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