Re: [sixties-l] Critique of Bruce Franklin >

From: Bill Mandel (
Date: 11/05/00

  • Next message: Barbara L Tischler: "Re: [sixties-l] Re: Bill Mandel critique of Bruce Franklin..."

    If by "other minority" you mean non-white, then Goldstein's guess of 
    10-15% "Black or other minority" victimized by government violence in 
    labor activity means that they were discriminated against severely. 
    The point is that they were simply barred from employment in the major 
    industries in which union organizing went on until, in the 1930s, the 
    Communist Party, a major factor in the growth of the C.I.O. (John L. 
    Lewis of the Mine Workers hired every individual on the Communist 
    Party's payroll in Ohio and other steel-industry states) insisted that 
    there be no discrimination in accepting workers into unions, offering 
    the practical argument that any other policy would, and in fact did, 
    compel Blacks to take jobs during strikes.
        To dismiss racial profiling as "emotionally-charged and 
    inflammatory" is white chauvinism in its pure form.
        Morgan's position is very close to that of the Socialist Party 
    before World War I, which regarded African-Americans simply as poor 
    workers, not understanding that the color of one's skin meant 
    discriminatory treatment by government at all levels (just now the 
    victory of a suit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture for 
    systematic denial of loans to Black farmers over all the decades that 
    such loans have been issued) and all three branches, executive, 
    legislative, and judicial.
        I am still interested in his response on the matter of the 
    physical decimation of the Black Panthers as political discrimination 
    against African-Americans.
    																													William Mandel

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/06/00 EST