[Marxism] An exchange with Bill Onasch on the Million Worker March

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

1. Comment by Bill Onasch
A couple of quick comments in regard to Fred and Steve's submissions.

Certainly you could say MWM was a direct challenge to the bureaucratic
leadership of the labor movement. However, I think we need to question
the wisdom of such direct  confrontations given the present relationship
of forces. As long as the class struggle left wing is so tiny we have to
learn how to maneuver in relation to the bureaucracy. A study of our
best traditions--the Cannon/Foster forces in the pre-Stalinized CP, the
Minneapolis Teamsters, the packinghouse comrades in Austin, Albert Lea
and South St Paul in the late Thirties-early Forties, and others--will
show an understanding of the need to avoid unnecessary premature
confrontations with the bureaucrats, and, in fact, the need to try to
involve them in specific tactical projects. Those forces were many times
stronger than what we can muster today.

I tried to avoid any appearance of red-baiting in my public article on
MWM. But everyone on this list, and any other lists these comments may
be circulated on, should be clear that MWM was not some spontaneous
action arising from people of color in the labor movement. It was
initiated, and tightly controlled, by two principal strange bed
fellows--the Lambertist Socialist Organizer and the Marcyite Workers
World.

Some good could come out of MWM if its organizers were prepared to be
realistic, learn from both its successes and failures, and be open to
building broader based actions in the future. I am not optimistic about
the chances of such a perspective being adopted. More likely is that
"continuations" will be at least as sectarian as their previous efforts.
Early reports from meetings on the West Coast indicate they still seek
to find short-cuts enabling them to bypass propaganda and recruitment of
a base, jumping ahead to lead  their own mass movement. That's not going
to happen.

Bill

Response  by Fred Feldman
2.I just want to say that Bill Onasch's inside dope about who was really
behind the Million Worker March (Lambertists -- didn't know we had 'em,
but I don't challenge him on that -- and Marcyites) changes nothing
about what I said (or Steve Bloom said) about the importance  of Black
and working-class initiative.
No more than the fact that SWP supporters were involved in the
leadership of small strikes over the past couple of years in St. Paul
and Utah places those fights outside the line of march of the working
class.

The course of Cannon/Foster,  Cannon/'Dobbs, and so on in the labor
movement deserves much closer study than it has received. Of that I am
certain. But it is not a rulebook to be counterposed to the first forms
and expressions of struggle that arise from the movement.  (From  that
standpoint, I always found Dobbs'  Revolutionary Continuity books, in
contrast to his books on the Teamsters' struggle, too didactic and
categorical in his criticisms of everybody who fought in ways that
differed from the line of march as it has been assessed by revolutionary
Marxists. I thought Dobbs'  RC books had value, but it was limited by a
certain rigidity in counterposing the revolutionary Marxist standpoint
to the initiatives of others.)

Was it wise for the initiators of the march to follow a political course
that led to an open clash with the AFL-CIO bureaucracy? Well, it would
probably not have occurred to me. But frankly, I cannot see how the
class struggle has been damaged at all by this open clash.  The
endorsements from the labor movement, which were very broad, indicate
that as a propaganda action, the Million Worker March had a positive
impact and the debate was a good one to have.

Will they go forward from this or drift into a sectarian dead-end?
Well, I guess if the sectarians have anything to say about it and, more
importantly, some of the workers lose some steam because of the
smallness of the action (a realistic assessment of possibilities would
be a step forward for future attempts), the negative will be the more
likely possibility.

But the significance of the action itself remains.  Its smallness is an
indication of the weakness of the labor movement.  Its occurrence is an
indication of the positive changes that I believe are beginning to take
place.  I wish the working-class activists success, regardless of their
possible affiliation with this or that group,  in seeking to bring some
of the real demands of the labor movement before the public eye, and I
appreciate their doing so in an election framework in which these are
deeply buried.
Fred Feldman
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism