Max Sawicky on redbaiting in the antiwar movement

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

(This is from MaxSpeak.org, the 'blog' of Max Sawicky, who is a staff
economist at EPI, which is a left-liberal think-tank with strong financial
and political backing from the AFL-CIO. Although I have strong political
disagreements with Max, I find him to be fairly principled in the way he
conducts himself in debates, plus having a good sense of humor. Not as good
as mine, of course.)

THE FRONT. Some friends take me to task for not being sufficiently clued-in
on the current state of the anti-war movement. In particular, people who
attended the large demonstration in New York on October 6th tell me it was
a fine event. The sponsor of this action was the "Not In Our Name"
coalition. Endorsers span the breadth of the usual liberal and radical
suspects. I have a high regard for most of them. The rhetoric of the
coalition is what it should be, from the practical standpoint of stopping a
general war in Iraq. So what's the problem?

Maybe there isn't any. The fact remains that the so-called Revolutionary
Communist Party (RCP) evidently plays an important administrative role in
this operation. There can be no other reason that the designated
spokesperson for the coalition is a fellow named C. Clark Kissinger, whom
I've never met or laid eyes on, but who is well-known as a long-standing
RCP cadre from way back. Kudos to CCK for sticking with it all these years,
while assorted other New Left personages went into New Age philosophy or
selling real estate.

The intent of descriptions of the NION coalition that reduce it to the RCP
is clear: to pimp for the President and defeat the anti-war movement.
Change the topic to the RCP's demented party rhetoric, on display here. I
don't want to do that. The purpose of NION is well-founded, and it seems to
be moving on the right track. Its demonstrations merit support, absent
superior alternatives.

The natural dynamic in a coalition like this is for the more radical
components to dilute their message. A staunch Marxist-Leninist might see it
as selling out, or compromising with liberalism. The message of NION is
decidedly liberal. The contrast with the RCP is obvious.

In the 60s, a similar phenomenon afflicted the Socialist Workers Party, a
Trotskyist group that ran the National Peace Action Coalition (NPAC). The
SWP was invisible in NPAC (much like the RCP in NION), to the
dissatisfaction of some of its members. Despite itself, through NPAC the
SWP did a great service. The SWP's stewardship of NPAC didn't do it much
good organizationally. It did not provide lasting recruits to the SWP
proper. Today the SWP is small potatoes, as radical outfits go.

The bottom line is that in a successful coalition effort, the 'front'
becomes the whole, and the group behind the front becomes unimportant.
Focus on the group and you're not on point, or you're trying to change the
subject.

There will be liberals and unaffiliated folks who will find the NION 'line'
insufficiently concerned with U.S. national security and insufficiently
critical of foreign dictators who have been targeted by the Bush
Administration. As I've said before, this sort of criticism of NION is
fair, but to be made in good faith, it is properly secondary to opposing
George Bush's war. Bush is a greater threat to the nation than C. Clark
Kissinger. It remains for any such persons to make sure their anti-war
voice is heard as well.

I have to be off so I will not have time to respond to the multitude of
comments until the weekend. Thanks to all for reading and writing.

Posted by maxbsawicky @ 12:16 PM EST


Louis Proyect
www.marxmail.org


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.