thenation.com/blog/168435/opinionnation-labors-bad-recall#
here is Matthew Rothschild's response: http://www.progressive.org/lafer_discussion_wisconsin_loss_walker.html
Whatever you think of the finer points of Doug's or Rothschild's analysis and responses, to suggest, as Lafer has, that criticism of the movement means that one opposes the movement is troubling. Please forgive the anecdote, but practically everybody I know who was active in this movement (and the subsequent mess) is deeply disappointed, critical of themselves and their organizations' leadership, and looking for ways to reflect and discuss - the material I have seen from Doug, Rothschild, truthout, Labor Notes, in these times, etc has been very critical *and* very productive for these conversations - all of it has been circulating among local activists and everybody seems to find it helpful in organizing their own thoughts, even if they don't agree with every point.
but seriously, this? --> "Labor leaders confronted a genuinely hard choice: roll the dice on the recall, which everyone knew would be an expensive and uphill battle, or give up." I don't see how anybody would be able to take Lafer seriously after reading that line.
I certainly have not written any epitaphs for this movement, but this moment truly sucks and we need (in my opinion) some rather thorough reflection - a sort of collective introspection - not somebody who will tell us not to peak behind the curtain.
fwiw, Joshua