Re: If Not Now, When, was Re: David Broder's new (materialist) idea

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

> "Devine, James" wrote:
>
> CC writes: >What Michael describes here is just one of an endless list
> of disasters
> that, for 68 years, have flowed from the most serious political error
> in
> u.s. history, the decision of the CPUSA in 1936 to tie itself to the
> Democratic Party. <
>
> wasn't that about as serious as the CPUSA leadership's earlier
> decision to tie itself to the USSR? Didn't their decision to back the
> DP reflect the Comintern's "popular front" line?
>

Yes. And a full historical analysis would require much more attention to
what led (worldwide as well as in Moscow and the U.S.) both to that
tie-in with the USSR and to the Comintern's swing to the popular front
strategy. But my immediate focus was on the decision itself (regardless
of its origins) and its long-run effect on U.S. politics.

It _is_ worth noting, also, that different CPs around the world differed
in how they implemented Comintern decisions within the context of
particular national struggles. The CPC in the '30s and '40s was quite
successful in (a) nominally maintaining the Comintern line _and_ in
wrenching it to local needs. I believe Chinese history (and language
even) had provided the CPC with the distinction between "isms" (theory)
and "thought," but the Party also seized effectively on that distinction
as a bridge between abstract Comintern line and the actual conduct of
the Chinese Revolution. One can imagine, at least as an abstract
possibility, other CPs, and specifically the CPUSA, finding ways to be
'true' both to Comintern strategy and the demands of u.s. conditions.
But I think very similar forces were operative on the left (including
the CP) in 1936 as we see manifested on the left today, which can be
summarized, I think, as an overestimation of the strength of the left,
as reflected in the claim that the tiny left forces in the u.s. (a) can
make a difference in the election and (b) are strong enough and
organized enough to maintain independence _within_ a subordination in
practice to the DP.

Both assumptions are wrong. LBO & Pen-L subscribers cannot and will not
make the slightest difference in the election, regardless of what they
do or don't do. I am continuously reminded when reading lbo or pen-l
posts of the old '50's joke about a flea approaching an elephant with
intentions of rape. This image also applies to those leftists who
thought they could give "critical" support to u.s. intervention in
Afghanistan, in Yugoslavia, or in East Timor. The weight of that
"critical" component was an absolute Zero. So is the weight in the 2004
election of the ABBs. So was the weight of the CPUSA in the election of
1936. That is why Roosevelt could manipulate the CP so easily: he didn't
_need_ their support, and didn't have to pay for it.

But the CPUSA in 1936 _was_ strong enough to have maintained its
independence of the DP and of the likes of Reuther in the CIO. As an
independent force, it could have made a difference. (The Wagner Act did
not need to be so weak in its provisions. Social Security could have
been far more generous. There was simply no independent left to
discipline the DP in either Congress or the White House.) The argument
for supporting the No-Strike policy during the war was every bit as
strong as the argument for supporting Kerry now. And just as the
No-strike policy weakened (perhaps disastrously) the CP and prepared the
way for the fiascoes of the late '40s, so the ABB position now weakens
the left for future struggles.

Leftists have _always_ claimed that they could support anti-working
class political forces in the U.S. at the same time as they built their
own power. They (the CPUSA) supported Joseph McCarthy in the Republican
primary in Wisconsin (46? 48?) because they thought he would be a weaker
candidate in the general election, in which they supported LaFollette.
The same idiocy was visible on several left maillists in the vicious
attacks on the Minnesota Green Party for running a candidate against
Wellstone.

This last bit of idiocy had another cultural leg: the American
superstition that one votes for the 'man,' not the party.

One cannot support persons; one can only support _parties_. It's not
ABB, it's Anybody but the RP, i.e., No one but a Democrat, Now and
Forever.

Carrol