Monday, May 12, 2014


Capitalists Gut the Motor City-Detroit: The Rise and Fall of a Labor/Black Stronghold


Workers Vanguard No. 1044
 




 
 
 
 
 


18 April 2014
 
Capitalists Gut the Motor City-Detroit: The Rise and Fall of a Labor/Black Stronghold
 
Part One
 
The following is a presentation, edited for publication, given by comrade Barry James at a March 22 forum in Chicago.
 
The “Motor City” was the center of American capitalism’s principal industry and a stronghold of a powerful unionized black proletariat. Today, Detroit is the world capital of closed auto plants, with the world’s most skilled army of homeless. It was in Flint, Michigan, in 1937 that a sit-down strike brought the auto giant General Motors to its knees. Michigan now is a newly minted “right to work” state.
Detroit is a monument to the irrationality of the profit system—a system based on the private ownership of the means of production. When the city went into bankruptcy, government spokesmen and the bourgeois press pointed the finger at mismanagement by city officials and “exorbitant” union contracts, which were alibis for the perpetrators. The auto giants brought in waves of labor, including many black workers, to toil on the assembly line only to then toss them on the scrap heap when the plants became unprofitable. A proletarian revolution is necessary to rip the productive wealth of society from the capitalists and build a collectivized, planned economy where production is based on social need, not profit.
In recent years, Detroit’s population has fallen sharply, leaving an 82 percent black populace that the capitalist rulers consider surplus. The U.S. bourgeoisie presumes that it can starve the poor, gut pensions and impoverish working people without repercussions. This calculation, indeed the plight of Detroit, owes much to the role of the trade-union bureaucracy in suppressing labor struggle.
Barack Obama, a Wall Street Democrat who is overseer of racist U.S. imperialism, was hailed for bailing out the auto bosses. The 2009 bailout meant remaining members of the United Auto Workers (UAW) would work for less, if at all, to restore company profits. In return for allowing the automakers to shave billions owed the retiree health care trust, the UAW took equity stakes in the “new” General Motors and Chrysler—and one seat on the board at the latter. True to form, GM and Chrysler announced plant closures and workers were saddled with a no-strike pledge for six years. The UAW tops assured the automakers, including Ford, that wages and benefits would end up on par with foreign-owned plants in the open shop South! A newly hired autoworker at a remaining plant in Detroit would earn $14 an hour. This wage, adjusted for inflation, is three cents less than what Henry Ford was paying in 1914 when he announced the $5 day.
Current UAW president Bob King has promoted the bailout, turning a defeat for the union into a badge of honor for Obama, with the union bureaucrats pouring millions of dollars into Obama’s re-election. At one time, the UAW was the symbol of union power. Today, the UAW Solidarity House crew can barely choke out the words “working class,” let alone reference the class-struggle methods that built the union.
In the course of the decades-long withering of the trade unions, the UAW tops habitually unfurled the banner of poisonous protectionism: “American Jobs for American Workers.” King may oppose the Pentagon’s School of the Americas, which trains anti-labor death squads for repressive regimes in Latin America, but he can China-bash with the best. The role of the labor bureaucrats was explained by Leon Trotsky in his 1940 article “Trade Unions in the Epoch of Imperialist Decay”:
“Monopoly capitalism is less and less willing to reconcile itself to the independence of trade unions. It demands of the reformist bureaucracy and the labor aristocracy, who pick up the crumbs from its banquet table, that they become transformed into its political police before the eyes of the working class.”
Turning back the ruling-class war against the unions requires breaking labor’s political subservience to the Democrats and the capitalist order. A fight inside the unions is required to oust the current sellouts and install a class-struggle leadership.
Workers, Black People Made to Pay
In the years prior to Detroit’s bankruptcy filing, former mayor David Bing ended city services, including road repairs, streetlights and garbage collection, to the parts of Detroit he deemed expendable. Meanwhile, the underfunded fire department adopted a “let it burn” policy. Unsatisfied, the Michigan governor appointed an emergency manager in 2013 to conduct a fire sale of city assets and slash costs, beginning with unionized labor. We oppose the devastating attacks on the pensions and health benefits of city workers past and present. We also oppose the privatization of the city water department to pay back the banks, higher utility service fees be damned.
A number of capitalist philanthropies are donating money to keep the Detroit Institute of Arts from being looted, dubiously claiming that they will make contributions to reduce the pension cutbacks, too. Outrageously, the plundering banks object to taking any “haircut” on their loans from which they have extracted massive profits. For their part, the Michigan public union tops, committed to a course of lobbying Democratic Party politicians, whine that the state constitution “protects” pension benefits. In early December, this protection was tossed out the window when a federal judge ruled that a bankrupt Detroit could wipe out city workers’ pensions, a precedent that has emboldened other municipalities in their efforts to gut pensions.
As for the cops and prison guards, they are not workers, but the repressive arm and professional strikebreakers of the capitalist state and we demand their ouster from the unions. The pensions of the retired thugs in blue who “made their living” terrorizing the black populace are no concern of ours. Police from the Detroit area, home to many Arabs, have also helped carry out Obama’s “war on terror.” A case in point is a 2009 FBI raid in which an imam who served the poor—not least hungry Christians—was blown away. He was shot 21 times and then handcuffed while the Feds’ wounded attack dog was airlifted for veterinary care.
The Ford Foundation has a vision of remaking the city into a young, high-tech, artistic-urban farm. Such “reimaginings” can only heighten the sense of siege in black Detroit, which is ringed by white suburbs that were called “sundown towns”—meaning if you’re black you’d better be out by then. In the 1950s, Dearborn mayor Orville Hubbard infamously said to an Alabama newspaper that a black man moving in to Dearborn would be responded to quicker than a fire. This is not simply ancient history. Last November, a 19-year-old black woman met her death by a shotgun blast to the face while seeking help on the porch of a Dearborn Heights home after a car accident.
Not a few of the city’s suburbs are affluent. Adjacent to Detroit is Oakland County, whose elected manager—an all-round retrograde and Ku Klux Klan defender—proposes to build a fence around Detroit and “throw in the blankets and corn.” With Detroit and several other Michigan cities in receivership and run by emergency managers, a wide swath of the state’s population, including a majority of its black residents, is subject to the diktats of unelected officials. Simply put, this is racist disenfranchisement.
The 1941 Strike: Solidifying the UAW
The completion of the Erie Canal in 1825 and the city’s relative proximity to the Mesabi iron range first spurred Detroit’s growth. The city produced railroad cars, stoves and other manufactured goods. It became the Motor City with the advent of Ford’s Model T in the early 20th century.
Shortly after, the “Great Migration” began, setting the stage for the economic integration of black people into industrial capitalism. During the labor crisis created by World War I, over half a million black people left the Jim Crow South for the North. A good portion of black Detroit “had roots in Tennessee, Alabama, western Georgia or the Florida panhandle because the historic rail lines connected those places during the Migration years.... Detroit’s black population would skyrocket” (Isabel Wilkerson, The Warmth of Other Suns, 2010).
Detroit has long been a city of sharp contradictions. Prior to the Civil War, it was a station for the Underground Railroad and a meeting place of leading abolitionists. Yet in 1863, it also was the scene of a major anti-black riot. Detroit at the beginning of the Great Migration was “the most Southern” of Northern cities, but at least black people could sit where they wanted on the trolley. In the early 1920s, 40,000 Klansmen lived in the city, and a KKK mayor was almost elected. In 1925, a black doctor, Ossian Sweet, moved his family to a white neighborhood. Armed with guns, the Sweet family defended themselves against racist mobs, killing one attacker. After trials and imprisonment, the Sweets were ultimately acquitted.
The mass unionization of black workers into the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) some seven decades ago was key to preparing the ground for common struggle with white workers against the bosses. But black workers first had to be convinced of the new CIO unions’ commitment to racial equality after decades of Jim Crow discrimination on the part of the craft-based American Federation of Labor (AFL). Moreover, Henry Ford and his ilk initially hired black people as a counterforce to unionism. Their toehold in northern industry was due to the capitalists’ desire for insurance against strikes.
A seminal event was the 1941 Ford strike, which brought 10,000 black members into the UAW. Taking on the “great white father of Dearborn” and besieging Ford’s giant River Rouge plant, then employing 100,000 workers, the UAW won recognition from the last of the Big Three automakers to be unionized. No longer did the black community bow down to the “king of the open shop.” The Rouge, known as Master Ford’s plantation, would become the home of UAW Local 600, a center of black union power. As the strike and its lead-up highlighted, breaking down racial barriers by fighting for black equality is essential to building strong industrial trade unions and advancing the struggles of the working class as a whole. In other words, labor and black struggles will either go forward together or fall back separately.
Years earlier, Henry Ford had bought off the small black middle class by pouring money into black churches. He also financed some services for a segregated slum known as Inkster. In return, his loyal black ministers screened job applicants for their anti-unionism. Ford’s racial “philanthropy” flowed from white supremacy. His paper, the Dearborn Independent, portrayed black people as beneficiaries of the “white man’s civilization” and warned against attempts by Jews to “Bolshevize the Negro.”
To do battle with Ford, the UAW hired several black organizers who had gained trade-union experience through the Communist Party (CP) and its National Negro Congress. Among its activities, the UAW’s Negro Sub-Organizing Department issued special editions of the Local 600 newsletter Ford Facts. Through such efforts, the UAW was able not only to neutralize anti-union sentiment but also to convince many black workers that it would defend their jobs—not by begging Ford but through collective action. When the organizing drive began, Ford countered by hiring black workers into his “Service Department” of anti-union thugs run by Harry Bennett.
The strike began on April 1 when Ford fired eight UAW committeemen. Practically the whole Rouge plant walked, though some black workers remained in the foundry and hundreds of others, recently hired to scab, slipped back in the next morning. At 6 a.m. on the second day, Bennett sent several hundred scabs and thugs out of the factory to attack the union pickets with steel bars and knives. At 9 a.m., another assault took place, but this time the picketers were prepared with baseball bats and sticks. The battle was brief and bloody; the union lines held.
There were few black workers on the picket line, and there were black scabs inside, making it possible to paint the confrontation as a racial conflict. Meanwhile, an ex-president of the UAW, working for the AFL, addressed 3,000 blacks in the ghetto to garner support for a back-to-work movement.
In response, the UAW appealed directly to black strikebreakers to leave the plant and urged black workers not to let themselves be used as scabs, pointing to the greater pay, job security and promotions from the seniority system that would be gained through unionization. The union reiterated that the UAW “permits no racial discrimination within its ranks.” The head of the NAACP youth group, who also was a Ford foundry worker, ignored the neutrality of the adult branch and used a UAW sound truck to appeal in the name of the NAACP for the strikebreakers to leave the plant. Such efforts were a counterbalance to the black ministers and defused the back-to-work movement.
On April 11, Henry Ford agreed to a National Labor Relations Board-supervised election. In May, the UAW won, although many black workers voted for the company-backed AFL union. But black hostility to the UAW dissipated after the elections because black workers received the same wages as the rest of the workforce, and they saw a black UAW organizer prominent on the contract bargaining committee. The part played by black UAW organizers was important to securing not only the union allegiance of black workers but also white workers’ acceptance of their black counterparts.
This victory for the UAW was partial—black workers were still segregated into the worst jobs, and auto companies would continue to play on the fears of white workers to keep the union divided. Henry Ford cut off money to Inkster and instituted an anti-black hiring policy at his plants. UAW president R. J. Thomas, in turn, ignored the fight to upgrade black workers to better jobs and the racism that remained in his own ranks.
Anti-Black Riot of 1943
The U.S. entry into World War II in 1941 brought another mass migration of Southern blacks and whites to labor-hungry Detroit. The thousands of new white workers from the South had not gone through the strike experiences with black co-workers. Together with second-generation Poles, they were, as a rule, hostile to black rights. Meanwhile, Detroit suffered an acute housing shortage, which exploded in the bloody riots of 1943.
The prelude to the riots occurred in 1942 at the Sojourner Truth Housing Project, built to accommodate the influx of thousands of defense workers. The night before it opened, the Ku Klux Klan burned a cross at the project, which was located in a mainly white area north of Polish Hamtramck. Tenants moving in were attacked. A UAW presence with sound trucks and black Local 600 members helped prevent a racist riot. However, hundreds of black people were arrested (and only a handful of whites). Local 600 and the UAW International issued statements defending the black tenants but failed to follow up with further union action. Three months later, black families moved in with the support of government housing officials acting to get critical industry up and running for the war profiteers.
Ominously, a series of reactionary strikes had erupted in the early 1940s in the auto plants. The KKK had a presence at Packard, where years of anti-black actions culminated in May 1943 with a walkout by 25,000 white workers protesting the upgrade of black workers to the assembly line. The plant manager agitated for workers to join a company union. Facing a threat to the union’s existence, UAW president Thomas—with the backing of the federal government—announced that all workers who struck against black labor would be expelled from the union and fired. Thirty whites were dismissed, and at an NAACP meeting Thomas blustered that if the Klansmen “want to fight the union on this issue, we are ready and willing to take them on” (August Meier and Elliott Rudick, Black Detroit and the Rise of the UAW, 1979).
Two weeks later, the riot began. By the time it was over, 25 black people lay dead—most of them killed by the police. While not lifting a finger to stop the lynch mobs during the riots, UAW leaders trumpeted that none of the bloodshed had entered the plants! But the then-revolutionary Socialist Workers Party (SWP) fought for a mobilization of union militants to defend the black masses. The Trotskyist SWP’s Militant newspaper (3 July 1943) wrote:
