Anti-Mexican yokels told where to stick it



LOS ANGELES -- Angry activists confronted a crowd of anti-
immigrant cretins in front of the Westwood Federal Building on 
July 4th. The cracker mob waved banners like "American jobs for 
American people!" "5th of May is not the 4th of July," "California 
= The illegal immigrant state," and the misspelled "What part of 
illeagle don't you understand?" The mostly young activists 
responded by burning an Amerikan flag and shouting "U.S. troops 
off the border! Racist ranchers off the border!"

This last slogan refers to the recent campaign of vigilantism by 
white Arizona ranchers. Vigilantes have shot four Mexicans 
crossing the border in the last year -- two have died. On May 13, 
for example, 23-year old Eusebio de Haro Espinosa bled to death 
after being shot while looking for water. 

One of the vigilante leaders, Roger Barnett, likens his anti-
immigrant patrols to hunting. "Humans. That's the greatest prey 
there is on earth." A flyer advertising the vigilante's "Volunteer 
Ranch Neighborhood Watch" reads: "This is a vacation for the 
Winter visitor that wants to help an American Rancher keep his 
land protected while enjoying the great southwestern desert at the 
same time... Just the great outdoors and good 'ole western 
individualism spirit of private property."

Stupid, gun-toting yahooliganism is endemic to Amerika. Barnett, 
David Duke, Pat Buchanan, etc. -- these freaks aren't just a few 
odd balls, rather they express the position of a petty-bourgeois 
class created by imperialism. 

Lenin wrote: "The bourgeoisie and the opportunists [tend] to 
convert a handful of very rich and privileged nations into 
'eternal' parasites on the body of the rest of mankind, to 'rest 
on the laurels' of the exploitation of Negroes, Indians, etc., 
keeping them in subjection with the aid of excellent weapons of 
extermination provided by modern militarism."(1)

Parts of the new petty-bourgeoisie (or labor-aristocracy) created 
by superprofits feels threatened by competition from workers from 
the oppressed nations. Hence the support for a wall along the 
border, etc. The imperialist bourgeoisie may not always see eye to 
eye with the radical chauvinists of the Amerikan petty-
bourgeoisie, but it can't sweep them into the trash where they 
belong. Similarly, social-democratic opportunists have catered to 
chauvinists and still do, despite all their chatter about a "fresh 
wind" in the Amerikan labor movement (see the review of "Audacious 
Democracy," in this issue).

In contrast to the imperialist bourgeoisie and opportunists who 
cater to Amerikan petty-bourgeois fears, we proletarian 
internationalists tell the ugly truth about superprofits, no 
matter how unpopular it makes us in the short term.

Lenin again: "Crispien went on to speak of high wages. The 
position in Germany, he said, is that the workers are quite well 
off compared with the workers in Russia or in general, in the East 
of Europe. A revolution, as he sees it, can be made only if it 
does not worsen the workers' conditions 'too much'. Is it 
permissible, in a Communist Party, to speak in a tone like this, I 
ask? This is the language of counter-revolution. . .The workers' 
victory cannot be achieved without sacrifices, without a temporary 
deterioration of their conditions. We must tell the workers the 
very opposite of what Crispien has said. If, in desiring to 
prepare the workers for the dictatorship, one tells them that 
their conditions will not be worsened 'too much', one is losing 
sight of the main thing, namely, that it was by helping their 
'own' bourgeoisie to conquer and strangle the whole world by 
imperialist methods, with the aim of thereby ensuring better pay 
for themselves, that the labor aristocracy developed. If the 
German workers now want to work for the revolution they must make 
sacrifices, and not be afraid to do so.... 

"To tell the workers in the handful of rich countries where life 
is easier, thanks to imperialist pillage, that they must be afraid 
of 'too great' impoverishment, is counter-revolutionary. It is the 
reverse that they should be told. The labour aristocracy that is 
afraid of sacrifices, afraid of 'too great' impoverishment during 
the revolutionary struggle, cannot belong to the Party. Otherwise, 
the dictatorship is impossible, especially in West-European 
countries."

Many of anti-anti-immigrant hecklers were self-described 
anarchists. A MIM supporter passing out MIM Notes had a brief 
discussion with one black-clad anarchist, on the topic of whether 
Maoists and anarchists are on opposite sides of the barricades. 
Although anarchists cannot be party members, MIM certainly does 
not place all anarchists (self-described or not) in the camp of 
the enemy. Indeed, many have and will make important contributions 
to the revolutionary anti-imperialist and socialist movements here 
in Amerika.

Differences between these better anarchists often amount to 
important debates among friends (people interested in MIM's 
positions on classic questions like the Spanish revolution and the 
Kronstadt uprising should check out MIM Theory #8). But in the 
imperialist countries there is a trend of so-called anarchists who 
take their dogmatic anti-hierarchy to extremes, and end up with a 
lame mix of identity "politics" and misanthropy. Many of these 
people are attracted by the individualist trappings of anarchism, 
without absorbing a deeper commitment to overthrowing group 
oppression. They cast aspersion on anybody taking political 
leadership -- including the better anarchists. This kind of 
"anarchist" we can do without.



Notes:

1. V. I. Lenin, "Imperialism and the Split in Socialism," in: 
Collected Works, Moscow: Progress Publishers, Vol. 23, 1963-1970.

2. V. I. Lenin, "Speech on the Terms of Admission to the Communist 
International July 30," in: Collected Works, Moscow: Progress 
Publishers, Vol. 31, 1960, pp. 248-249.