[sixties-l] On 'Fugitive Days (fwd)

From: sixties@lists.village.virginia.edu
Date: Wed Feb 20 2002 - 15:07:23 EST

  • Next message: nefertiti: "Re: [sixties-l] Re: heil freedom"

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:04:34 -0800
    From: radtimes <resist@best.com>
    Subject: On 'Fugitive Days

     From Portside

    >From Ethan Young

    It was a thrill to read the responses to Cathy Wilkerson's review of Bill
    Ayers's 'Fugitive Days' and to my 2 cents on the first year of the Weather
    fiasco. I was tempted to write back about Stew Albert's comments and some
    others who took issue with my take on Weather, Fred Hampton, etc. But as
    much fun as that might be, behind all this is a political task: the need to
    address the issue of trashing.

    After SDS was dead and buried and W went underground, many activists began
    to sort out the various arguments for and against street violence as a means
    of opposing the war, fighting imperialism, building the movement, or living
    the revolution. Some turned to community-level service: free health clinics,
    food co-ops, storefront law offices. Some moved to working class
    neighborhoods, got factory or service jobs and joined unions. Study groups
    sprang up, spurring an increased identification with Marxism in its manifold
    schools and tendencies. By 1973 or so, a simple citation of Lenin pointing
    out the negative aspects of running through the streets breaking windows
    could get the attention of young people who previously would have considered
    it quaint.

    Well, the issue has returned but the means of resolving it are no longer so
    easily summoned up. Marx and Lenin are no longer movement icons, which some
    might consider a shame but I call a mixed blessing. Along with a lack of
    enthusiasm (at least) in social movements for the geniuses of 1848 and 1917,
    the role of the organized left itself is just a shell. In these post-1989
    circumstances the reemergence of anarchism and the defensive, inward-looking
    political culture in social movements are not surprising. And that's the
    perfect breeding ground for the fad of proving one's revolutionary-ness in

    That's the significance of the Black Bloc and less zealous pro-trashing
    tendencies in the antiglobalization events. This is not a manifestation of
    anarchism as an ideology or movement but of missionary romanticism left
    unchallenged. Those who argue against are conciliatory, splitting the
    movement, thinking hierarchically, buying into the legitimacy of private
    property and police power.

    To counter this tendency we - Portside readers and other Boondocks fans -
    have to reintroduce the idea of organizing as a political duty outweighing
    everything 'symbolic' in the social movements. No more self-identified
    bubbles of righteousness in a sea of hypocrisy - the tide of public opinion
    must be turned. This was the appropriate response to 'exemplary violence and
    confrontation politics' at the height of the Indochina war, and it's more
    necessary now.

    We have to warn about the serious state violence lurking around the corner.
    But this must be done patiently and analytically, without resorting to
    demagogy or conspiracy-mongering. At the same time, we need to encourage
    real, systematic, fearless outreach and education to the general public in
    its many forms, to link problems on the ground to capital's new global power
    and Bush's war drive. All this, in plain language, without insulting
    anyone's intelligence by claiming a higher moral sense or political
    sophistication. Or, as we so often do, expecting anyone to get excited about
    so-and-so's language or such-and-such politician's conduct - unless we can
    be funny about it.

    As Cathy pointed out in her review, movement democracy was given short
    shrift back then. This is less the case today, but democracy also implies an
    expectation that the massive majority - unpoliticized, unmobilized - have
    the potential capacity to run the world. And that expectation is no more in
    evidence among the new streetfighters than it was with the Weatherpeople.
    Once again, the more they take an isolated stand of disdain for capitalist
    power, the further they get from identifying with those who are being
    screwed en masse, those who can potentially uproot capitalism and not just
    bloody cops' nightsticks.

    Another revoltin' development, this is.


    Cathy, I wasn't reproaching you in any way for your excellent
    article. You, of all people, have the right to say anything you want. (And

    My comments about Bill and Bernardine were mostly directed to the "rest of
    us." Us Old White Men tend to pontificate a lot, and my point was the need
    to keep some current perspective.

    Here in Chicago, Bill and Bernardine are under a lot of fire from
    Conservative groups of alumni who are trying to get them fired. To this
    group, they have become surrogates for Bin Ladn. While we criticize Bill's
    book (and it certainly is insouciant and glib!) we should also keep this in

    That was my only caveat.

    James H. Williams

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Feb 20 2002 - 15:47:27 EST