Re: FW: Racial Blind Spot Continues toAfflictGreens

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> lnp3@xxxxxxxxx 12/01/00 04:50PM >>>
CB:
>How about John Conyers as as good as Nader ?

Undoubtedly he is better, just as Henry Gonzalez was. But unless we break
with the two-party system, we will always be providing ideological
backhanded support for the main obstacle to social progress: the
Republican-Democrat Party. In the 1960s the Trotskyists urged a vote for
Louis Stokes when he ran as an independent for Mayor of Cleveland, but
withdrew support when he ran as a Democrat. His politics had not changed
one whit.

((((((((((((((

CB: Yes, I know this theory, but what is an elaboration of it ? Since I believe it has never been carried out in practice, isn't it a hypothesis ? I don't mean that it doesn't have some inherent logcial sense, but that's not sufficient.

In other words, I don't think we can conclude that when there are radical developments in the masses, that it won't be possible and necessary to use the Democratic ( or even Republican ) Party in the struggle, perhaps in conjunction with other parties.

Just as an historical example, the Democratic Party was once the Party of the slaveowners and the Republicans arose as the slayer of slavery. Yet  concrete circumstances changed so much years later that the Democratic Party was the vehicle of the New Deal, and today is the party of Black People almost.

So, I would have to have a little more argument as to the validity of elevating absolutely no work in the Democratic Party to the level of a principle and not tactics.

Just as another example, Lenin discussed work or not in reactionary trade unions as a tactical issue, not principle.