First, in reply to Marv Gandall, who writes "It’s not simply or even primarily a crisis of leadership, John, as many of us were miseducated to believe." I think this is mixing up two slightly different things. that "crisis of the leadership" classically refers to the crisis of the revolutionary leadership, not the union leadership. Of course Marv is right that a consciousness developed partly independent of the union leadership (due to the post war boom and the role of Stalinism), but the union leadership definitely played a major role in what developed inside the unions. I can give Marv example after example from my own personal experience. This includes blackballing, physical threats and assaults, red baiting, and ostracism. I'm not just talking in abstractions here. I experienced it all up close and personal.
This gets to my second point: Marv mixes together my success or lack of success in reaching Oakland voters with the same regarding the membership of my union. Regarding the former, keep in mind that I spent maybe $75 on the campaign overall. I did not go out onto the streets very much and did very little campaigning other than online and appearing at the candidates' forums. This was partly a recognition that there was no organized support for what I represented, which was a definite break from the liberal Democratic institutions that run the city of Oakland. East Bay DSA is definitely against that and as for the "revolutionary" left, they are tied in with the union bureaucracy (as well as the NGO's) in this area. That means that while they can thunder on about how horrible the Democrats are in "revolutionary" circles, they cannot actually *do* anything about it. It was also a recognition that the 75 year war on class consciousness has had an effect on the working class of Oakland (among other cities), meaning there is not exactly an overwhelming mood to self-organize and fight back. So, overall, I think the number of votes for what I represented was not bad. (I think it was 4,000 overall.) As for my success or lack of success within my union: I was elected 3 times as recording secretary against the total opposition of the entire bureaucracy in my local and beyond. This was before the collapse of the Soviet Union, when anti-communism was quite strong and everybody in the local (which was not exactly a hotbed of radical politics) knew I was a socialist. I was also elected as a delegate to numerous union conventions for which competition was quite strong. In fact, at that time I was one of the very, very few socialists who got elected to any position in a union while opposing the union bureaucracy. The 1999 wildcat strike speaks for itself. So, I'd say overall my success was pretty good. In reply to Mark Baugher's comment, "we decided to invite people [as panelists to that forum] on the left who actually do stuff in the labor movement rather than politically-pristine bloggers." Assuming the snide comment about "pristine bloggers" refers to me, it is the exact opposite of what he writes. Two of the individuals Baugher refers to were active as a rank and file unionist as a way point on their journey to getting out of such activism and in fact getting out of the working class itself, and either entering academia or the tops of the union bureaucracy. On the other hand, I spent nearly 30 years as a rank and file activist organizing within the membership around numerous issues. That included participation in 3 wildcat strikes and numerous other activities. But it wasn't about me - there were and still are a few such activists then and now. Ones who actually organize to build a movement within the rank and file to oppose the team concept in all its aspects. These are not the "national experts" that the administrators of Marxmail seem to see as being so important. Others will have to decide for themselves. As far as their "expertise", others will have to decide whether the view of those panelists that the leadership's ties to the Democratic Party and their acceptance of the team concept are no big deals - whether that really represents expertise or just opportunism. John Reimann -- *“Science and socialism go hand-in-hand.” *Felicity Dowling Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#29052): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/29052 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104479559/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
