Further on discussion on Alabama Election.

Two  Creatures.

Sean O'Torain.

To add a little further to this discussion on the Alabama election I would like to ask Comrades who opposed the position put forward by Richard and I to please read again the paragraphs below in bold which I copy from the original post which started this discussion. The discussion is here at the bottom of this post.  They make clear that we did not and do not support the Democratic Party. They also make clear what it is we stand FOR. See the two paragraphs in bold print.  This is our position. What we stand for, what we fight for. I would like also to point out that contrary to one claim we never supported Sanders. I would like to thank the Comrade who came in and quoted Lenin and showed how this man who is seen as the most intransigent of the intransigent was extremely flexible on tactics. And this is what this issue was in Alabama – a question of tactics. Not that on all occasions we agree with Lenin. But that is for another day.

A mistake in tactics can wreck a strategy. The self styled revolutionary left in the US are particularly weak on tactics. There are many reasons for this. A fundamental reason is that the left has no base in the working class. As a result they are not challenged to develop tactical skills. There are many reasons the left in the US does not have a base. Their combination of left sectarianism, ultra leftism, opportunism, these mistaken policies continually interacting with each other makes it impossible for the left to develop a working class base. In relation to Alabama the tactical mistake of not calling for the defeat of Moore by voting for Jones meant that once again any left forces, which adopted this position, would have been unable to put down roots in the working class. If they had roots they would have lost those roots. Working class people, especially African American working class people would not have taken them seriously. As one worker, not a socialist but a serious union activist said when he heard our position of voting for Jones to defeat Moore – ‘sure its only common sense’. The mistake of not calling for a vote for Jones to defeat Moore was to wreck the strategy of putting down roots in the working class, to make impossible at this time in Alabama to put down roots. impossible to be taken seriously by the most conscious and thinking workers and youth.

Of course those of us who put the position of voting for Jones to defeat Moore have an important responsibility, one which is alluded to by our critics and correctly so. That is we have the responsibility while calling for a vote for Jones to defeat Moore at all times we must explain we do not support the capitalist Democratic Party, we explain at all times what we stand for, see the two paragraphs in bold below where we spell out our position. It is essential that we at all times spell out this position of ours so we do not as is suggested fall foul of the ‘slippery slope’.  To develop this metaphor a little, and to keep in mind that life is complicated. Sometimes it is necessary in life as in politics to step on to the slippery slope. I am sure we have all done so at one time or another. Just in doing so to be conscious that it is a risky proposition and that we only do so if it is absolutely necessary. And sometimes it is. I think it was Marx who said that we make our own history but we do not make it on ground of our own choosing.

One Comrade in the discussion says it was not correct to say ‘vote Jones with no illusions’. But we did not say that. We said vote Jones to defeat Moore and at the same time build forces around the program and strategy and tactics we spell out in our two bold type paragraphs below. It was not an illusion that defeating Moore raised the head of the anti Trump movement. It would have been no illusion that if Moore had won the vicious racist, sexist forces would have been strengthened.  And it was no illusion that the possibility of revolutionary forces putting down roots in the working class would have been better if they had called for a vote for Jones to defeat Moore than if they had done a Pontius Pilot and washed their hands of the whole thing. Just said never for the lesser of two evils. Life is not that simple, class struggle is not that simple.

Comrade Francisco criticizes our position and says; ‘And yes it was a small victory (Moore’s defeat), but the victory was that we wouldn’t roll back the clock to slavery – not one where we would advance headlong to revolution’. I think that this is to over state things a bit. There would have been no roll back to slavery given the present objective situation in the US. Nor would there have been any headlong rush to revolution on the cards. I think Comrade Francisco poses things in a bit of a non-dialectical fashion. He seems to say the alternatives were back to slavery or headlong to revolution. But neither of these alternatives was on the table. The task was to put down roots for revolutionary socialist ideas in the working class. A more nuanced approach was necessary. An approach, which allowed any revolutionary forces to gain the ears of the most thinking combative sections of the working class.

