Re: There they go again! The Militant on Elián, one year l ater

["Jose G. Perez" <jg_perez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>At any rate, I put it to my friend that the SWP's position was an
adaption to this growing sector of the working class. This assertion really
snapped him up; he couldn't see why such an adaption would be a bad thing.

>>But to me, if you think about it, of course it is. Immigrant workers are
not today revolutionary minded, far from it. They have come here to make
money and right now they are doing that. Being an immigrant worker does not
automatically mean that you sympathize with or even vaguely comprehend what
is at stake for the Cuban Revolution.

>>What you do understand and fear, is the possibility that your new life
could be rudely destroyed by La Migra. It's understandable that it would be
difficult to explain to a new immigrant worker why the INS raid rescuing
Elian was a good thing. You have to explain a lot. So the SWP sought a way
to avoid grasping the nettle and risk losing influence with the immigrant
workers around them in industry.<<

Jon, interesting point, and, clearly, the SWP stressed the anti-INS
character of its position to the hilt in its reaction to the raid.

So there well may have been an element of this in the SWP's position, but by
far the biggest aspect was that they disagreed with Cuba's campaign around
Elián, they believed it to contain elements in the direction of an
adaptation to liberalism to facilitate diplomatic maneuvering. And they were
dead set against a protest campaign for Elian's freedom in the U.S.

This is part of a pattern. They have for some years been stressing more and
more their general agreement with the overall thrust of Cuban policy over a
period of decades, rather than any specific support for anything Cuba
happens to be doing at the moment (except for the shoot down of the Brothers
to the Rescue planes, an incident to which the SWP attributes transcendent
importance). And they urge working people to relate to Cuba by studying its
lessons an applying them to "our own" struggles here in the U.S., by which
they mean largely economic struggles, judging from the contents of the
Militant, rather than by joining in a movement against the blockade and the
hostile US policy.

You can even see this in the kind of new books that Pathfinder is
publishing, compared with those that Ocean Press, which I believe is run by
members of the Australian DSP, for example, is bringing out. The Pathfinder
stuff is historical, like the Che Guevara talks to young people, whereas
Ocean's offerings include much more up-to-date material. Mind you, I'm glad
both are bringing out Cuba books, the more the merrier, but the editorial
choices that are made reflect something about the political approach of the
group involved.

In the past couple of months, however, they had once again seemed more
supportive of Cuba's current political initiatives and campaign against the
hostile U.S. policy. After having featured a reiteration of their Elián line
in virtually every single issue of the paper from May through August, they
dropped that and instead talked about some of the marches in Cuba, Fidel's
speech in New York, etc.

That's why the re-emergence of the Elián line in the current issue was so
disappointing, and, I believe, worthy of comment. Nevertheless, it should be
noted that at least on one point there has been a shift, their evaluation of
Cuba's campaign around Elián now seems more positive than before.

José
----- Original Message -----
From: "jonathan flanders" <jon_flanders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: There they go again! The Militant on Elián, one year l ater


Re the Militant and Elian >> I'll have more to say about this in a couple
of days. <<

Jose,

  While in San Francisco for the machinist's convention I visited
extensively with my old friend from the Albany area who is now living in SF
and is the SF SWP organizer.

  Eventually we got round to the Elian question. He seemed not to have
heard all the arguments you have put forward(!!), and seemed surprised by
my vehement rejection of the SWP view.

  I have another take on the SWP position after having visited with him. He
works in a plant with many immigrant workers, as do other party members and
the rest of us working in industry in the US. And I should add, relating to
immigrant workers was a significant theme at the IAM convention itself. The
head of the Painters Union gave an impassioned speech on the subject,
recounting how his union had turned around on the issue, with the result
that the painters have now begun to reverse their long-term membership
decline.

  At any rate, I put it to my friend that the SWP's position was an
adaption to this growing sector of the working class. This assertion really
snapped him up; he couldn't see why such an adaption would be a bad thing.

  But to me, if you think about it, of course it is. Immigrant workers are
not today revolutionary minded, far from it. They have come here to make
money and right now they are doing that. Being an immigrant worker does not
automatically mean that you sympathize with or even vaguely comprehend what
is at stake for the Cuban Revolution.

  What you do understand and fear, is the possibility that your new life
could be rudely destroyed by La Migra. It's understandable that it would be
difficult to explain to a new immigrant worker why the INS raid rescuing
Elian was a good thing. You have to explain a lot. So the SWP sought a way
to avoid grasping the nettle and risk losing influence with the immigrant
workers around them in industry.

And I don't need snide lectures that there are no such workers around the
SWP, I went out to dinner with my friend and one of his co-workers who is a
Filipino immigrant.

Jon Flanders