This might be worth discussing. Here is some background on the single-issue versus multi-issue coalition in the specific conditions of the US anti-Vietnam War movement in the early 1970s: https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/the-dubious-history-of-a-slogan/ disparages the single-issue coalition, and https://obits.cleveland.com/us/obituaries/cleveland/name/jerry-gordon-obituary?id=18755010 is the obituary of the person who built one of the largest single-issue coalitions to fight against the US war in Vietnam.
> On Nov 9, 2024, at 12:43 PM, sartesian via groups.io > <[email protected]> wrote: > > See if I can respond to all 3 in post: > Hari: > • agree--soviet is the most highly developed form, meaning there can be > many "lower forms"-- like a simple strike committee; like a workers defense > group; like unionizing effort--but a)all are derived from their class basis > b) none of the forms are supposed to restrict the participants from > presenting their own critiques and remedies. How vigorously the participants > exercise those facets is a tactical decision, not an ideological one. So what if the leader of the single-issue coalition, which I called a "united front," spent decades in the labor movement and the coalition had a large collection of unions participating in the march? That describes the National Peace Action Coalition in 1971. > > Mark B: > • "The movement was a united front of a special type, not between mass > organizations of the working class for a concrete set of demands, but between > diverse and multiclass elements whose sole bond of unity was to oppose the > war"--exactly and w/o debating the whole issue again, that "brief" severely > constrained a movement to a single issue that not only resisted identifying > the cause, but also welcomed those bourgeois representatives in their attempt > to deflect the movement back into the very institutions that executed the > policy--the Democratic Party, Congress etc. If it "severely constrained" the anti-Vietnam war movement, then how come the people implementing this tactic had the larges coalitions, held the biggest demonstrations, and organized the largest march in US history to that point of 300k-500k people? Unlike the PSLs 300k demonstration in Washington DC, this one really happened and was actually counted by third parties. > • "The inevitable logic of a multi-issue umbrella including such groups > as SANE would have to be a coalition of radical-liberal forces subordinated > to the multi-issue program of the liberal politicians, to a wing of the > Democratic Party, in the practicalities of the situation. In Marxist > terminology, the technical name for such a coalition is a 'popular > front.'"--which is what happened to those attracted to the movement. The "orthodox" answer, I think, is that this is not a "popular front" at all because it seeks to promote legislation but not to govern the country. There is a good argument that Marxist terms arise from specific historical conditions but then people wrongly apply the term to much changed conditions later on. Someone pointed out to me recently that, although one might believe there is a "crisis of leadership" today, Trotsky's 1938 Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution" meant something quite specific, e.g. workers more revolutionary than their leaders. One might also criticize Lenin's reuse of the term "imperialism" for something that has nothing to do with the medieval and ancient empires from where the word arose. Mark -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#33443): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/33443 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/109441085/21656 -=-=- 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/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