Thank you to Comrade Krahbedad (I am wondering about the name Comrade. ‘Bedad” is an expression from my old country Ireland) but to continue. Thank you for raising the French elections. How millions of French workers did what you said – voted for Macron to defeat Le Pen and then prepared to fight Macron. The millions of French workers who did so had a better grip of the dialectic, of tactics; of the balance of class forces than the left have here in the US. In France we also saw the damage done by sectarianism another weakness shared by the majority of the US left. If my memory serves me right if the SP had withdrawn and supported Melechon the more left candidate, he would have probably come ahead of Le pen in the first round and he would been in the run off with Macron. Not a fascist against a right wing capitalist candidate but a left candidate versus a right wing capitalist candidate. This would have meant a much more favorable ground on which the French working class would have been fighting.

From here down I reprint the section of the statement from Richard Mellor, and myself, which was in the original statement in the Blog. I ask Comrades to look at this again and see what we advocated fighting for, what we still advocate fighting for, here in these paragraphs, and which we advocate in general. The issue in Alabama was how to get this message heard and also how to deal a blow to this most conscious and crude racist and sexist and the forces around him and his fellow creature Trump.

The section of original statement begins here.

“Having said this, it is necessary to go further. It is necessary to add to the position of a vote for Jones. It would have been necessary not just to say vote for Jones, to come out and vote for Jones, but it would have been necessary, yes essential to have explained clearly that while we would have called for a vote for Jones we did not do so because we supported the capitalist Democratic Party, we do not, but we called for a vote for Jones because we wanted to deal a blow to the Trump forces and add fuel to the anti Trump movement.

This is how our vote would have been cast. We oppose the capitalist Republican and Democratic parties and will always do so. We would have explained that we were calling for a vote for Jones, as this election was extremely significant in terms of the balance of forces in the country. Vote for Jones because a defeat for Moore would mean increasing the strength and morale of the anti Trump forces. Vote for Jones in order to make the ground more favorable for the struggles of the working class, the anti racist and anti sexist forces. However. And it is an essential “However”. We do not leave it there. 
While advocating a vote for Jones, and if we had forces working for a vote for Jones, we would have explained on what basis we were doing so, that we were doing so on a certain basis. We would have explained that calling for a vote for Jones did not mean we were supporting the capitalist Democratic Party but as we have already said we would have been doing so to improve the ground on which the rising women's movement, the rising anti racist movement, and the rising workers movement that is inevitable in the period ahead, are fighting and will fight.

And along with this and an essential part of this while advocating a vote for Jones to defeat Moore and his crew, and to make the ground more favorable for the struggle of the working class and all oppressed minorities and people, we would have advocated and built for the following alternative:  

Build an alliance/united front against the capitalist agenda using mass direct action tactics. Organize the unorganized using the tactics, which built the unions in the 1930’s------mass occupations, mass confrontations with the state and anti union forces on the streets. Build a mass workers party by going to the rank and file in the unions and the workplaces and our communities mobilizing support for resolutions to this end. 

And equally essential: Build as part of all these struggles a revolutionary socialist current based on the ideas and principles of revolutionary socialism. And do so in a non-sectarian manner. That is, throughout this entire process we recruit and build a revolutionary current with its roots in the working class. We believe this approach properly explained would be understood and supported by every thinking worker. 

At this stage we anticipate outraged cries from some left groups and individuals that we are committing the sin of sins of supporting a Democrat. We will not be intimidated by such calls. We put our position out here for discussion. We think that serious workers and activists will give it thought. As well as anticipating the cries of horror that we as revolutionary socialists would advocate voting for a Democrat we also believe that there are tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of thinking workers out there who hate the Democrats, see their pro capitalist role but who also see the dilemma that existed in Alabama.

We anticipate that these serious workers will give consideration to our position and we believe many will support the position we advocate here.