wise - truly a "short-cut" to socialism! - at the same time as our organizing conceptions degenerate into meaninglessness editorials, articles, briefings I won't bother to quote from reassure us that "there's no time for fears - we must move and move fast", "workers will begin to self-organize around our ideas", and so forth. The transmitters of such formulations, or an FEC member like Syvriotis who says (Aug. 11) that "in two months" - by Oct. 11, comrades - "we will be a mass organization because xve exposed Rockefeller", are playing a cynical confidence game with the membership. Similary, as Dillon would heartily agree, the disease of prediction-mongering -whimsical projections of our growth rate, our operational capacity (the CP and Voodcock mop-up campaigns, e.g.), our electoral tallies, the doomsday' deadlines like the 60-90 day thesis on the blow of the shebang - forms an outright a historical tendency, a one-day-at-a-time kind of unself-consciousness that no political organization could tolerate. "Stop Rockefeller" covers for our lost grasp of the continuity of the socialist movement and of the class-for-itself institution-building process.
Comrades, "The Approach to Left Hegemony", by two members since driven from the Labor Committee, was political discussion. You know what happened to it. You "didn't notice" it getting knifed in the back room of our policy-makers. All of us should carefully re-read this document and Marcus' angry reply ("The Academic Pathology"). Here we see the emasculation-of-discussion technique in full forms
Her objections are of "so little merit" (see "NAGging in Europe", August 4, 1974) that we don't need to even think of them - just psycho-slander their purveyor.
Here "personal life" is demagogically used both to obfuscate real differences and to demean Carol's (and your) desire for love and realization of creativity. The dualism exists in Marcus' mind, rather, and as the persona/self dichotomy became established, it came also to split that of the member browbeaten into giving up these desires in the name of "being serious." Such unprincipled "replies" on the part of 1-iarcus in particular ' are in fact slanderous in the extreme, and. their inexplicable authorization for publication has done untold damage to us over the years.
It is now clear that the anti-epigonism of LaRouche and Dillon represented the key alternative cadre-development policy, the suppression of which has led inexorably to the present accelerating rates of primitive accumulation off the membership.
Unfortunately, Dillon fails to deal with the crucial problem of the nature of the identity the LC gives its members. Why did I, for example, feel it absolutely "in my interest" to insist, especially over the last 8 months, to any and all comers that, indded, black was white (sic), and to even squeeze amounts of black out of my grey cells to detail the case? "Of course White was brainwashed. - it's inconceivable that we'd lie, we have the hard evidence - I'll even imagine for you every possible proof." "The conference was not Stalinist -that's bullshit."