Re: Output Falling in Oil-Rich Mexico, and Politics Get the Blame

[Julio Huato <juliohuato@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jim Devine wrote:

> here in Southern California, there
> have been several positive trends
> in the labor movement: the janitors'
> strikes, the effort to get living
> wage ordinances and the like. There
> have been movements like this all
> across the US, though the old
> AFL-CIO/C2W is definitely in trouble.
>
> there is also a contrasting &
> conflicting movement among some workers
> to oppose "illegal immigration" and
> the like.

I think you're absolutely right.  There are contradictory tendencies
in the U.S. working class.  Many encouraging local developments.  Etc.
What surprises me (and then not) is the standoffishness of the
radical grouplets of Marxist pedigree.

For example, in my neighborhood, there's a network of civic
organizations that support immigrant workers and their families.  The
young activists undergirding these organizations are, mostly, members
of religious groups.  Very committed and very progressive in their
political views.  But not your traditional Marxist socialist.

So, unfortunately, they are largely unaware of the rich intellectual
tradition associated with Marx's name.  I don't care about Marxist
exegesis, but there's no need to reinvent the wheel.  This disconnect
from worldly socialist traditions shows politically.  The approaches
of these activists can be naive, pragmatic, and often narrow.

On the other hand, some of my neighbors belong to radical political
groups that have resounding polysyllabic names with relatively little
influence in the class.  I'm talking about full timers, "professional
revolutionaries," or whatever they call themselves.  Yet they don't
entertain for a second serious work with these local organizations.

It'd very natural and economical for these political groups to have
their members engage -- even if part time -- with these local
organizations.  To do that, they'd have to do concrete work that
translates into helping concrete people concretely.  For some reason,
that has zero appeal to them.  They are full-time propagandists.

But, to paraphrase Zinoviev, you cannot educate the masses with your
agitation and you cannot agitate the masses with your propaganda.
It's like two parallel lines.  They go on without touching each other.

One of my neighbors, a prominent member of the grouplet led by
chairman Bob Avakian, the CRP of the U.S., is entirely focused on
selling her "party's" newspaper and recruiting the next member to have
her/him replicate the same behavioral template.  To be fair with them,
the newspaper says the right things about immigrant workers, the war
in Iraq, Venezuela, Cuba, etc.  Great work, in a way.  But I've never
seen her in local meetings.

She and her comrades think of themselves as members of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff of the Future Communist Revolution in the U.S.  But
for the most part they lack organic connection with the actual class.
This kind of political behavior seems bizarre to me.  It's as if we
were starting up a modest grocery store at the corner, but believed
that just by naming it "Take Over The World, Inc." and giving
ourselves pompous titles, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Executive
Officer, etc., we were actually turning it into the next Microsoft,
getting ourselves ready to acquire our next corporate jet.

(I know you don't like my corporate metaphors, Jim, but I can't resist
this one.)