[Marxism] Comments by Steve Bloom on the Million Worker March

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am enclosing here some comments, which I think are relevant and
useful, by Steve Bloom.  They  are from a letter he wrote in response to
a discussion of the Onasch assessment on a Solidarity mailing list.
Fred Feldman

What weight do we give to the problems?

In my judgment all of the difficulties are secondary to the most
fundamental truth: An organic wing of the labor movement, led by people
of color, stepped out against the prevailing, bureaucratic, not only
pro-Democratic Party but completely-dependent-on the Democratic Party
trend that dominates the AFL-CIO and other unions.

We should be giving this many hearty cheers, not an "on the one hand, on
the other hand" kind of assessment. We should be seeking to support and
work with these elements in their ongoing efforts, not asking whether
sectarian forces will dominate. One thing is for certain: if Solidarity
and the people we influence in the labor movement are not present, the
sectarian forces will dominate even more than they would otherwise.

We talk a lot about respecting the leadership of people of color. In
this case it's necessary to walk the walk. Even when comrades may have
questions about specific decisions we should understand that our
questions are just that--which means we should be ready to listen to the
answers, and respect the culture and alternative traditions which
generated those answers.

It is only in this context of wholehearted and unconditional support,
and genuine respect for the leadership of people of color, that any
discussion of problems can be useful, leading to a constructive
participation and potentially better efforts in the future. I get the
feeling, however, that some comrades are not discussing in that spirit,
in order to figure out how to participate most constructively. They seem
to be weighing the problems in order to determine whether support is/was
warranted. That's the wrong approach, IMO.

Bottom line is this: The general level of support, paper endorsement vs.
mobilization, number of participants, visible (and audible) dominance by
some sectarian elements, etc., basically reflects the actual
relationship of forces in the US labor movement, not mistakes made by
the organizers of the MWM. Yes, had things been done perfectly there
might have been double the numbers, and a somewhat more congenial
speakers' platform.

But the march would still have been relatively small by labor movement
standards, and sectarian voices would still have been heard
disproportionately--in the crowd if not on the platform. So here is the
fundamental question we have to answer: Given that reality was it a
positive, or a negative, that this march took place, that an alternative
program to the one pusued by the traditional labor bureaucracy was
raised for the consideration of working people everywhere? Was there a
sufficient *genuine* expression of an alternative labor movement
manifested at the MWM to have made the march worthwhile?

To me the answer is clearly in the affirmative. Revolutionaries have to
see this as a first fledgling step, and as a first fledgling step it is
a truly positive development. That this march took place at all is the
key factor. We should be behind it fully, mobilizing whatever resources
we can to help encourage this wing of the labor movement to continue
raising its voice, contributing as much as we can to helping it's
initiatives become successful.


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