Re: [Marxism] ISO's conference.

[chegitz guevara <absynthe@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/22/09, Joaquin Bustelo <jbustelo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Chegitz: "Back in 1998, Diane Feeley wrote an article for Against the
>
> Current in which she stated that it was a good thing that the government
>  removed Ron Carey from his leadership position in the Teamsters. As I
>  recall, I was the only one in my local that raised a stink that a leader of
>  a socialist organization was siding with the government against a union.
>  Carey was eventually indicted, and found not guilty of all charges against
>  him.
>
>  "As far as I know, Solidarity has never admitted it was wrong."
>
>
> My understanding is that ATC is NOT the organ of Solidarity.


Not particularly relevant to whether or not a leader of Solidarity
uses it to express anti-working class opinions. Facebook isn't the
organ of Solidarity either, but when I expressed my displeasure with
the organization there late last year, Finkel and Silver both decided
I had to be questioned about it.


>  In  addition, Solidarity does not exercise "discipline" over the writings of
>  individual members nor does it necessarily adopt formal positions as an
>  organization on all sorts of events on which, in theory, it could. Comrades
>  are free to express their own individual take on things,


My direct experience leads me to believe that the reality is quite
different from the pretty face.


>  Since most comrades would not view what has been raised as some sort of
>  official Soli positions, I doubt it would occur to anyone to repudiate it.


Irrelevant. If the leader of a socialist organization with significant
links to the trade unions publicly takes an anti-union, pro-government
position, pretty much every member of that organization ought to have
been up in arms.


>  This is, of course, a very different way of functioning than that of the
>  self-proclaimed Democratic Centralist groups.


The fact that Solidarity doesn't call itself democratic centralist
doesn't mean it isn't. You're allowed to have different opinions, as
long as you don't fight for them, as long as you don't oppose the
decrepitude and hypocrisy of the leadership, as long as you don't
expose their rotten politics. Then the knives come out and they get
rid of you.


>  I believe chegitz's disappointment in the lack of a formal Solidarity
>  repudiation of Dianne Feeley's individual opinion on this matter may reflect
>  a "hangover" --so to speak-- from the practices of socalled "democratic
>  centralist" groups.
>
>
>  Joaquin

I wouldn't know. The only openly DC group I was ever in (The Spark), I
was only in for six months, nineteen years ago. If six months out of
more than twenty years as a socialist produces such an effect on me,
one can only wonder what it did to you, who spent so much time in the
SWP. Or perhaps we can refrain from making assumptions about people we
don't know instead?

The truth is, not being a DC organization doesn't mean that comrades
are allowed to say whatever they want and remain from from criticism.
Or should we refer to Rosa Luxemberg as a budding DCist for
criticizing Bernstein? The fact that I was the lone voice raising a
protest against Feeley's siding with the Feds against the Teamsters
tells volumes about the level of political discourse within the
organization, or rather the lack thereof.

The Socialist Party is as far from a DC organization you can get, and
you can be damn sure that when someone says something publicly which
someone else doesn't like, the last thing that happens is that
everyone in the organization meekly accepts it. There's plenty of
debate.

________________________________________________
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