“The labor leaders must do more than deplore these attacks...do more than order their members to stay off the streets and appeal for grand jury investigations. They must summon their membership to take determined and organized action against the instigators and organizers of these lynch mobs. The unions of Detroit could have repulsed this threat to their very existence as they repulsed General Motors in 1937 and 1941. Detroit would be far different today and the native fascists would be cowering in their holes, demoralized instead of triumphant, had the union leaders called out the veteran flying squadrons to defend the Negro people.”
With the country awash in patriotic war fervor, the SWP pointed out that “because of their no-strike pledge and slavish subservience to Roosevelt’s labor policies, the CIO and AFL leadership have completely failed to provide the workers with any program of resistance to the encroachments of the capitalists.... That is the reason why fascist demagogues and preachers of race hate and violence are able to receive a hearing from some workers” (Militant, 3 July 1943). The pro-capitalist labor bureaucracy’s support to imperialist wars abroad has as its corollary support to the wartime suppression of union struggle at home.
Postwar Anti-Communist Purges
The New Deal put labor in bed with its liberal class enemies in the North as well as the Dixiecrats, who terrorized black people and the unions in the South. It is a myth that Roosevelt’s New Deal pulled the U.S. out of the 1930s Great Depression. The economy did not return to its pre-1929 level until the interimperialist slaughter of World War II set the war industries running in high gear. As opposed to the CP, the SWP supported none of the imperialist combatants, whether “democratic” Allies or the Axis. At the same time, the Trotskyists continued to stand foursquare for the unconditional military defense of the Soviet Union.
The U.S. was the only imperialist power to emerge from the war with its industrial infrastructure intact. It also was the unchallenged military power of the capitalist world. The triumphant U.S. ruling class heralded the “American century.” When the largest strike wave in the country’s history broke out in 1946 amid postwar austerity, the bourgeoisie, rolling in profits, pieced off workers with wage increases and talk of the “American dream.”
At the same time, the victory of the Soviet Union over Nazi Germany and the Red Army’s liberation of much of Central and East Europe was a boon for the USSR. Communism had more prestige despite the anti-working-class crimes of Stalin’s bureaucratic rule. As the industrial-military powerhouse of the non-capitalist world, the Soviet Union was the main enemy of the bourgeoisie. The U.S. rulers turned on their erstwhile ally with a vengeance, launching a Cold War against the Soviet degenerated workers state. In its domestic reflection, the unions were purged of reds and other militants who had led the major organizing struggles of the 1930s.
Given its association with the Russian Revolution and its influential position in the CIO, the Communist Party became the chief target of the witchhunt. As a result of its all-out wartime support for the Allies, the CP had upheld a no-strike pledge and quashed struggles for black rights, betrayals that further isolated it from union militants. The success of the purges helped consolidate an anti-Communist union bureaucracy committed to U.S. imperialism and class peace. Anti-labor laws like the Taft-Hartley Act, which outlawed secondary boycotts and sympathy strikes and demanded “loyalty oaths” from union officials, were passed at this time. The Cold War leaders of the AFL and CIO—George Meany and Walter Reuther, respectively—denounced such slave-labor legislation but complied with it.
Social democrats like the UAW’s Reuther were the spearhead of repression within the labor movement. He had tried to ban Communists from elected union office as early as 1941. In September 1948, Reuther moved to purge Coleman Young (later the mayor of Detroit) and other CP supporters from the Wayne County CIO. Local 600, where black workers and the CP were concentrated, was the last holdout. One authoritative account gives a picture of Walter Reuther working in tandem with the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) to put Local 600 in receivership in the early 1950s: “He described the local’s anti-Korean War stance as a response to the dictates of the Communist party and suggested that an aerial picture of the River Rouge plant printed in Ford Facts was evidence of espionage. At the end of the lengthy meeting, the executive board voted unanimously to take control of Local 600 and soon dismissed or suspended many of its leading Negro caucus activists and their white progressive allies” (David M. Lewis-Colman, Race Against Liberalism, 2008).
As the witchhunt escalated, Communist workers were beaten up and fired, and attempts were made to evict “reds” from public housing. Particularly in Detroit, CP supporters who were victimized were heavily black. As Lewis-Colman observed, Reuther became “concerned about the race issue in the union. Like many liberal anti-Communists, Reuther believed that racism had become an effective issue for Communists.” Specifically, he wanted to clean up the image of racist U.S. imperialism to neutralize CP influence and to bolster the Cold War drive against the Soviet Union. As such, he would later support Martin Luther King’s liberal pacifism in the South. At the same time, he allied himself with the racist and FBI-linked Association of Catholic Trade Unionists. As the International Affairs Director of the UAW, Reuther’s brother Victor spent CIA money to split Communist-led unions in postwar Europe.
Walter Reuther’s 1950 auto contract, touted as the “Treaty of Detroit,” gave union members a cost-of-living adjustment but tied wages to productivity. The UAW tops agreed with the slogan attributed to GM boss Charles Wilson that “what’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” To maintain labor peace in the late 1960s and early ’70s, Reuther and his lieutenants crushed revolts by radicalized black workers.
In earlier years, the New Deal alliance that Reuther lauded had crippled key labor struggles. For example, in 1946 the CIO announced a campaign to organize the South, grotesquely called “Operation Dixie.” This vital task ran head-on into Jim Crow segregation. The fight for integrated unions would have aroused a vicious backlash from Dixiecrats and their Klan auxiliaries, blowing apart the New Deal coalition. In the face of the Cold War witchhunt, CIO leaders, fearing the prospect of black workers falling in with Communist labor organizers, scuttled the effort after only two years. The working class is still paying for this crime. The open shop South remains a bastion of racist reaction and a “sword of Damocles” hanging over labor’s struggles.
Black and Red
The intervention of Lenin and Trotsky’s Communist International was crucial in driving home the centrality of the fight for black freedom to the American proletarian revolution. James P. Cannon, a leader of the early CP in the U.S. and later the founder of American Trotskyism, emphasized that Lenin and the Russian Revolution “contributed more than any other influence from any source to the recognition, and more or less general acceptance, of the Negro question as a special problem of American society—a problem which cannot simply be subsumed under the general heading of the conflict between capital and labor” (“The Russian Revolution and the American Negro Movement,” in The First Ten Years of American Communism [1962]).
The SWP tirelessly fought for black rights and equality during World War II and subsequently made headway recruiting black workers, including in Detroit. When Cannon wrote this essay from semiretirement in 1959, though, the Southern civil rights struggle was polarizing American society and had brought to the fore differences in the SWP on the black question. Cannon was addressing this debate by inference when he observed that the “expansion of the communist influence in the Negro movement” in the 1930s happened despite the CP’s call for self-determination, which invented a separate “black nation” in the Deep South. Cannon continued: “In practice the CP jumped over this contradiction. When the party adopted the slogan of ‘self-determination,’ it did not drop its aggressive agitation for Negro equality and Negro rights on every front.... It was the CP’s agitation and action under the latter slogan that brought the results.”
A “Freedom Now” resolution adopted at the SWP’s 1963 Convention codified a wholesale embrace of black nationalism and was accompanied by a policy of abstention from the Southern civil rights struggle. This abstention meant an entire generation of black youth was lost to the revolutionary movement. In a matter of a couple of years, the degenerating SWP would descend into full-blown reformism.
The SWP’s rejection of Marxism over the black question did not go unopposed. Richard Fraser, an SWP member who addressed American black oppression and struggle in his lectures and written documents in the 1950s, was a key figure. By 1963, Fraser was in opposition to the SWP majority, and his tendency submitted a resolution on revolutionary integrationism. The Revolutionary Tendency (RT), forebear of the Spartacist League, supported the basic line of that resolution in a “Statement in Voting on the Negro Question” while giving its own explanation that black people “are not a nation; rather they are an oppressed race-color caste, in the main comprising the most exploited layer of the American working class. From this condition the consequence has come that the Negro struggle for freedom has had, historically, the aim of integration into an equalitarian society.”
Objecting to the SWP majority’s abstentionism and view that “inevitably ours is a white party,” the RT called on the party to “expend significant material resources in overcoming our isolation from Southern struggles.... A successful outcome to our action would lead to an historic breakthrough for the Trotskyist movement.” As the RT put it in the 1963 document “For Black Trotskyism”: “The Negro question is so deeply built into the American capitalist class-structure...that only the destruction of existing class relations and the change in class dominance—the passing of power into the hands of the working class—will suffice to strike at the heart of racism and bring about a solution both real and durable.” The leadership of the RT, representing Marxist continuity, was expelled beginning in December 1963 in the rapidly rightward moving SWP’s first political purge.
The SWP’s abandonment of the perspective of building a multiracial vanguard party impacted the development of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers in Detroit. Some of its founding members had been around the SWP, while others came from a Maoist background. Comrade Don Alexander has recounted meeting one of them, John Watson. According to Watson, he was among a number who had attended Friday night Militant Forums and been impressed with the SWP. But the SWP was chasing the pacifist preachers and black nationalists and had nothing to offer them, except to advise them to form a separate black party. So they concluded: why not? And that is what they did.
Dead End of Black Nationalism
Detroit in July 1967 was witness to one of the last, and bloodiest, of a series of ghetto rebellions sparked by racist police as well as job and housing discrimination. National Guardsmen and federal troops poured into Detroit as the inner city was turned into a war zone with tanks rumbling down the streets. However, when the majority black 82nd Airborne was sent to Detroit to quell the rebellion, military hardware was soon mysteriously finding its way to the besieged ghetto, illustrating how in times of social upheaval a heavily working-class and minority army will not always remain loyal to the capitalist rulers. As punishment, the 82nd was sent back to Vietnam.
Soon-to-be Democratic mayor Coleman Young had joined his former antagonist, Walter Reuther, in calling on President Lyndon Johnson to send in federal troops. By the time the rebellion was suppressed, 43 black people had been killed, hundreds injured and over 7,000 arrested. Young and Reuther enlisted in the bourgeoisie’s “New Detroit Committee” aimed at saving the Motor City for the Big Three.
In the 1960s, the unemployment rate for black people and youth in Detroit was sky-high. Working conditions in decrepit auto plants were horrendous. Tens of thousands of black workers in the plants were excluded from the skilled trades and trapped in the dirtiest, hottest, most backbreaking and dangerous jobs. The largely white UAW bureaucracy was hostile to its black membership. Racist foremen, speedup and industrial injuries were common. The title of the book Detroit: I Do Mind Dying came from a Detroit blues song of the ’60s that starts, “Please, Mr. Foreman, slow down your assembly line. No, I don’t mind workin’, but I do mind dyin’.” The book documents the period and the development of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers.
After the 1967 ghetto upheaval, black nationalists at Wayne State University coalesced around a community newspaper, the Inner City Voice, to form a “black Marxist-Leninist party.” Many black workers hired into the plants in the late ’60s scorned the appeals for “nonviolence” pushed by Martin Luther King and the liberal leadership of the civil rights movement. These militants recognized black workers had some social power at the point of production but did not draw the conclusion that the multiracial working class uniquely could strike real blows against racist American capitalism. Inner City Voice cadre made contact with just such black militants at the Dodge Main assembly plant and formed the Dodge Revolutionary Union Movement (DRUM).
A May 1968 wildcat strike over speedup that involved both black and white workers resulted in racist disciplinary actions. In response, DRUM initiated a boycott of nearby racist bars, another three-day wildcat and a rally of 3,000 workers in the plant parking lot. Word of DRUM’s audacity spread. ELRUM was formed at Eldon Ave. Chrysler, as were a number of groups at other plants. Based on this growth, the Inner City Voice activists formed the League in early 1969.
In 1970 at the Eldon Ave. Chrysler plant, a black worker who had been fired shot dead two foremen and a white co-worker. Ken Cockrel, a lawyer and founding member of the League, defended him. Blaming the deaths on horrific conditions at Chrysler and the worker’s lifetime experiences of racism, Cockrel took the jury to the plant so they could see the conditions. In the end, the worker was found not responsible for his acts and awarded worker’s compensation for company-inflicted injuries.
DRUM correctly called for rehiring fired workers and opening the skilled trades to blacks, opposed speedup and unsafe conditions and denounced the betrayals of the UAW tops. But many of their demands were unsupportable: hiring black foremen, general foremen and plant managers; that “a black brother be appointed as head of the board of directors of Chrysler Corporation”; and that “50 percent of all plant protection guards be black.” Such demands would simply put “black faces in high places” and had nothing to do with mobilizing class struggle. That DRUM considered a black director of Chrysler or a black security guard to be a “brother” speaks volumes about the political bankruptcy of black nationalism.
Some white workers respected DRUM picket lines and wanted to work with the group, but DRUM avoided organizing them. They lumped white workers together with the white racist rulers and the trade-union bureaucracy. Especially in Detroit at that time, while there were conservative white workers, there also were young white workers who hated the Vietnam War. However, the League had little interest in politically engaging these workers. In this vein, a supporter of the Spartacist League who had led an effective wildcat strike against Michigan Bell was turned away from their door.
The League’s nationalism also rendered it incapable of building a united class-struggle opposition to the racist, pro-capitalist union bureaucracy typified by UAW secretary treasurer Emil Mazey, who vilified DRUM as a “black peril” more dangerous than the “red peril” of Communism. Instead, the League threatened to pull black workers out of the UAW. Typical was a poem that came out of the DRUM struggles, which concluded: “U.A.W. is scum/OUR THING IS DRUM!!!!”
The League itself split in 1971. The community-oriented wing of Ken Cockrel moved quickly into Democratic Party politics, giving support to Coleman Young. Its more workerist wing—represented by General Baker among others—joined the Stalinist Communist League with its ludicrous theory of the Negro nation in the Deep South and formed the Communist Labor Party. Despite the anti-UAW rants of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers, Baker became a UAW bureaucrat, receiving a union award in 2011, for those who “exemplify the teaching and life” of Martin Luther King.
[TO BE CONTINUED]

Workers Vanguard No. 1045
2 May 2014
Capitalists Gut the Motor City
Detroit: The Rise and Fall of a Labor/Black Stronghold
 
Part Two
 
We print below the second part of a presentation, edited for publication, given by comrade Barry James at a March 22 forum in Chicago. Part One was published in WV No. 1044 (15 April).
 
The 1967 ghetto rebellion and the rise of black working-class militancy shook the city rulers, accelerating the auto industry’s exit from Detroit and deepening state repression. Police commissioner John Nichols set up a special “decoy unit” called STRESS (Stop the Robberies, Enjoy Safe Streets), which gunned down 21 black people between 1969 and 1972. In 1972, Nichols led a cop charge into Chrysler’s Mack Avenue Stamping Plant to arrest the leaders of a sit-down strike.
With the city polarized, the 1973 mayoral election pitted black Democrat Coleman Young against Nichols. Even as he campaigned against STRESS, Young joined Nichols in calling to put more cops on the streets. Young’s goal was to restore popular illusions in the police by dramatically increasing the number of black cops. Nonetheless, the Communist Party (CP), a host of other reformist “socialists” and remnants of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers gave open or backhanded support to Young.
Against such opportunists, the SL wrote: “Far from being a working-class victory, the victory of a ‘responsible’ black ‘progressive’ fits in nicely with the liberal bourgeoisie’s current game plan for siphoning off racial tensions by giving the oppressed minorities the illusion of political power” (“Black Democrat Defeats Cop in Detroit Elections,” WV No. 33, 23 November 1973). Expressing the outlook of Detroit’s capitalist establishment, department store magnate Joseph Hudson remarked: “The black man has the feeling he is about to take power in the city. But he is going to be left with an empty bag.”
After winning the election, Young oversaw the devastation of Detroit. Some 200,000 auto workers lost their jobs as the Big Three moved their operations out of the area. In 1974-75, Young laid off city workers by the thousands. Services were slashed, school funding cut and the streets were flooded with cops. He opposed a proposed ordinance to disband the Detroit “red squad” and busted a city workers strike to make the Motor City “safe” for the 1980 Republican Party convention. As Young’s capitalist masters had hoped, all this was carried out without any major protest.
Coleman Young was one of the most prominent of the black Democratic Party mayors elected after the ghetto upheavals of the late 1960s. What made him different was his experience as a CP sympathizer and a civil rights activist with a base in Detroit’s black proletariat. Young cynically campaigned on his having remained loyal to his original goals. In office, he put a lid on the city’s rebellious population and the multiracial auto workforce. Young exemplified the role of black Democratic Party politicians in containing the discontent generated by the capitalist rulers’ wars at home and abroad.
A measure of Young’s political journey was expressed in his attempt to ban a march against the Ku Klux Klan. Earlier in his life, he had fought the Klan. But in 1979, Young threatened to arrest auto workers who joined a November 10 SL-initiated labor/black mobilization to stop the KKK from coming to Detroit to “celebrate” the fascist massacre of five leftists and union organizers in Greensboro, North Carolina. An SL leaflet calling for the rally declared: “Mayor Coleman Young said we who oppose the Klan have no more rights than the KKK killers, that we should not show our faces on fear of arrest.”
The mobilization went ahead, and a special 16 November 1979 WV supplement reported, “500 at Detroit Labor/Black Rally Say: The Klan Won’t Ride in the Motor City!” Addressing the rally, SL spokesman Don Alexander said: “You know what Coleman Young is—the awful example of what selling your black political soul to the Democratic Party means. You sort of go morally and politically blind. After a while you can’t tell the difference between the guys in white sheets and the guys on the other side.”
Another sign of the times was the crazed actions of the United Auto Workers (UAW) bureaucracy. In 1973, the UAW tops blamed “reds” for unauthorized strikes over grievances that even the union bureaucracy admitted were legitimate. A 1,000-man goon squad, including UAW leader Doug Fraser and local officials, was composed to break a sit-down strike at the Mack Avenue Stamping Plant. This goon squad was turned loose on radical paper salesmen outside the plants. The Spartacist League and our supporters in the auto plants warned that this campaign against “outside agitators” was a prelude to attacks on the union membership.
To advance class-struggle politics in the unions, the Spartacist League called for building caucuses in the UAW based on the Transitional Program (“The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International,” 1938) as expounded by Leon Trotsky. The purpose of the Transitional Program is to bridge the gap between the existing consciousness of the working class and oppressed and the necessity of the conquest of power by the proletariat. The task of the program “lies in systematic mobilization of the masses for the proletarian revolution.” Detroit was turbulent and full of all sorts of ostensibly revolutionary and “socialist” groups that rejected our programmatic approach. Rather, they supported one or another wing of the union bureaucracy or sought to bring the bourgeois courts into the union to unseat the misleaders.
Spartacist in Detroit
What kind of struggles did we intervene into? In November 1973, one month after the Yom Kippur War (also known as the fourth Arab-Israeli war), 1,500 Arab auto workers conducted a political strike against the UAW’s purchase of nearly $1 million in Israeli war bonds. Nearly every Arab worker on the second shift at Chrysler’s Dodge Main heeded the call of organizers to strike, shutting down all but one assembly line. Arab workers from Dodge marched 1,000-strong to downtown Detroit to demonstrate against UAW president Leonard Woodcock’s acceptance of B’nai B’rith’s “Humanitarian of the Year” award.
At the time, the Detroit area’s 80,000 Arabs were the largest such concentration in the U.S. Lacking citizenship rights, they constituted an oppressed layer of the population, one that was kept in desperate conditions. Arab workers, separated from their co-workers by a language barrier, were given the dirtiest, most difficult jobs. At Dodge, some 25 percent of the workforce was Arab. There were no Arab foremen or union reps.
Arab workers were brought to Detroit by Chrysler in 1968 in an effort to further divide the workforce, which was becoming militant. The automaker opened a recruiting office in Yemen, and racial/national divisions would soon supplement the divisive role played by black/white hostility on the shop floor. Many black workers resented the Arabs who, because they were desperate and vulnerable to deportation, accepted speedup by the foremen. Black workers were occasionally heard uttering that infamous line: “They ought to send them back to where they came from”...about the Arabs! We said that it was crucial to fight for black-Arab unity and against anti-immigrant oppression. We called for full citizenship rights for Arab workers and special programs under union control for their advancement and training, including special publications in Arabic, as well as programs to learn English.
Six years later in 1979, Chrysler was threatened with bankruptcy. Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca issued extortionate giveback demands to the union, which would prove the first wave of a government/auto industry attack on auto workers. In response, UAW head Doug Fraser drafted a nationalization plan for the automaker, while at the same time pledging to exempt the company from strike action. Nationalization of dying or bankrupt industries has been an option pursued by capitalist governments elsewhere to buy off working-class discontent and prop up failing enterprises.
We said that Chrysler workers had to fight to regain wage parity with Ford and General Motors and called on auto workers to demand equal pay for equal work, a fundamental trade-union principle. But we noted that Chrysler could go down the tubes due to years of shortsighted mismanagement. If Chrysler went into bankruptcy, the bosses would sell the company’s assets to other capitalists and pocket the money. We advocated the mobilization of workers in a sit-down strike to seize the plants. Should the plants have to be sold, the money should not go to the auto magnates and their bankers, but to the workers.
This proposal would have provided more to the workforce than any government bailout scheme and represented a radical attack on capitalist property rights. As Trotsky put it in the Transitional Program: “Every sit-down strike poses in a practical manner the question of who is the boss of the factory: the capitalist or the workers?” Such a strike would point to the need for a revolutionary struggle for a workers government to expropriate the capitalist exploiters and direct the wealth of this country toward satisfying the needs of those whose labor produces it, not the profits of a few.
In the end, Fraser, Walter Reuther’s apprentice, settled for a seat on Chrysler’s board of directors and proceeded to implement givebacks that would undo decades of union gains and result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs. With the UAW tops acting to keep the workforce in line for the capitalists, between 1979 and 1984 black Detroit was decimated. It was the givebacks extracted by the bosses with the complicity of the UAW tops at Chrysler in 1979 (under the Democrat Jimmy Carter) that began a wholesale assault on industrial unionism.
The smashing of the strike by the PATCO air traffic controllers union in 1981, synonymous with the Reagan years, followed on its heels. As we said at the time, the Machinists and other airline workers needed to have walked out in solidarity with PATCO, defying Reagan and shutting down the nation’s airports. America’s rulers went on to demand giveback contracts in other industries and two-tier wages for younger workers. AFL-CIO bureaucrats obliged with a policy of concessions. Meanwhile, these labor statesmen turned a blind eye to the necessity to organize the open shop South. When forays into the South are made, the union tops’ loyalty to capitalist profitability has hamstrung organizing efforts. Such was the case in the recent stinging defeat for the UAW at Volkswagen in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where anti-union forces peddled the grotesque lie that union wages and working conditions ravaged Detroit.
Protectionism: Poison for Workers
What accounts for the state of Detroit today? Faced with the declining profitability of the plants, the U.S. capitalists abandoned Detroit and turned the Midwest industrial heartland into a rust bowl. The employers junked the antiquated plants they had milked dry. The capitalists hoped to realize their former profit margins not by modernizing the old plants but by expanding into Southern “right to work” states to exploit non-union labor. Production was also shifted to East Asia and Latin America. Rather than retool a 1950s engine plant, for example, in 1983 Ford rolled out a union-busting strategy to build its new line of “economical” auto engines in Mexico, exploiting cheaper labor.
Previously, after emerging victorious from World War II, the U.S. had by far the greatest productive capacity of any capitalist country. But by the mid 1960s, Germany and Japan had rebuilt their war-ravaged industry. In many cases, the new plants embodied more advanced technology than in U.S. factories. American corporations found themselves facing stiff competition. The failure of U.S. industry to retool to make small cars in the wake of staggering oil price increases in the 1970s sent Japanese auto imports soaring and increased pressures for protectionism, particularly in auto. The U.S. economy was further weakened by the inflationary pressures generated by the long, losing imperialist war in Vietnam.
In the 1980s, the Reagan administration cut taxes for the rich while expanding military spending to advance the anti-Soviet Cold War II. To finance the resulting government deficits, a large amount of new Treasury bonds were sold, mainly to the Japanese. Within the space of three years, the U.S. went from being the world’s largest creditor nation to the world’s largest debtor nation.
As the Big Three began to move out of Detroit in earnest, Fraser and the other UAW tops found it easier to blame Japanese and German workers for layoffs than to fight for jobs against the auto giants. A sign posted at the union’s International headquarters warned: “UAW parking reserved for U.S. and Canadian vehicles only. Please park imports elsewhere.” Economic protectionism created a poisonous climate of chauvinism that vicious anti-black, anti-union groups like the Klan thrived on. In 1982, a crazed racist auto foreman and his stepson beat to death Vincent Chin, a Chinese American man mistaken to be Japanese American.
The Rouge Militant Slate of UAW Local 600—a caucus formation in political solidarity with the Spartacist League, vying for leadership of the union—fought the anti-Japanese protectionism and collusion with the auto bosses of both local president Mike Rinaldi and the UAW International. During a 1980 union election campaign, the Rouge Militants wrote: “Fraser blames Japanese workers for U.S. unemployment. Rinaldi and every unit chairman jumped on the ‘Buy American’ bandwagon, singling out the Japanese in racist fashion. This campaign is dangerous. Trade wars lead to shooting wars. This campaign feeds the atmosphere that breeds the Klan and Nazi scum.” Rouge Militant candidates were known throughout Local 600 as leaders of an earlier campaign against a KKK-hooded foreman and as organizers of the November 1979 anti-Klan demonstration. (For more, see page 7.)
In subsequent decades, the union misleaders would in the name of advancing “workers rights” combine national chauvinism and protectionist filth with China bashing, abetting the imperialist drive for capitalist counterrevolution in that country. Albeit on different scales, both the UAW (as well as other unions) and the Chinese deformed workers state are the fruits of historic victories for the proletariat. One resulted from the formation of industrial unions in the U.S. during the 1930s, the other from the overthrow of capitalist rule in the 1949 Chinese Revolution.
Both must be defended unconditionally from attacks that seek to undo these gains, despite the fact that each is led by a bureaucratic layer that puts them in jeopardy. The trade-union bureaucrats with their pro-capitalist program must be ousted and replaced by a class-struggle leadership committed to the overthrow of the U.S. imperialist order through socialist revolution. The bureaucratic ruling caste in China with its nationalist program must be swept away by a proletarian political revolution to preserve and extend internationally the working-class property forms established after the 1949 Revolution.
Karl Marx Was Right!
Under capitalism, industrial development requires maintaining what Marx called a “surplus population” or “industrial reserve army” to facilitate the expansion of production during boom periods and to hold down wages through competition for jobs. The capitalists enlist the ranks of the industrial reserve army to fill dangerous and dirty jobs and to scab on strikes. During the period of black chattel slavery, the Northern capitalists recruited a surplus population from among former tenant farmers driven off their land in Ireland and later migrants from East and South Europe as well as Asia.
Black emancipation in the Civil War meant the bourgeoisie had a new source for its industrial reserve army in the black population. With the dawning of the epoch of imperialism at the end of the 19th century and later the first interimperialist war, the working class was polarized into a heavily black industrial reserve army at the bottom and a predominantly white, craft-skilled, job-trusted “aristocracy of labor” at the top. This division of the U.S. working class along race lines is a prop of the bourgeois order and obstacle to the forging of a unified proletarian vanguard.
From the mid 1960s on, the weight of manufacturing in the economy plummeted, devastating unionized industrial jobs—the fragile economic base of black communities. As a result, the capitalist rulers could no longer afford improvements in the economic conditions of the working class at the very moment the liberal-led civil rights struggles came North, running up against the discrimination in jobs, education, housing and health care that is deeply rooted in U.S. capitalism. Plant closures, which had a disproportionate impact on the black working class, only made matters worse, a reflection of the intertwining of black oppression and capitalist exploitation. Anything that could be construed to be addressing the needs of the black population became a target.
As deindustrialization gathered steam in the late 1970s, for every place lost on the assembly lines, one was added in the prisons. The “war on drugs” launched by the Feds in the early ’80s became the preferred method of social control of what the capitalist rulers considered an increasingly expendable layer of black youth for whom capitalism in decay offered no productive employment. The anti-drug crusade, which black Democrats like Jesse Jackson promoted, was enforced through cop occupation of the ghettos and barrios and mass incarceration. From its outset, we have insisted that the racist “war on drugs” is a war on black America. We say: decriminalize drugs!
The racist state terror and impulse to genocide marking the “war on drugs” is on display in Detroit and elsewhere. Witness the 2010 death of seven-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones, who was killed in her home in a military-style raid by a Detroit police Special Response Team. It was no aberration, as WV observed at the time, but a stark example of the state of siege that defines life in black Detroit.
The TV series The Wire graphically captured how a whole swath of the population, mainly black, is surplus and has no future in this system. The creator of the show, David Simon, wrote in a Guardian article (7 December 2013) that the “social compact...between labor and capital that actually allowed people to have some hope” is now frayed. According to Simon, the notion that “profit is the metric by which we’re going to measure the health of our society is one of the fundamental mistakes.” He went on to observe that Karl Marx was right “diagnostically” in that Marx accurately described the processes that devastate large numbers of people under capitalism. But he opined that Marx was wrong “clinically,” i.e., that Marxism has nothing to offer for the future. Citing Marx to defang Marx is de rigueur.
Well, Simon is wrong, and Marx is right. Marx provided the analysis and tools to change the world. Profit is the fundamental “metric” of capitalism. There is no social compact between labor and capital. Despite the rulers’ one-sided onslaught on working people today, Marxism teaches that powerful social struggles will erupt, which the history of the U.S. has shown numerous times. That’s why we look at these formative struggles in Detroit and seek to learn the lessons of history so that we will be better prepared next time. Capitalism destroys, but it also creates again its own gravedigger in multiracial strongholds of workers social power in transport, longshore, manufacturing. And black workers remain proportionally the most unionized sector of the labor force.
The working class is not just one more victim of capitalist austerity within the “99 percent” as today’s populists would have it, or part of the middle-class as the trade-union leaders would have it. Instead, the working class continues to occupy a unique role in the process of production; through its exploitation the capitalists derive their profits. Concentrating workers in large factories and urban centers, the capitalists have created the instrument of their own destruction as an exploiting class.
Socialist revolution, in which black workers will play a vanguard role as part of the proletariat with the least to lose and the most to gain from a fundamental reshaping of the existing social order, is the only means for delivering ourselves from capitalist wage slavery. Will there be a multiracial communist leadership, tested in struggle and based on the program of revolutionary integration, to intervene in future sharp social struggles to change the course of history? We in the Spartacist League, U.S. section of the International Communist League, are determined that the leadership will be there.
 
From The Archives Of The Class Struggle- Spartacist Supporters in Detroit Auto -1970s

Workers Vanguard No. 1045
 


2 May 2014
 
Spartacist Supporters in Detroit Auto
 

The following are edited comments made by Matt, a Spartacist League supporter in the auto industry in the 1970s and ’80s, at the March 22 forum.
 
I arrived in Detroit in winter 1973. The Motor City: auto plants within miles of each other—smokestacks visible whichever direction you traversed—and hiring. The hours of work, speed of the line and blur of activity were a culture shock. Within the first few days, in my haste to eat a can of tomato soup during a short break I sliced open my thumb with the pop-off top of the can. Not even a work injury, but I felt I couldn’t screw the lug nuts onto the tires, so I stopped the line to inform the foreman. But before I could even call him, he was there with a relief man for my spot and restarted the line. He wrapped my hand with duct tape, and two cars later I was back fastening on the tires. I learnt quickly that the line doesn’t stop!
Spartacist supporters in the auto plants talked about a range of social issues. At that time, there was busing for school integration; the Hyde Amendment, which banned federal funding for abortion; and the economy, which was already spiraling downward, causing skyrocketing inflation along with the new phenomenon of gas lines everywhere. It had even become financially advantageous to pay the round-trip bridge toll and gas up in Canada. We became known as knowledgeable anti-racist, pro-union militants, always pointing out the role of the cops and the two parties of capital, the Democrats and Republicans.
In winter 1977-1978, a small band of Nazis began a provocative campaign of harassment and intimidation in a racially mixed west side neighborhood. These fascists kept reopening a bookstore after having been evicted by on-site protests and publicity, in which both the Spartacist League and its supporters in the auto industry participated. These events were unfolding in the shadow of the Ford River Rouge plant, where SL supporters had been raising the issue of the need for labor to do something about this scum. So the UAW Local 600 bureaucrats felt compelled to bluster about driving the Nazis out of town, and they formed a Labor-Community Council Against the Nazis.
At a steering committee meeting in February 1978, the Nazis brazenly showed up. After they had been identified by a trade unionist who appealed for immediate action, some of those present began to advance to deal with the greatly outnumbered fascists. However, the Council chairman handpicked by the Local 600 bureaucrats intervened to break up the imminent confrontation and permit the fascists to depart. The Nazis proceeded to set upon a Workers Defense Committee (WDC) supporter distributing literature outside. Coming to that person’s defense, another WDC supporter was slashed viciously with a razor, producing a ten-inch gash in her leg, which bled profusely. The cowardly Nazis ran off as SL supporters and others came running to aid the injured woman.
When the Nazis opened another bookstore, Spartacist supporters in the Rouge plant, including myself, wanted to drive them out of Detroit once and for all. At the next Local 600 union meeting, we raised the following motion: “That this unit of UAW Local 600 initiate a mass, labor-centered demonstration in front of the Nazi headquarters within 2 weeks around the slogan ‘smash the Detroit Nazi threat.’ We call on the general council, International and the Detroit area trade unions, black and other minority organizations and all other anti-Nazi organizations and individuals to mobilize and join us in this demonstration.”
We followed with a leaflet to the entire Rouge plant pointing out that workers should not rely on Mayor Coleman Young and his cops, who had been routinely terrorizing the black community while at the same time standing guard at the Nazi headquarters. We pointed out that the 40,000 UAW members at the Cadillac and River Rouge complexes were only five minutes from the fascist headquarters and had both the interest and power to act decisively. We were agitating for a working-class mobilization to drive the Nazis out of Detroit. Little did we know at the time to what extent this would define our future work.
The Spartacist League had another group of supporters in UAW Local 140 at Dodge Truck who also engaged in the anti-Nazi work. These militants argued against the union bureaucracy-supported 1979 government bailout of the failing Chrysler, which came at great cost to the workforce, proposing instead sit-down strikes and, if necessary, the seizure of company property to be sold to the benefit of the displaced workers. Tens of thousands of Detroit auto workers had already been hit by layoffs.
In 1979, Jimmy Carter—the millionaire peanut boss, former nuclear submarine commander and “born again” Christian—was president, preaching a “human rights” crusade to morally rearm U.S. imperialism following its historic defeat in Vietnam at the hands of the heroic Vietnamese workers and peasants. The American economy was tanking, and the fascists were again rearing their ugly heads. On September 27, two foremen at the Dearborn Assembly Plant (DAP) felt emboldened enough to put on KKK hoods and march up and down the trim line. Outraged at the sight, dozens of workers in the area immediately walked off the line. News of the incident spread through the entire Rouge complex instantly.
Not about to allow this racist insult in our “backyard,” SL supporters at Rouge initiated a petition demanding Local 600 mobilize to ensure that the racist foremen be fired and driven from the auto industry and that the threat of discipline against the workers who protested be dropped. The petition was instantly embraced by the workforce. Over 1,000 signatures were obtained with workers standing in line at the gates to sign, while in the plant the petitions were being passed hand-to-hand at lunch tables. Many workers voiced the sentiment that the issue should be “settled outside in the parking lot,” with others astonished that these foremen had made it out of the plant at all. The petitions were delivered to the union hall by an integrated team of Local 600 members, including both skilled and production workers from various units.
Initially, the racists who comprised Ford management took no action. The union leadership acquiesced by allowing one foreman to continue working in the trim department, while the other foreman beat a hasty retreat and had not been seen in the plant after the incident. But he was not fired! This backroom maneuvering to bury the KKK provocation came to an end after a front-page article in the Detroit News kicked off a barrage of newspaper, radio and TV coverage. Under pressure, Local 600 president Mike Rinaldi and the head of the union’s Ford department, Ken Bannon, realized they were sitting on a powder keg. Both ended up supporting the demand for the firing of the foremen and—with puffed chests and mock bravado—verbally threatened a strike by the 4,500 DAP workers if any of those who had walked off the line were disciplined.
The victory electrified the Rouge complex and gained us authority. For the first time in years, workers at the plant had a sense of what the union could do if it relied on its own power. But the union leaders eventually backed down, allowing the foremen to be transferred out of the DAP instead of being fired. The almost universal response was “I hope they transfer them to my department, they wouldn’t last five minutes.”
The struggle also shed a glaring light on the various fake-left oppositions in the plant. Supporters of the Communist Party at Rouge predictably did nothing to help circulate the petition. In fact, after having voted to table our motion concerning the Nazi bookstore, they cravenly assisted and supported the Local 600 bureaucracy in trying to thwart our efforts at every step. Supporters of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) at Rouge grudgingly signed the petition, but none of them helped circulate it, issue statements about the racist outrage or do anything to assist in driving the foremen from the plant. One SWP supporter even opined to a petitioner that the bosses had “already fired these guys, why don’t they lay off?” Another grouping, the Committee for a Militant and Democratic UAW, affiliated with the Revolutionary Workers League, stood on the sidelines throughout the entire event as well.
At the next union meeting, there was anger over the company’s transfer of the two foremen and the failure of the union misleaders to block it. That same night, as we were leaving the union hall, news of Klansmen massacring five communists and union organizers in Greensboro, North Carolina, was on the radio and TV (see article above). The Spartacist League responded immediately. In the union, our experience at Rouge and our understanding of the role of the pro-capitalist labor bureaucrats allowed us to not waste time waiting for the union and black misleaders to take action after the Klan announced it was coming to Detroit to celebrate Greensboro. In fact, during our subsequent efforts in the auto plants to build a labor/black demonstration against the fascist killers, these same misleaders joined in a slanderous chorus against “extremists,” meaning us, not the Klan.
A November 4 AP article reported on the DAP resolution that we had put forward, quoting one Spartacist supporter who called on the UAW to hold an anti-Klan demonstration. The mayor joked that he’d watch it on TV and then proceeded to ban both Klan and anti-Klan marches. On November 7, the UAW executive board rejected the demand for a demonstration and later wrote to President Carter and the U.S. attorney general to protest violence on all sides.
But 500 people did come out to stop the Klan three days later. Workers in auto and other industries throughout the city participated, the result of years of principled programmatic struggle by SL supporters in the auto industry. It was an impressive and historic rally, labor and black, youth and unemployed, led by union militants and a revolutionary organization with a shared class-struggle program.
I want to emphasize that this was not a one-note campaign against the Klan/Nazis. All along, we brought up the nature of the state as the repressive apparatus of the class enemy, the need for the unions to maintain strict independence from the capitalist parties and the need for workers defense guards. We also argued for a sliding scale of hours and wages to provide work and income to all, the concept of revolutionary integrationism to combat black oppression and the importance of addressing the special oppression of women, all pointing to the need for a workers party to fight for a workers government. In short, we campaigned on and argued for a revolutionary program.
Our success in bringing together hundreds of Detroit area workers to stop the KKK led to the formation of the Rouge Militant Slate (RMS) in the ensuing union elections to the UAW International Convention. The RMS candidates made an impressive showing. These results reflected a real base of support for our program. During these elections, the Big Three threw thousands of workers onto the streets with new announcements of plant closings and shift shutdowns. The RMS fought the reactionary smokescreen of anti-Japanese protectionism and the nationalist, racist “Buy American” campaign initiated by the UAW International. We called for a shorter workweek with no loss in pay along with sit-down strikes backed by labor solidarity when the companies closed plants or axed entire shifts.
An electrician in the Rouge plant at the time, Bob King—the current UAW president—was well known to us. In fact, many times he was responsible for maintaining the electrical panels powering my various welding guns in the white metal department. He always adopted and defended the position of the bureaucracy. We were wary of him. I read recently that he wanted his legacy to be the unionization of a Southern auto plant. His real legacy can be drawn with a straight line from his time in Local 600 to now. Indifference toward the Klan/Nazis, acceptance of mass layoffs, the introduction of the two-tier system of wages that vitiates the concept of equal pay for equal work, the wholesale dismantling of the ranks of the UAW and, of course, Michigan becoming a “right to work” state.
Greensboro 1979, Kansas City 2014-Fascist Murder





Workers Vanguard No. 1045
 



2 May 2014
 
Greensboro 1979, Kansas City 2014-Fascist Murder
 

After Frazier Glenn Miller gunned down three people outside a pair of Jewish community facilities near Kansas City on the day before Passover, the arrested killer shouted from the back seat of a police car: “Heil Hitler!” For decades a prominent member of Ku Klux Klan and Nazi outfits, Miller, also known as Frazier Glenn Cross, stood out even among his fellow white supremacists for his virulently murderous hatred of Jews. (None of the victims were in fact Jewish.) Nearly 35 years prior, Miller was in a caravan of KKK and Nazi fascists who shot and killed five union organizers and civil rights activists—supporters of the Communist Workers Party (CWP)—on 3 November 1979 in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Following the April 13 killings in Overland Park, Kansas, the bourgeois media have recounted in some detail how Miller and the Feds struck a plea deal in the late 1980s. In return for his testimony against other white supremacists, Miller claims that he was shielded in a witness protection program and his family helped financially. But in recounting Miller’s participation in the Greensboro Massacre, the New York Times (14 April) in typical fashion steered clear of any mention of the government’s involvement in those killings.
Greensboro was a conspiracy of the fascists and their capitalist state minders. In broad daylight, 30 race-terrorists drove in a caravan to a black housing project, escorted by local police, pulled out their shotguns and rifles and, in full view of television cameras, began pumping lead into a peaceful protest march. From the outset, the fascists were aided and abetted by the government, from a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent who helped train the killers and plot the assassinations to a “former” FBI informer who rode shotgun in the motorcade of death.
Greensboro survivors, one of whom was left partially paralyzed, were jailed, fired and blacklisted from work and stalked by the FBI and local police. Some of the fascist killers were charged but acquitted by all-white juries in farcical trials, affirming once again the meaning of “justice” in this racist capitalist country. Miller was not one of those charged. Signe Waller, the widow of James Waller, one of the CWP activists murdered in Greensboro, declared after Miller’s rampage in Overland Park that he “should not have been walking the streets all these years,” in which case his victims “would probably still be alive.”
Coming near the end of the Democratic Carter administration, the Greensboro Massacre was the opening shot of what would become the Reagan years’ war on labor and black people. When the Klan announced that it would “celebrate” Greensboro in Detroit a week later, the Spartacist League initiated a labor/black mobilization that drew over 500, many of them black auto workers (see accompanying articles). Those 500 militants made sure that the Klan did not ride in the Motor City.
Over the next two decades, the SL actively built such labor-centered mobilizations in several other urban centers, successfully stopping Klan/Nazi provocations. Against those liberals and reformists who sought to derail such protests with calls on the government to “ban the Klan,” we pointed out that the capitalist state would use any such bans to go after leftists as well as trade-union and black militants. We declared: No more Greensboros! In an exemplary way, the mobilizations initiated by the Spartacist League and Partisan Defense Committee showed the power of the working class, marching at the head of all the fascists’ intended victims, to sweep the race-terrorists off the street and crush the Klan/Nazi menace in the egg.
Chicago-Right Sector Fascist Provocation at Leftist Event on Ukraine


Workers Vanguard No. 1045
 




2 May 2014
 
Chicago-Right Sector Fascist Provocation at Leftist Event on Ukraine
 

An April 12 meeting in Chicago in opposition to U.S./NATO provocations over Ukraine was the target of a sinister mobilization by supporters of the Ukrainian fascists. A screaming mob of some 30 reactionaries, among them sympathizers of the neo-Nazi Right Sector, amassed outside the meeting, carrying that organization’s red and black flag with trident emblem. Three fascists made it inside, but no effort was made to alert those at the event until Spartacist League members found out. At which time, the event organizers—Workers World Party (WWP), Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) and various liberal coalitions—refused our demands for the fascists to be ejected.
Instead, the WWP moderator, Eric Struch, launched a vitriolic tantrum threatening to remove our comrades if they did not stop “interrupting.” He was seconded by a spokesman of the American Party of Labor, who had been invited to speak on…the history of Ukrainian fascism! Expelling our comrades from the meeting would have meant sending them into the heated mob of fascist scum out front.
One woman then interjected: “Eric, relax. I know it’s tense with fascists in our midst.” She added that our comrade was “asking a perfectly valid question, why are there fascists here?” When our comrades refused to back down, the reactionary goons themselves prepared to leave. Extending an olive branch to the vermin, Struch told them: “If you guys want to listen, that’s fine. We just don’t want any disruptions. That’s what the issue is. Have a seat.” To which one fascist replied, “Thank you, I appreciate that.” Our comrades, however, were not “fine” with this arrangement, as the fascists are not about debate but about terror, and we continued to protest energetically until the three withdrew from the meeting.
In an attempt to whitewash its abject capitulation in the face of the fascists, WWP published a fabricated version of the events, titled “Chicago Anti-War Meeting on Ukraine Beats Back Fascists” (workers.org, April 15). Noting that “a handful of fascists and extreme nationalists got into the meeting,” the article makes it seem as if the event security team “forced all of them out.” Although the bulk of the reactionaries were blocked from entering by that team, it was our comrades who saved the situation on the inside. For its part, the FRSO simply disappears the fascist presence in the meeting in its account in the online FightBack!news (15 April).
The attempted disruption by the fascists on April 12 came after a March 22 International Day Against Fascism and Racism demonstration that began outside the Ukrainian Consulate in Chicago. There WWP, the FRSO and others ran up against a hostile crowd of over 100 Ukrainian nationalists and fascists. At the time, the FRSO criticized the International Socialist Organization (ISO) for refusing to join in chants against the fascists. But two weeks later when fascists showed up at their meeting, WWP and the FRSO were more inclined to have a civil dialogue with them than to drive them out.
If they had been in Ukraine, the ISO on one side and WWP and the FRSO on the other would have been viewing each other through rifle sights. The ISO called for workers to join the mobilizations in Maidan square in Kiev, which provided the shock troops for the fascist-led Ukrainian coup in February. Meanwhile, WWP and the FRSO opposed the coup and denounced U.S. and European Union (EU) support to the Kiev regime and sanctions against Russia.
Despite their differences over Ukraine, what unites WWP, the FRSO and ISO at bottom is their reformist political perspective: They seek to pressure the capitalist parties, centrally the Democrats, to shift their priorities and carry out policies that benefit the workers and oppressed. However, the bourgeoisie is not about to abandon its drive to dominate the world and to squeeze out its great-power rivals, any more than it will cease to exploit labor for profit. Like the ISO, both WWP and the FRSO gave backhanded support to presidential candidate Barack Obama on the basis that he would supposedly be more susceptible to mass pressure than his Republican counterpart. Now that Obama is the main imperialist patron of the Ukrainian fascists, WWP raises the inane slogan: “Money for jobs, not fascist mobs!”
Virulently anti-Jewish, anti-communist, homophobic and anti-Russian, the Right Sector is led by Dmytro Yarosh, who has railed, “I wonder how it came to pass that most of the billionaires in Ukraine are Jews?” From the start, the new Ukrainian government issuing out of the Maidan protests was a nest of fascists, including Svoboda party leader Andriy Parubiy as head of the National Security and Defense Council, and Yarosh as his deputy. Amid Ukrainian military moves in the heavily Russian provinces of eastern Ukraine, Yarosh recently moved his party headquarters to the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk and created a battalion to help suppress pro-Russian fighters in the region.
Like Svoboda, the Right Sector harks back to Stepan Bandera’s Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which collaborated with the Nazi occupiers during World War II and slaughtered tens of thousands of Poles and Jews. After the war, the Banderaites continued, until their defeat in the early 1950s, to fight the Soviets. Many of them fell into the waiting embrace of the imperialists, helping to swell the ranks of hardcore anti-Communists in the West. Many surviving members of Bandera’s Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists fled to the U.S. with the aid of the CIA. Once there, they transformed themselves into the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA) and were harbored by Democratic and Republican administrations alike. In the 1980s, some UCCA members occupied posts in the Reagan administration.
We opposed the recent U.S.-backed Ukrainian coup that was spearheaded by the fascists and stand in opposition to the Kiev regime’s provocative military forays in eastern Ukraine. We oppose U.S./EU sanctions against Russia and the U.S./NATO military presence in the Baltics and elsewhere in East Europe. While giving no political support to Vladimir Putin’s Russian-chauvinist regime, we supported Russia’s intervention in Crimea, which allowed the people of that region to exercise their right of self-determination through reunification with Russia.
In WWP’s recounting of the April 12 event, they hail their fictitious eviction of the fascists as “paving the way for future cooperation between anti-fascist forces.” Such dishonest posturing is counterposed to an effective defense against reactionary forces like the Right Sector. The fascists must be stopped from spewing the kind of filth that they were spreading outside the meeting, such as a Right Sector leaflet extolling the need for Ukrainian “living space”—an allusion to the Nazi displacement of “inferior” peoples.
With the pro-Maidan fascists feeling the wind in their sails, there clearly is a need to physically defend leftist events from these thugs. But its militant pretenses to the contrary, WWP coddled the fascists inside their own meeting! In general the reformists politically undercut the struggle against fascism by breeding illusions in bourgeois democracy.
Since capitalism gives rise to and sustains the fascist scourge, the struggle against this scum must be linked to the fight to overthrow capitalist rule. The working class has both the interest and the social power to sweep the fascist enemy off the streets. To the extent of their limited influence, reformists like WWP represent an obstacle to imparting this lesson and to winning workers to the understanding of their historic role as gravediggers of capitalism. Our perspective is, through political struggle against all stripes of reformism, to forge a workers party that fights for socialist revolution.
Defend the Palestinians!-For a Socialist Federation of the Near East!-“Boycott Israel” Campaign and Illusions in Democratic Imperialism


Workers Vanguard No. 1045
 






2 May 2014
 
Defend the Palestinians!-For a Socialist Federation of the Near East!-“Boycott Israel” Campaign and Illusions in Democratic Imperialism
(
Young Spartacus pages)
 
The pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign has recently gained a foothold on numerous U.S. and European campuses and among small sections of the European bourgeoisies. This liberal movement appeals to “international civil society organizations and people of conscience” to implement boycott and divestment campaigns against Israel, a regional capitalist power that has brutally dominated the Palestinian people for over six decades. It also calls on its supporters to pressure their governments to implement embargoes and sanctions against Israel. The stated goal of the campaign is to force Israel to comply with “international law” and recognize the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.
The American Studies Association (ASA) made national headlines with its endorsement of BDS in December. Over 1,000 professors and academics at U.S. universities have endorsed the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, and several university student governments have symbolically voted to divest from Israel. Student governments at Loyola University in Chicago and the University of California (UC) at Berkeley, Irvine and San Diego have voted in favor of divestment from companies such as Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, General Electric and Boeing which do business with Israel. Divestment campaigns have caused a stir at University of Michigan, Arizona State University, New York University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
BDS has also been debated internationally. Some European pension funds have withdrawn investments from Israeli banks, while some European corporations have canceled contracts. The most widely known controversy has involved actress Scarlett Johansson, who quit her role as ambassador with the British charity Oxfam to keep her contract with the Israeli company SodaStream, which has a plant in a West Bank settlement.
Predictably, the Zionists have launched a widespread campaign of slander and repression against all advocates of BDS. Speaking at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in March, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu provided marching orders for American Zionists: “Those who wear the BDS label should be treated exactly as we treat any anti-Semite or bigot. They should be exposed and condemned. The boycotters should be boycotted.” According to the London Times (February 11), the Israeli government has begun a media campaign to publicly link BDS supporters to “terrorists” and “enemy states.”
Equating any criticism of the racist, semi-theocratic Israeli state with anti-Jewish bigotry is the leading tactic of a well-oiled Zionist propaganda machine, which has the full support of the U.S. government. Their attacks on anyone who wants to defend Palestinian rights go far beyond slander and assaults on students’ free speech: the highly organized and financed pro-Israel cabal works overtime to instigate suspensions of activists from school and to get state legislatures to cut funding from universities that support the boycotts or to ban criticism of Israel under “hate speech” laws.
Last year, in the lead-up to an event featuring BDS spokesman Omar Barghouti and liberal academic Judith Butler at Brooklyn College in New York City, Democratic city council member David Greenfield slandered the BDS campaign as a “hate-filled, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist movement” (see “Pro-Israel Furor at Brooklyn College,” WV No. 1018, 22 February 2013). The New York Spartacus Youth Club stood in defense of BDS supporters, holding signs outside with the slogans, “Down With the Zionist Witchhunt at Brooklyn College! Defend the Palestinians!”
In recent months, Palestinian rights groups on campuses across the country have been suppressed and intimidated, most notably at Northeastern University in Boston where the administration suspended Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) in March until 2015 after the group distributed mock eviction notices throughout campus dorms during Israeli Apartheid Week, simulating those distributed by the Israeli occupiers before they demolish Palestinian homes. The group was recently reinstated for the fall semester on a probationary basis after students held rallies and threatened to sue the university for violating their free speech rights. During the suspension, the administration mandated that representatives from the organization undergo university-sanctioned trainings if they wished to serve in other student organizations. Two of the students who participated in the mock eviction initially faced expulsion and a Jewish spokesman for the group, Max Geller, received death threats. We demand the reinstatement of Northeastern SJP with full student group status! Down with the Zionist witchhunt!
The attack against the Northeastern SJP has been led by the ludicrously named “Americans for Peace and Tolerance,” a Zionist group that viciously smeared several professors there including Denis Sullivan, co-director of the Middle East Center, whom it vilifies for everything from stating that Hamas provides health care in the Gaza Strip to promoting Jewish historian and opponent of Zionist terror Norman Finkelstein. A UC student trip to the Palestinian territories in 2012 was spied on by a Zionist organization, the AMCHA Initiative. The ASA was swiftly ostracized in academia, as over 80 college presidents have condemned its endorsement of BDS and several have withdrawn from ASA membership. Meanwhile, legislation was introduced in February in the House of Representatives that would remove funding from any college that boycotts Israeli academic institutions or scholars.
While the Spartacus Youth Clubs fundamentally disagree with the liberal politics of BDS, we vigorously oppose all state attempts to limit its supporters’ freedom to express their views. Hands off BDS supporters!
BDS: An Obstacle to Palestinian Liberation
The SYCs stand for the defense of the Palestinian people against Zionist state terror. We oppose all U.S. aid to Israel, demand the withdrawal of Israeli troops and settlers from the Occupied Territories and call for the right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants. Our starting point is the understanding that there can be no just solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict within the framework of capitalism. Two national populations claim the same small piece of land, and under capitalism the exercise of self-determination by one will necessarily come at the expense of the other. Only through the establishment of a socialist federation of the Near East can the national claims of the Palestinians as well as the myriad other oppressed peoples of the region be equitably resolved. Simply put, the peoples of the Near East will never know justice, peace or prosperity until a series of working-class revolutions overthrow bourgeois rule throughout the region.
By contrast, BDS looks to employ moral suasion to pressure campus administrations and American corporations to ditch Israel and put their money in presumably more ethical investments. Academics, students and “cultural workers” are called on to “express solidarity” with the Palestinians by refusing, for example, to attend Israeli academic or cultural activities. The liberal idealist nature of this perspective is made clear in a statement by BDS spokesman Barghouti:
“It is the classic right-over-might paradigm, with the right being recognized by an international public that is increasingly fed up with Israel’s criminality and impunity and is realizing that Israel’s slow, gradual genocide places a heavy moral burden on all people of conscience to act, to act fast, and to act with unquestionable effectiveness, political suaveness, and nuance, and above all else with consistent, untarnished moral clarity.”
The background to the growth of BDS is the increasingly desperate plight of the Palestinian masses in the Occupied Territories. Gaza is essentially an impoverished concentration camp, regularly bombed with impunity by Israel, surrounded by an electrified fence, a sealed border with Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea, relying for its survival on whatever UN aid the Israeli regime permits into it. In the West Bank, the Palestinian population has been sealed off by an apartheid wall and subjected to a deadly Israeli military occupation. Separated by settlements containing over 600,000 Zionists who are backed up by thousands more troops, Palestinians are subjected to a series of humiliating military checkpoints and “Israeli only” roads that make travel between towns virtually impossible.
Under such desperate circumstances, the so-called “success” of the movement is not measured by any change in the actual material conditions of the Palestinians, but by publicity alone. BDS leader Ali Abunimah spelled this out in an interview with the reformist International Socialist Organization (ISO) titled, “We’re Starting to Win” (socialistworker.org, March 6). After describing the Zionist backlash against BDS as an indication of the campaign’s success, he says, “It’s pretty remarkable. Another sign of the success and growth of BDS is the fact that U.S. officials, like Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power and others, are speaking out against BDS. It goes to show that they are bringing out all the big guns.”
In reality, the strategy of BDS is to appeal to the very same imperialist forces that are the historic occupiers, colonialists and oppressors of the Near East. For its part, the ISO, in a rare moment of candor, succinctly described the aim of BDS as “to bring sufficient pressure to ‘ensure a change in Zionist strategic calculations’ that would make a democratic state an acceptable option” (socialistworker.org, March 13). To seek to pressure the imperialists to make more “socially responsible” or “ethical” investments is to build dangerous illusions in the supposed benign nature of the imperialists—whose class interests are fundamentally counterposed to those of the workers and the oppressed all over the world—as being somehow better than Israel. It is no accident that advocates of boycotting the goods of “immoral” regimes like Israel do not propose boycotting U.S. goods—they believe bourgeois democracies like the U.S. can be pressured to be a force for good in the world. But the economic and military force of the U.S. and the other imperialists is what keeps the whole world capitalist system in power.
While the Zionists’ crimes against the Palestinians are abominable, they pale in comparison to those of Israel’s main imperialist patron, the U.S., which is responsible for well over a century of mass murder, torture and genocide on a global scale. From the brutal occupation of the Philippines following the 1898 Spanish-American War to the counterrevolutionary war against the Vietnamese workers and peasants to the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. imperialists have massacred and tortured their way to global supremacy.
The U.S. imperialist ruling class will pursue its interests in as merciless a manner as it needs to, regardless of what “people of conscience” have to say. The U.S. supports Israel to the hilt because Israel has served and continues to serve U.S. imperialism’s interests in the region. The only route to the liberation of the countless victims of U.S. imperialism is socialist revolution led by the international working class that smashes the imperialist and other capitalist ruling classes around the world and lays the basis for the development of an egalitarian socialist society.
South African Divestment Campaign
Supporters of the BDS campaign draw parallels between their struggle against “Israeli apartheid” and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. In a 27 February editorial in Socialist Worker, the ISO stated, “It was precisely when the South Africa regime could no longer defend its legitimacy that it was clear that apartheid’s days were numbered. The BDS movement is hastening the arrival of those same days for Palestinians, eager to live as equal citizens in their indigenous land.” The BDS campaign is supported by former spokesmen for divestment from South Africa, such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu.
Leaving aside (for the moment) that the end of legal apartheid did not end the oppression of South Africa’s black masses, what the BDS campaign and its ISO tails promote is the liberal fiction that divestment ended apartheid in South Africa. They bury the mass social struggles of the black and other non-white toilers, centered on the powerful working class, which brought an end to direct white-supremacist rule in South Africa. Before the end of apartheid, the significant wage gains won by black class struggle and the instability caused by a growing strike movement deterred investment. This was a direct threat to the continued profits of U.S. imperialism, which began to see the South African regime as a liability.
By the early 1990s, the imperialists and a section of the apartheid ruling class decided to go for a “power-sharing” deal with the African National Congress (ANC). A key factor was the 1991-92 counterrevolutionary destruction of the Soviet Union, which for decades had supported the ANC materially and diplomatically. As the Moscow Stalinist regime disintegrated, ending the supposed “Communist threat,” the South African rulers came to terms with Nelson Mandela and the ANC.
By and large, divestment from South Africa took the form of overseas corporations signing over their interests to local subsidiaries, which often treated their workers even more brutally. In fact, divestment actually worked against the interests of the South African working class. A case in point occurred in 1989 when workers struck against plans by Mobil Oil and Goodyear to pull their investments from the South African economy during the divestment campaign. While the workforce at Mobil Oil received a small payout in return, the 1,200 workers at Goodyear represented by the National Union of Metalworkers were fired en masse.
We would support time-limited, trade-union actions against the Israeli state, such as in response to a particular Israeli atrocity. But we are politically opposed to standing boycotts, divestment and sanctions. Successful boycott campaigns would hurt the working class of Israel—Jewish, Arab and immigrant—with mass layoffs weakening its power, which must be mobilized to smash the Zionist state through socialist revolution. As we said about the anti-apartheid struggle: “The only kind of ‘divestment’ that will benefit the exploited and oppressed will be proletarian revolution, and the expropriation of these riches by a black-centered workers government as part of a socialist federation of southern Africa” (“Black Workers Strike Against ‘Divestment’ Union-Busting,” WV No. 486, 29 September 1989).
Furthermore, the BDS movement prettifies the horrific poverty and immiseration that continue unabated in today’s neo-apartheid South Africa. While apartheid’s legally enforced racial segregation is no more, the economic and social foundations of white supremacy, based on superexploitation of overwhelmingly black labor, remain intact. South Africa is today ruled by the same white capitalist class with a sprinkling of a few black faces. Once the leadership of the South African divestment campaign, the ANC through its Tripartite Alliance government now runs this neo-apartheid capitalist order, which dishes out brutal oppression to the South African working class, exemplified by the massacre of 34 striking miners in August 2012.
The analogy is also false at another level. South African capitalism, both under apartheid and since, is rooted in the brutal exploitation of black labor in the mines and factories. Thanks to its size and centrality to social production, the black South African proletariat has tremendous social power. In contrast, Zionist Israel is based on reliance on Jewish labor, from the outset marginalizing Palestinian workers as much as possible and now virtually excluding Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories from participating in the Israeli economy. In the years following the 1993 U.S.-engineered Oslo accords, the Zionist rulers displaced hundreds of thousands of Palestinian workers, replacing them with workers from Asia, Africa and East Europe, who are themselves deeply exploited and oppressed. This underlines that Palestinian national and social liberation can only come through common class struggle against both the Israeli and regional Arab ruling classes, which are likewise oppressors of the Palestinians.
“One-State,” “Two-State” Chimera
With the growth of BDS, a debate has emerged in the pro-Palestinian movement between those who support a “one-state solution” in which Israelis and Palestinians would supposedly live under one bourgeois-democratic secular state and those advocating a “two-state solution,” where Israelis and Palestinians would each have their own state. Norman Finkelstein, long a darling of the pro-Palestinian movement, ignited a furor in 2012 with his comments that BDS is a “cult” and that its program seeks to “destroy Israel.”
There can be no genuine expression of Palestinian self-determination while the racist capitalist state of Israel, which inherently oppresses the Palestinians, continues to exist. A Palestinian “state” along some variant of the 1967 borders, consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, would be, at best, a deeply partial and deformed expression of Palestinian self-determination. It would be a statelet ghetto under the stranglehold of Israel and the surrounding Arab bourgeois regimes where neighboring states could dump their unwanted Palestinian populations—which number over three million in Jordan, 1.7 million in Israel and one million in Lebanon and Syria.
While the BDS Call remains agnostic on the question of a one- or two-state solution and the views of its supporters are diverse, several prominent leaders of the BDS campaign do support a “one-state solution.” BDS leader Barghouti, who often refers to Israeli Jews as the “oppressor community,” argues for a “secular, democratic state” that would supposedly ensure rights to both Jews and Palestinians.
In reality, this “secular, democratic” Palestine would exclude the millions of Palestinians living in Jordan, which is a majority-Palestinian country. More fundamentally, this position wrongly denies that Israeli Jews constitute a nation with the right to their own self-determination. This was made clear by BDS leader Haidar Eid:
“A binational state by definition is a state made up of two nations. These two nations are historically entitled to the land. But Jews do not constitute a nation. Israeli Jews constitute a settler-colonialist community, not unlike the whites of South Africa or the French in Algeria. Settler colonists are not entitled to self-determination.”
socialistworker.org, 16 December 2013
The doctrine that an oppressor nation forfeits its right to self-determination is the ideology of genocidal irredentism. The Zionist state was created by crushing the national rights of the Palestinians. But securing national justice for the Palestinians must not mean reversing the terms of oppression and denying the national rights of Israeli Jews. Basic to our Leninist position on the national question is that all nations have a right to self-determination.
Moreover, claiming that Israeli Jews have no rights pushes them more firmly into the arms of their Zionist rulers. The perspective of Eid, Barghouti et al. rejects any possibility of ever winning the Israeli Jewish working class to a program of class unity with their Arab brothers and sisters against all the exploiters and oppressors of the region. And if you do not look to the proletariat to advance your cause, then there is only one other social force to appeal to: the capitalist imperialist rulers and their politicians and institutions. Finkelstein rants about BDS’s supposed refusal to work within the framework of the United Nations. But in fact the BDS campaign, much like Finkelstein, appeals to the UN to enforce “international law.” Opponents of Zionist terror must place no reliance on this imperialist den of thieves and their victims! Time and again, the UN has acted to reinforce Palestinian oppression. The UN presided over the 1947 partition of Palestine, and its “peacekeepers” disarmed Palestinian fighters in Lebanon in 1982, setting up the massacre at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps by forces acting on behalf of the Israeli army.
What BDS leaders promote is really nothing new. The “one-state solution” is a rehash of a similar formula promoted by the PLO in 1969, while the “two-state solution” apes its support in 1974 for the creation of a “mini-state” in the West Bank and Gaza. The fundamental premise of both perspectives was to appeal to the regional Arab bourgeois regimes and/or the imperialists to pressure Israel into negotiations. The result is the deepening of Palestinian oppression, with the Palestinian Authority now acting as gendarmes for Israel in the West Bank. In turn, the utter bankruptcy of the Palestinian nationalist movement has fueled the growth of the reactionary, anti-woman, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian outfit Hamas, not only in Gaza, where it holds power, but even among the historically cosmopolitan Palestinians of the West Bank.
For a Socialist Federation of the Near East!
Looked at narrowly through the prism of that tiny sliver of land called Israel/Palestine, the situation of the Palestinians does indeed seem intractable. It is only the working class of Israel that has the capacity to destroy the Zionist citadel from within through socialist revolution. Yet Israeli society has moved sharply to the right in recent decades and the stranglehold of Zionism on the Jewish working class has only tightened. Indeed, it will likely take a cataclysmic event, such as the conquest of power by the working class in one of the major countries of the region, to dramatically change the political consciousness of the Israeli working class.
The key to the liberation of the Palestinian masses lies not in a Palestinian nationalist framework, which preaches the unity of the downtrodden and exploited with their “own” exploiters and would-be exploiters, but in an internationalist class perspective that looks to the overthrow of bourgeois rule throughout the region through socialist revolution. Yet it is precisely the liberal-bourgeois political outlook promoted by the likes of BDS and others—working within a capitalist framework, seeking to pressure one capitalist force or another—that ensured that upheavals like the early 2011 uprising in Egypt, taking place amid massive waves of labor strikes, never for an instant challenged capitalist rule in that country. This was most clearly expressed by the ISO’s fraternal group in Egypt, the misnamed Revolutionary Socialists, which in 2012 called for a vote to the reactionary Muslim Brotherhood, only to support the coup carried out by the bloodsoaked military a year later. The only program the ISO and its cothinkers will never support is that of the class independence of the proletariat and the struggle for workers revolution.
The Arab nationalist view that Israel is a seamless mass of predatory colonialists denies the reality that it is a class-divided society, with a capitalist ruling class and an exploited proletariat. If the Jewish working class is to fight for its own liberation from capitalist exploitation, it must champion the national rights of the Palestinians. In turn, the Arab workers will not be won to a perspective of proletarian revolution if they are not broken from nationalism, religious fundamentalism and anti-Jewish bigotry. And that will not happen unless the Arab proletariat upholds the right of Israeli Jews—as well as the Kurds and other peoples—to a national existence. In short, the program of BDS rejects the only realistic program for social and national liberation in the region: a socialist federation of the Near East.
The current grim situation underlines that there is no easy road to the liberation of the Palestinian people, which requires the revolutionary overthrow of capitalist rule in nuclear-armed Israel and the surrounding Arab states. This perspective demands the forging of revolutionary Marxist parties committed to the struggle for working-class power and tempered through the most uncompromising struggle against all forms of nationalism and religious reaction. There is no other way.
As Bourgeoisie Touts 1964 Civil Rights Act-Supreme Court Knifes Affirmative Action, Again-For Black Liberation Through Socialist Revolution!


Workers Vanguard No. 1045
 


2 May 2014
 
As Bourgeoisie Touts 1964 Civil Rights Act-Supreme Court Knifes Affirmative Action, Again-For Black Liberation Through Socialist Revolution!
 

To mark the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act, the politicians turned out in droves—the president, both generations of George Bushes, black establishment types. For three days in early April, the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library in Austin, Texas, oozed with oily words about equality and opportunity. Outside, demonstrators shackled themselves to a statue of Martin Luther King Jr. in protest against the Obama administration’s massive deportation of immigrants. The high-profile celebration was no solace to the black masses, whose hellish conditions of life—mass chronic unemployment, cop terror, crumbling schools, poverty and hunger—define the racial oppression inherent in American capitalism.
Two weeks after the Austin “Civil Rights Summit,” the Supreme Court took a knife to what remained of affirmative action, upholding in a six-to-two vote an amendment to the Michigan state constitution that bans the consideration of race in university and college admissions. The Supreme Court majority’s decision was a bald assertion of “states’ rights,” the rallying cry of the slaveholders in the Civil War. The same court that last year gutted the 1965 Voting Rights Act now upheld the supposed democratic right of voters to close yet another door on the victims of racist discrimination.
The Supreme Court ruling was the latest blow in a decades-long offensive to roll back one of the more minimal gains of the civil rights movement. Affirmative action allowed a small percentage of black and Latino youth to overcome racial barriers keeping them out of higher education. For this layer, the shredding of preferential admissions has been catastrophic. Between 2006, when the Michigan ban was passed, and 2012, black enrollment at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor dropped by a third even as overall enrollment grew by 10 percent. Seven other states have similar bans, and now the reactionary Project on Fair Representation is taking aim at affirmative action at Harvard, the University of North Carolina and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
The ruling was another victory for Chief Justice John Roberts, whose philosophy of Constitutional originalism grew out of the racist reaction to civil rights-era court decisions acknowledging that black people have some rights. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed the sentiment of those in the bourgeoisie concerned with maintaining a layer of black and Latino professionals—supervisors, administrators, marketing agents, etc.—to further ruling class interests in a “global society.” The capitalist rulers have also found it useful to have minorities serve as government officials (and judges) to shove austerity and racist repression down the population’s throat, not to mention as military officers to lead black and Latino troops against dark-skinned people around the world.
In the face of racist attack, the remnants of affirmative action should be defended. But even at its height, this tokenistic measure never made a dent in the deep-seated oppression of the mass of the black and Latino population. Now, as public education funding is slashed, tuition costs explode and families drown in debt, the top state and private campuses are becoming even whiter and more elite. We call to nationalize the private universities, for open admissions with no tuition and state-paid living stipends, and for remedial programs to enable students in the inner cities to catch up with graduates of well-funded suburban and private schools. These demands cut against the capitalist rulers’ use of affirmative action to set whites against minorities and men against women in competition over slices of the shrinking pie.
The Supreme Court case pitted the liberal Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (or BAMN—By Any Means Necessary) against Michigan attorney general Bill Schuette. In 2012, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that Michigan’s ban on affirmative action was unconstitutional, leading Schuette to appeal to the Supreme Court. BAMN filed a brief supporting that appeal, arguing in a press statement that this would give the Supreme Court an opportunity to “strike down all of the anti-affirmative action laws” (4 February 2013). With this extraordinarily blind faith in the racist legal system, BAMN—whose clarion call is for a “new civil rights movement”—echoes the MLK-era liberals in sowing dangerous illusions in the capitalist state.
The civil rights struggles profoundly shook the racist American capitalist order, shattering the deep conservatism and anti-Communism of the early Cold War against the Soviet Union. The fight against Jim Crow segregation paved the way for the mass protest movements that followed—against U.S. imperialism’s dirty war in Vietnam and for the rights of women, gays and others. But from its outset, the civil rights movement was dominated by a middle-class leadership wedded to Democratic Party liberalism. The aim of this leadership, whose most effective exponent was King, was to pressure the courts and the John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson administrations to grant formal, legal equality to black people in the South.
The gains that the civil rights struggles achieved lay largely in the realm of formal democracy, such as voting rights and an end to legal segregation, later extended to increasing college admissions for minorities and women. But the liberal-led civil rights movement did not and could not challenge the root cause of black oppression: the capitalist profit system, which in the U.S. was built on the forcible segregation of the mass of black people at the bottom. The civil rights movement smashed its head against this fact in the mid 1960s when it swept North, where segregation could not be addressed through abolishing outmoded Jim Crow laws. Northern ghettos exploded in rage over unfulfilled expectations of equality.
From the 1970s on, the capitalist rulers have rolled back black rights. Black children are more segregated in the public school system today than at any time since 1968. In the North, busing and other school integration programs were minimal and short-lived, beset by racist mobs and betrayed by liberal politicians. In the South, events played out differently but with the same result. As investigative reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones explained in her study of Tuscaloosa, Alabama (“Segregation Now,” The Atlantic, May 2014):
“Schools in the South, once the most segregated in the country, had by the 1970s become the most integrated, typically as a result of federal court orders. But since 2000, judges have released hundreds of school districts, from Mississippi to Virginia, from court-enforced integration, and many of these districts have followed the same path as Tuscaloosa’s—back toward segregation. Black children across the South now attend majority-black schools at levels not seen in four decades.”
Separate is no more equal today than it was 50 years ago. Segregated schools pack black and Latino students in like prisoners, with metal detectors, video cameras, monitoring by security guards, drug testing and locker searches. Meanwhile, charter schools and voucher programs suck money from already impoverished inner-city schools as well as further the nationwide assault on teachers unions.
Treating poor and minority children like criminals is the “training” the racist capitalist rulers give to those they consider surplus. More black people today have spent time in the U.S. prison system than were enslaved in 1850. With the prisons full to bursting with victims of the racist “war on drugs,” the Justice Department announced on April 23 that it will expand a program of clemency for nonviolent felons who have been locked up at least ten years. The several hundred who are likely to benefit from such a break are a drop in the bucket of the overall prison population. And as the Black Agenda Report’s managing editor Bruce Dixon noted in a 23 April article: “At the rate the pipelines are pumping them in, their cells will be refilled in a month or two, no problem.” Dixon continues, “It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that this clemency initiative is nothing more than a lazy, cynical and nearly empty gesture” by which the Obama administration “will buy some black votes and good will in 2014 and beyond.”
The same ruling class that for decades has consigned black and Latino youth to prison hell has also been carrying out a full-bore offensive against the trade unions, of which black workers form a significant component. In response, the pro-capitalist labor “leadership” has rolled over and played dead. What is needed is to forge a workers party that can fuse the anger of the ghetto and barrio masses with the latent social power of the working class, whose labor makes this profit system run.
In 1872, Fredrick Douglass, who had fought his way out of slavery, educated himself and served as a radical leader of the abolitionist movement, observed: “The cunning ex-slaveholder sets those who should be his enemies to fighting each other and thus diverts attention from himself. Educate the colored children and white children together in your day and night schools throughout the South, and they will learn to know each other better, and be better able to cooperate for mutual benefit.” Douglass made this statement in the midst of the Reconstruction era following the smashing of the slavocracy in the Civil War. It was the betrayal of Reconstruction by the Northern bourgeoisie that sealed the fate of black people as an oppressed race-color caste.
To bring about genuine equality requires the destruction of existing class relations and the passing of power into the hands of the multiracial working class. The workers in power will use the social wealth produced by labor to rebuild this country, creating the conditions for the full integration of black people in a socialist society.
***A Simple Act Of Bravery-Concerning The Second Selma To Montgomery Civil Rights March, Circa 1965
 
 

From The Pen Of Peter Paul Markin

We all know the heroes or at least the names of the highly publicized heroes of the black civil rights movement down South (and later up North and West in the 1960s led by the courageous Doctor Martin Luther King and his compatriots. Less well known, and generally unknown except perhaps at the margins of specialty books on the subject, are the mass of average, well maybe more than average, citizens, mainly from the North, and mainly students or the young who put themselves on the line, put themselves on the line of fire to do the right thing in the face of civil evil. This is a short sketch about one such simple act of bravery.  

Not everybody who participated in the civil rights struggles down South came to those tasks fully aware politically or with the deepest motives-but they were there. Take the case of Dave Patrick from my hometown of North Adamsville, a small city just outside of Boston which despite its proximity to the city had virtually no blacks living there in the early 1960s the time of the great struggles down South (and according to some fairly current census information the black population of the town today is still minuscule). And we had no blacks, none in our graduating class and one sole black  teacher during our  four year stay. Dave Patrick, although we graduated together in 1964 was unknown to me until recently when through a 50th Anniversary class reunion site we “met” and he related the information that he had participated in the second Selma to Montgomery march in 1965. Not necessarily for the highest political motives at first but he went.

I was surprised by the story of his action because I believed, as mentioned below in my e-mail responses that I was the only vocal pro-civil rights activist in the school or the neighborhood. Certainly the town, white working-class, mainly third and fourth generation Irish and Italian, at its core and dependent on the local ship-building industry for many jobs and industry-related jobs held the common racial views of day and might have had, if it rose to that level then, some sympathy with the whites down south. And certainly in the high school to the extent that such dramatic social issues drew any attention at all as against who the hot girls or guys were, who had a hot car, who was doing what to whom down at the midnight “submarine races” lovers’ lane beachfront well-detailed in Monday morning before school boys’ and girls’ “lav” talkfest students would reflect for the most part what was being said at home. Of course once a lot of us got away from the town, got emerged in issue-oriented campus life and away from the high school norms many things changed. They did for David anyway.  

David had gone away to college after being a very bright high school student. But he like a lot of us then (and maybe now too but I see very little when I am on real campuses) got caught up in the turbulent social life of the times, the experimental 1960s time of blessed memory -drugs, sex and rock and roll to put a short name to it. While at one particular party, a frat party at his school he was confronted with a blatantly racist-themed event (mock, and maybe not so mock, honoring the KKK) and plenty of street-wise racist talk and balked at it. He told me that event, and the cold hard fact that he was going to flunk out of school anyway because of his excessive social life, led him to the Selma march. A mixed motive. He also said that he was afraid every minute that he was down there in Alabama since he had never been that far south, had been heckled, and the whole police state presence there unnerved him.  But he marched and survived to tell the tale.      
Below are my e-mail responses to the details of his story and some observations of my own.  
**********
Kudos, Dave Patrick, Kudos

Although you really should have placed your fine piece about your participation in the second Selma to Montgomery march in 1965 in the “Message Forum” section so all your fellow classmates could read it I am just glad you placed the piece somewhere.
Since we have exchanged previous e-mails on this subject I would now publicly honor your brave act of heading south whatever your private reasoning. Alabama and Mississippi were murderous dangerous places foremost for militant black freedom- fighters and just behind then white Yankee civil right supporters.  As you know from one of our previously exchanged e-mails in the summer of 1964 when the civil rights movement was desperate for people to head south to Alabama I had volunteered to go. When my family, including my mother usually supportive but not on this one, heard about that idea they threatened to disown me, to throw me out of the house. I buckled under and did not go. The most I did in those times was to be part of a small group of students in high school sending books to children in Alabama, earlier joining an occasional picket line in front of Woolworth’s in downtown Boston in support of the lunch counter sit-in demonstrators down South, and some work a few weeks one summer on voter registration in North Carolina. So you can see why I say, and continue to say, kudos, brother, kudos.

As we have been recollecting those bedeviled times I keep feeling how strange it was that you and I, others too maybe, who came out of very white working-class North Adamsville and were just a step or two economically above the blacks we were supporting had decided to cast our fate with what Jack Kerouac called the fellaheen of the world, the downtrodden and forgotten ones. Given the racial climate around town then, and probably now too, it seems almost impossible except as an act of extreme idealism that I could have thought of heading, and you did, head south then. Those were certainly heady times.   
******

Dave- interesting story about how you got to Alabama. I will tell you however that rather than hide the fact you should have just left it as is on your profile page. It did not matter why you went. YOU WENT and coming out of lily- white North Adamsville where we only had one black teacher and no black fellow students (we might as well have been in the South on that account) despite the historic black community of Roxbury being within a stone’s throw right over the bridge  that speaks to me as a very brave and honorable act.
Moreover- to place your act in context- in high school I, along with some students from North Adamsville and Hullsville High were involved in a books for Alabama program sponsored by the NAACP in Boston and we took a lot of heat from our friends and neighbors for that small action. As well as the few times I went into Boston in support of trying to de-segregate the lunch-counter down south by picketing Woolworth’s where we took much heat from local yahoos. You actually went down to the heart of the beast so kudos, brother, kudos.

My more serious work with the black liberation struggle actually came later when I lived in Oakland and got involved with Black Panther defense as the government was trying to jail and/or kill every black militant it could get its hands on and still later on apartheid in South Africa. I will keep what you sent to me by private e-mail in confidence if you wish but believe me I have great admiration for what you did.
Later Peter Paul Markin      
*******
Dave

To finish up on the Selma-Montgomery March second e-mail of 3/16 I should note that I faced some of the same family hostility that you encountered. With the exception of my mother who has some kind of low-level Dorothy Day Catholic Worker spirit that drove her on social issues (her social concerns for other people, for her sons nothing but rancor and “disappointment”) that hostility was palpable. My mother is probably where I picked up my own fledgling sense of social consciousness (overlaid back then with that loner, existential “king hell king” thing). My father was nothing but a good old boy Kentucky coalminer displaced by World War II and the Marines who wound up being stationed at the Hullsville Naval Depot before being demobilized. The best I/we could ever get him to say about black people was “nigras.”

On my mother’s side there were nothing but Irish rednecks many of whom still lived over in the old family town of South Boston and who in our generation were well known in the fight against desegregation that rocked that area in the mid-1970s and 1980s. Hell I could not even go over there then without being harassed the minute I hit L Street where they hung out. Here is the kicker though- in 1964 when the civil rights movement was desperate for people to head south to Alabama I had volunteered to go. When my family, including my mother on this one, heard about that they threatened to disown me, to throw me out of the house. I buckled under and did not go. So you can see why I say, and continue to say, kudos, brother, kudos.
Later Peter Paul Markin
*********
Kudos again Dave of such small acts human history rather than an unending story of piles of bones gives hope.

In Honor Of May Day 2014-From The American Left History Blog Archives-Reflections on May Day 2012 In Boston- Forward To May Day 2013

 

An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It, It’s Ours! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!

From The Pen Of Frank Jackman


I have noted on several previous occasions (including in an article in the April 2012 “Boston Occupier, Number 7”) that due to the recent absence of serious left-wing political struggle (prior to the events at Occupy Boston in Dewey Square from October to December 2011anyway) that our tasks for May Day 2012 in Boston centered on reviving the international working class tradition beyond the limited observance by revolutionaries, radicals and, in recent years, immigrants. This effort would thus not be a one event, one year but require a number of years and that this year’s efforts was just a start. We have made that start.

The important thing this year was to bring Boston in line with the international movement, to have leftist militants and others see our struggles here as part of an international struggle even if our actions were, for now, more symbolic and educational than powerful blows at the imperial system. I believe, despite the bad weather and consequently smaller than anticipated numbers on May Day 2012, we achieved that aim. Through months of hard outreach, especially over the past several weeks as the day approached, we put out much propaganda and information about the events through the various media with which we have access. The message of this May Day, a day without the 99%, got a full hearing by people from the unions, immigrant communities, student milieu and other sectors like the women’s movement and GLBQT community.  The connections and contacts made are valuable for our further efforts. 

Some participants that spoke to me on May Day (and others who had expressed the same concerns on earlier occasions) believed that we had “bitten off more than we could chew,” by having an all-day series of events.  While I am certainly open to hear criticism on the start time of the day’s events (7:00AM does stretch the imagination for night-owlish militants) the idea of several events starting with that early Financial District Block Party and continuing on with the 11:00 AM Anti-Capitalist March which fed into the noontime rally at Boston City Hall Plaza  and then switching over to the immigrant community marches and rally capped off that evening by the sober, solemn and visually impression “Death Of Capitalism” funeral procession still seems right to me. Given our task –introducing (really re-introducing) May Day to a wider Boston audience we needed to provide a number of times and events where people could, consciously, contribute to the day’s celebration. Maybe some year our side will be able to call for a one event May Day mass rally (or better a general strike) but that is music for the future.  

Needless to say, as occurs almost any time you have many events and a certain need to have them coordinated, there were some problems from 
technical stuff like mic set-ups to someone forgetting something important, or not showing at the right time, etc. Growing pains. Nevertheless all the scheduled events happened, we had minimum hassles from the police, and a couple of events really stick out as exemplars for future May Days. The Anti-Capitalist March from Copley Square, mainly in a downpour, led by many young militants and which fed into the noontime City Hall rally was spirited and gave me hope that someday (someday soon, I hope) we are going to bring this imperial monster down. The already mentioned funeral procession was an extremely creative (and oft-forgotten by us) alternative way to get our message across outside the “normal” ham-handed, jack-booted political screed.

Finally, a word or two on organization. The Occupy-May Day Coalition personnel base was too small, way too small even for our limited goals. We need outreach early (early next year) to get enough organizer-type people on board to push forward. More broadly on outreach I believe, and partially this was a function of being too small an organizing center, we spent too much time “preaching to the choir”-going to events, talking to people already politically convinced , talking among ourselves rather than get out into the broader political milieu. For next year (which will not be an election year) we really need union and community people (especially from oppressed communities) to “smooth” the way for us. We never got that one (although we want more than one ultimately) respected middle-level still militant union official or community organizer that people, working people, listen to and who would listen to us with his or her nod. Radical or bourgeois politics, down at the base, you still need to have the people that the people listen to on board. Forward to May Day 2013.