I will comment on this. I was for about 6 months also in the Kansas City, MO 
Branch when Mark was there. The soliloquy of events *started* with the 1975 
Steel Workers Fight Back campaign. That was the real beginning of the SWP's 
turn. While it did "start" at Chicago's South Works (Mark, I believe it was 
actually smaller than your plant) and the huge and super large U.S. Steel plant 
in Gary, Indiana (plant was a damn near 5 miles long!) it was a national 
campaign even outside of what we call "Basic Steel", that is the iron ore into 
finished steel. At that time they were still hot rolling steel in downtown 
Pittsburgh (Jones & Laughlin). The Fight Back campaign was indeed quite 
national. There were Fight back groups of rank and filers in *most* but not all 
Basic Steel sectors of the industry and as many in non-Basic Steel (the 
Steelworkers Union had organized many manufacturing jobs such as canneries and 
even some large chain coffee shops in NYC!).

Mark probably got from my my off the cuff analysis of the SWP's "campaign 
party" nonsense that developed out of the stupendous anti-war work the SWP did 
in the 1960s and early 1970s where the entire party was turned into an 
anti-Vietnam war machine. This is when the national campaign party nonsense 
started to develop where the success, for example, of the Lower East Side 
branch of the SWP in NY during the campaign for "bi-linguel/bi-cultural" school 
board campaign was successful and the SWP became literally the headquarters for 
the 2 communities in question, Puerto Rican and Chinese, against the right-wing 
United Federation of Teachers. From this the SWP "analysis" dictated a "turn 
toward the communities" which in 100% of the practice mean simply moving one's 
headquarters into the communities of the oppressed but ignoring actual 
struggles going there. Unlike, for example, the CPUSA which allowed their 
branches to also engage in local struggles, the SWP ignored them if it was part 
of the "National Campaign". The SWP suffered unknowingly from this idiotic 
strategy.

The same applied to union struggles that Mark also touched on. In NYC there are 
union locals with over 30,000 members. One such was the very radical Hospital 
Workers Local 1199. During the 60s and 70s this lone NYC local (the national 
union was an old "red union" called the Retail, Wholesale, and Distributive 
Workers of America or the RWDWA. In otherwords a small warehouse and retail 
union that existed only the NE of the U.S.) it actually mobilized 10s of 
thousands of it's own members to march for civil rights and against the war. 
The union was dominated by Black, Puerto Rican, Dominican and immigrant works. 
The SWP did have a fraction inside it but when the turn to garment workers was 
announced, it dissolved the fraction to go into it because it was part of the 
"national campaign". Many of us questioned and opposed this but were shutdown.  
We didn't oppose an orientation toward garment workers but we didn't believe 
that dissolving the ONE fraction we actually recruited out of and had massive 
rank and file involvement was correct. And that was true increasingly into the 
1980s as well. Very sad.

David Walters


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#29180): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/29180
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104608543/21656
-=-=-
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]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to