Re: [Marxism] Did Trotsky urge voting for Black Democrats?

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Joaquin:
>         "We consider that the Negro's candidacy as opposed to the white's
>candidacy, EVEN IF BOTH ARE OF THE SAME PARTY, is an important factor in the
>struggle of the Negroes for their equality, and in this case we can
>critically support them. I believe it can be done in certain circumstances."
>(EMPHASIS added).

Of course. This is consistent with everything else that has been 
discussed. If we were to understand it in (nearly) contemporary 
terms, let us say that Malcolm X's Organization of African-American 
Unity had gotten involved in a campaign for president and decided to 
run somebody like Adam Clayton Powell Jr. rather than Trotskyist Paul 
Boutelle. Hypothetically, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. does not resign 
from the Democratic Party but simply takes this opportunity to get 
his name out and burnish his (fake) rebel reputation. Trotsky was 
arguing that this makes no difference. It is still good for the Black 
organization to compete with the Democrats and the Republicans.

>         Louis interprets Trotsky's talking about the candidate being "put
>up" by an independent Black organization as meaning he would be on a
>counterposed ballot line. But there is no reason to think that Trotsky knew
>or cared how candidates were presented on U.S. ballots, which vary
>tremendously from state to state anyways.

But he certainly understood that the Democratic Party was the enemy 
of the working class. Just go to MIA and search for Roosevelt in the 
Trotsky archive.

>         The message, as I read it, is unquestionably that, under "certain
>circumstances" the question of PARTY is secondary.

That's right. When life-long Democrat Louis Stokes decided to run as 
an independent in the 1960s, the SWP backed his campaign. It is such 
small breaches that revolutionaries must support no matter the 
history and ideology of the candidate. It would be like backing 
Walter Reuther for Congress if he ran as a Labor Party candidate.

>         Political representation of a people is a DEMOCRATIC RIGHT, one
>which Black folks were denied through Jim Crow apartheid and savage
>terrorism.

That's right. In "What is to be Done", Lenin said that a vanguard 
should fight against any attempt to prevent a liberal politician from 
assuming office. In the 1960s, the fight to oppose Jim Crow ballot 
restrictions was as important as the Chartist movement, but this 
should not be interpreted as an invitation to vote Democratic.

>         I do not think it can be reasonably argued that Trotsky saw ballot
>line designation and formalities as decisive in this.

Of course it can. What you call a "ballot line designation" is not 
some nicety that can be observed on some tactical basis. The 
Democratic Party was the enemy of the working class and national 
minorities. The entire effort of the SWP in the 1930s was to create 
alternatives in the electoral arena, a Labor Party first of all, and 
a Black organization that would not conduct litmus tests on how the 
candidates identified themselves. Just as was the case when Democrats 
spoke from the platforms of antiwar rallies in the 1960s, it was 
their contradiction not ours.





________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu