From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Thu Aug 21 2008 - 17:43:42 EDT
> My question is, why do so many on the Left still believe in the > Democratic Party? Are there any major trade unions that are discussing a > different electoral strategy? I.e. a labour candidate or setting up a > workers' party of some sort? Hi Dave: Actually, there's less discussion within the US labor movement about the possibility of forming a Labor Party than there was in the 1980's. The reason why there was an initiative at that time is because of the recurrent experience that unions had with the DP whereby the DP politicians relied on unions to get them elected but once elected showed the rather unpleasant pattern of stabbing those same unions in the back. The labor movement in the US is certainly weaker and more divided now than it has been at any point in my life. There are precious little signs that this is going to turn around anytime soon. > I must say that the prospect of progressive political change in the > United States by its own citizens looks quite gloomy. Rather long-term > change seems more likely to come from the mass of Central and South > American immigrant workers. It is certainly the case that the demographics within the US have been changing and that undocumented immigrant workers potentially represent a major social-political force for change. We saw that a couple of years ago on May Day when - literally - millions of workers took to the streets to protest the government's plan to change immigration policy. But, this is a very vulnerable and 'at risk' group and this has tended historically to mitigate against their activism (for obvious reasons). This is a phenomena seen in many other countries as well with workers in the informal (petty commodity) sector whereby the precariousness of their existence and their vulnerability to selective enforcement by the state tends to inhibit radical activism. History should teach us, though, that pre-revolutionary situations can emerge in social formations rather quickly. How many thought that there was a realistic prospect for revolutionary action in Russia in 1900? Yet, five years later .... It's also the case, historically, that radicalization and revolutionary movements tend to spread internationally - especially after a success. So, who knows what effect successful revolutionary experiences in Latin America or elsewhere would have on workers in the US? It could lead to a radicalization here ... or a new heightened period of reaction. Making predictions about such matters is hazardous. I saw on 'youtube' a video today which had an excerpt from the end of Part I of "The Civil War" by Ken Burns. The documentary noted that when General Sherman said that it would take 200,000 troops to defeat the Confederacy in the West, he was judged to be insane and was basically relieved of command! That's what happens sometimes when you tell people what they don't want to hear (at the time it was widely believed in the North that the war would be quickly ended - within a matter of months). At the risk of sounding melodramatic, though, I think it's fair to say that the international workers' struggle will ultimately depend critically on what happens in "the belly of the beast". Whatever revolutionary developments happen elsewhere will be threatened so long as US imperialism persists. In solidarity, Jerry _______________________________________________ ope mailing list ope@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 31 2008 - 00:00:07 EDT