The Revolutionary Answers of C.L.R. James - REBEL
|
Louis Proyect
James put the matter this way: We say, number 1, that the Negro struggle, the independent Negro struggle, has a vitality and a validity of its own; that it has deep historic roots in the past of America and in present struggles; it has an organic political perspective, along which it is traveling, to one degree or another, and everything shows that at the present time it is traveling with great speed and vigor. We say, number 2, that this independent Negro movement is able to intervene with terrific force upon the general social and political life of the nation, despite the fact that it is waged under the banner of democratic rights, and is not led necessarily either by the organized labor movement or the Marxist party. We say, number 3, and this is the most important, that it is able to exercise a powerful influence upon the revolutionary proletariat, that it has got a great contribution to make to the development of the proletariat in the United States, and that it is in itself a constituent part of the struggle for socialism. James arrived at this position through an application of both Marxist theory and historical example. http://www.rebelnews.ie/2020/09/11/revolutionary-answers-clr-james/
|
|
|
|
Jerry Monaco
Yes, this is how it has been and how it could be in the future; if it is done well then such movements are worth supporting and helping to grow. But to say how something is and how something has been done well in the past is not to say how something should best be done in the future. Ultimately, in order to carry through a socialist revolution and have it succeed, it would be best to have a united working-class party led mostly by people of color. A working-class party with a Black leadership of all the oppressed would be the best way to accomplish the ultimate goal of a workers democracy and a socialist society in this country. Also, I believe James was arguing that one way to get to the best kind of leadership of a working-class party is through the historically independent movement of radical Blacks. What he argued may be true but it is an empirical question that must be answered in practice it can't be set beforehand. I don't understand the exclusivity and reductionism of the argument on all sides. Movements for liberation, whether they are for national liberation, or sexual liberation, or liberation based on overcoming ethnic or color-based oppression, are what they are. What needs to be thought through is how to make them into revolutionary socialist movements.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 8:03 AM Louis Proyect <lnp3@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dayne Goodwin
Bill Mullen doesn't mention that James' 1948 "essay" which he quotes from was created as a report to the 1948 convention of the Socialist Workers Party. The impression i had through decades of pedestrian involvement in the U.S. left (early on with the YSA/SWP) was that James was invited to come to North America in 1938 by the SWP, when he met with Trotsky in Mexico in 1939 they clashed fiercely, then the following year James went with the Schactman/Workers Party split forever renouncing the orthodox 'Trotskyites'. A few years ago when our reading group was reading James' classic "Black Jacobins" followed by the recent "C.L.R. James and Revolutionary Marxism: Selected Writings of C.L.R. James 1939-1949" edited by Paul Le Blanc and Scott McLemee (Haymarket 2018) i did some additional reading by and about James. I learned that Trotsky was a prime mover in getting James to travel to North America. In their 1939 talks James and Trotsky agreed on the priority strategic perspective that the SWP support building an independent Black political party. I learned that it was during the three years in the latter 1940s when James had rejoined the SWP that James made this presentation to the 1948 SWP convention, expressing views generally shared by the SWP leadership.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 6:03 AM Louis Proyect <lnp3@...> wrote:
|
|
|