Re: [Marxism] Camejo to speak at CCNY

[Steve Gabosch <bebop101@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I got the impression from Louis's 9/22 post that he believed there was
nothing "left-liberal" at all in Camejo's Avocado Resolution.  Referring to
Camejo and the Avocado Resolution, he said "For those who can detect
anything "left-liberal" in this document, please share it with the rest of
us."

For my part, I see nothing *but* left-liberalism in this document.  In my
reading, it is clearly a program for a democratic reform of the US
political and electoral system, but I see nothing more to it in terms of
advocating fundamental social change.  This does not necessarily make its
specific proposals wrong from a working class and socialist point of
view.  Marxists in general, to my knowledge, have traditionally agreed with
specific reforms to the system that Camejo and his colleagues in the Green
Party propose in this document, such as abolishing the electoral
college.  And certainly, this document's criticism of the Democratic Party
as a party of big business is a traditional socialist point of view.  But
these positions are also traditional views of left-liberalism in the US.

The most important theme of the Avocado Resolution, of course, is promotion
of the Green Party, and the right, ability and necessity of "third parties"
in general to run for office.  But promoting campaigns by such parties
running outside the traditional Democratic-Republican framework is also not
a break with left-liberal traditions, at least not in theory.  In a sense,
left-liberals have always considered whether to do so to be a "tactical"
question.  This political current in general has never been opposed to
third party campaigns in principle - what they argue about is how to be
"realistic" and "pragmatic" from one election to the next.  For example,
this debate among liberals and left-liberals over Nader versus Kerry in the
elections - and what the realistic and pragmatic thing to do is this year -
is of course quite heated.

My question: am I missing something in the Avocado Resolution? - seems to
have been answered.  No one has pointed to anything in that document that
is not a traditional position of left-liberalism.  Nothing in the document
discusses socialism, why working people should oppose capitalism, how
socialism can come about, or whether a revolution in the US is possible or
needed - all omissions that are consistent with a left-liberal,
pro-capitalist program.  These questions are left untouched in this document.

I raise this as a matter of empirical fact.  Louis wanted anyone who could
detect anything "left-liberal" in the Avocado Resolution to share it with
the Marxmail list.  Apparently, there is no one on this list who can detect
anything *but* left-liberalism in this document.  The document is at
http://www.gpus.org/articles/camejo_01_05_04.html

********************

Moving beyond the Avocado Resolution, if I am reading Louis and others
correctly, they believe the strategy of deliberately restricting its public
platform to nothing but left-liberal positions is a positive and central
feature of the Nader/Camejo campaign, and that this is a key reason to
support it.  Perhaps this can be described in a more nuanced way, but I
think I am capturing the basic idea, am I not?

In my view, the question is really not over whether the Nader/Camejo
campaign platform and program is left-liberal.  Of course it is.

The argument is over whether or not to support and promote left-liberal
campaigns, such as Nader/Camejo, and in general, Green Party efforts to get
political activists elected to public office on a left-liberal platform.

As for this fall's election, I personally argue that a protest vote to one
of the small socialist groups such as the WWP or the SWP is the most
effective way of utilizing the ballot box by class conscious workers,
anti-capitalist minded activists, and anti-imperialists.  Clearly, this
particular argument is a minority view in the political left and the
working class in general today.  But in my opinion, even though only tens
of thousands, and not millions, will vote as I will, that it is the best
way to register at the polls the need for both a break with the Democratic
Party and the development of a mass anti-capitalist working class movement
in US politics today.  Where many will disagree of course is whether
building a "mass anti-capitalist working class movement" is a realistic and
pragmatic idea.  Nader/Camejo supporters argue that such an effort,
realistic or not, needs to be combined with a left-liberal electoral
strategy to be effective.  Interestingly, they advocate this view despite
the pragmatic reality that Nader has no chance of being elected this
year.  In that sense, their campaign is just as "idealistic"
(non-practical) as the ones that are being conducted by the
socialists.  They are advocating a protest vote.  This offers two kinds of
protest votes for anti-capitalist minded people to consider - a vote for a
socialist program or a vote for a left-liberal electoral strategy.  And so
the debate goes on.

The other question I had was where does Camejo stand, based on things he
has recently written, on how to make a revolution.  More specifically, I am
interested in what kind of coalition of class and political forces does he
advocate these days that he thinks are needed to make a revolution, and
what might such revolution look like.  Marx introduced the concept
"dictatorship of the proletariat" as a solution for drawing lessons from
defeat of the Paris Commune, and of course, the question of how the working
class and the oppressed can make and sustain a revolution has been central
in Marxist political theory since the 1840's.  Decades later, Lenin
advocated in Russia, for example, a "democratic dictatorship of the
proletariat and peasantry."  Behind these formulations are of course the
Marxist theory of the state, and theories about how the capitalist ruling
class and the different social classes in a given society are likely to
respond to major social crises and pivot points in the class struggle where
the masses are in major motion and the possibility of revolution is on the
agenda.  Camejo made these questions - and revolutionary socialist answers
to them - among his core themes in the '60's and '70's.  I am curious what
he is saying today.

In solidarity,
~ Steve


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism