[maoist3@yahoo.com: Below are two posts from the RCP-USA's website discussing its program. After the two posts I will post comments.] http://2changetheworld.info/ Subject: There IS a proletariat in the U.S.! Posted by: rafael on 2002-18-05 00:11 I want to get into the question of whether there is a "proletariat in the U.S." and "how revolutionary is it?" First, lets be clear that the bourgeoisie hides and distorts the real social and economic relations that exist in society. They promote ignorance about the class structure in the U.S. They try to confuse the masses into believing their lies that we live in a "post-industrial" society in which the laboring classes are increasingly "irrelevant," and "small in number," and "marginal to the functioning of society"-- as if society is run by a "few great men," their "bold investments," and the wonders of "new technology." The reality is that the proletariat in the U.S. is part of an "international class of wage-laborers whose labor is the foundation of capitalist production and whose exploitation is the source of capitalist wealth."(Draft p.64) Bob Avakian, in speaking to the fact that there IS a proletariat in the U.S., said that "this is not just an article of faith," but instead it is based on "material reality." Now, this is important. He says that the more social investigation that gets done, the more this "material reality" --that there IS a proletariat-- becomes clear. For example, a great deal of social investigation was carried out as part of the process of forging the new Draft. The Revolutionary Worker ran an article about a group of youth close to the Party who shared their experience of doing social investigation in Los Angeles. They did library research but most importantly they went out to the masses and carried out interviews to find out their life conditions. They took an eye-opening trip through the downtown garment district and did extensive interviews at different factories through out the area. They spoke to unemployed youth and other residents of housing projects. After having in-depth conversations with the masses it became clear that the proletariat in fact does exist. That in the city of LA exists a widening, deepening, hardening divide between the lowest sections of the proletariat, especially proletarians of the oppressed nationalities and immigrant proletarians, and the rest of society. They spoke about being struck by the furniture factory where the women have to clock out when they make a mistake and fix it on their own time. How people are forced to work at these jobs where they do the same small task over and over all day. How people have no opportunity to advance because the boss won't let them learn anything else. Some youth they spoked to talked about the work being really menial and deadening. How peoples lives are on the edge, who don't even make enough to go back to work the next day. Factory and business owners don't care what condition the workers are in-- all they want is for the workers to slave no matter what. And they talked about how this country looks like the Third World, with so many people working as servants for other people, maids, gardeners, nannies etc. Finally a youth who was part of the investigation team said "I feel like the bourgeois glasses have been ripped off my eyes!" Again, through social investigation, and applying the Maoist method, the youth came to understand that there is a section of people here in the "belly of the beast" with "nothing to lose but there chains" and whose intersts lies objectively in making proletarian revolution. So, to quote Bob Avakian again, he said, "the proletariat is a material fact and a potentially material force with world- historic potential - the proletariat can and must still play its role as the leading force and backbone of the revolutionary struggle to transform society." ************************************************** *********** Subject: Some Statistics Posted by: Morpheus on 2002-08-06 18:59 Here are some statistics that I think might be helpful in looking at the question of white workers in the U.S. 1. Poverty Levels In 2000 Census out of 193 million white people 7.5 percent or over 14.5 million people live in what the census defines as poverty. 18% of white households that are headed by a woman are below the poverty level. Over 8 million while people live in extreme poverty making only 50% of the poverty level income. The poverty level income is pretty low -- $17,000 for a family of 4 with two children. This is equivalent to a $8.17 an hour wage for a full time employee working a 40 hour week.) African Americans and Latinos in the US do have much higher poverty rates than whites – 22.1% for African Americans and 21.2% for Latinos. Out of 35.7 million African Americans, 7.9 million are in poverty and out of 33.7 million Latinos 7.1 million are in poverty. 2. Occupation For white people 11.6% are in less skilled blue color and service jobs, 16.6% are skilled blue color and supervisors, 10.7% are in clerical or sales occupations, 24.5% are doctors, lawyers, managers or other professionals, 1% are farmers or farm laborers, 2% are unemployed and 33.6% are not in the labor force. For Black people 23.3 are in less skilled blue color and service jobs, 12.2% are in skilled blue color and supervisors, 14.5% are in clerical or sales occupations, 14.4% are doctors, lawyers, managers or other professionals, .1% are farmers or farm laborers, 4.8% are unemployed and 30.7% are not in the labor force. For Latinos, 25.6 are in less skilled blue color and service jobs, 15.4% are in skilled blue color and supervisors, 10.4% are in clerical or sales occupations, 11.6% are doctors, lawyers, managers or other professionals, 1.7% are farmers or farm laborers, 4% are unemployed and 31.2% are not in the labor force. (Source: Social Stratification in the United States by Stephen J. Rose) Morpheus ************************************************** maoist3@yahoo.com replies for the Maoist Internationalist Movement: The above are two typical examples of the big neo- colonial disconnect in the "RCP-USA"'s response to the MIM line. Again and again they try to refute the fact that the majority of the population is petty- bourgeoisie, with a huge labor aristocracy in the united $tates. But how do they attempt to do that? We've seen them tell individual stories about white workers-- as if even the most unfortunate white persyn's story or ten thousand such stories could amount to a class in a country of 280 million people! ( See for example what Sartre quoting Marx says it takes to form a class.) Next we hear that the "RCP" went out into the garment districts. Well, fine and good, the "RCP- USA" went into the garment districts. When did it prove that the conditions of the Amerikkkan majority are the conditions in the garment districts? And the surplus-value being tossed around in the garment districts comes mainly from what nationality of workers? You could walk around in the garment district for a month straight without asking or noticing. Even the race of the people doing the trade in the garment district could be white, but did you check where the garments came from? And did you only investigate U.$. factories? The "RCP-USA" is so accustomed to USING the proletariat of oppressed nationalities, that when it tries to refute MIM it refers again, to what? The oppressed nationalities and a minority of poor people. The "RCP-USA" thinks it even refuted MIM by posting the statistics above. The "RCP-USA" even went out of its way to post them here. But where in the statistics do they ever talk about the conditions of the majority of Amerikkkans? No where. Instead, the "RCP-USA" talks about relative questions and the minority of people within U.$. borders who are poor, at least by parasitic standards. First of all, we said that our cardinal question holds that the "majority" is not proletarian, especially the overwhelming majority of whites. We did not say there was no "poor" within U.$. borders. Second of all, once again, the "RCP-USA" failed to even ask about the extraction of surplus value. Exploitation is not a matter of relative social standing or government definitions of poverty--at least not for us Marxists. On this point, I do have to point out that MIM holds the "RCP-USA" as a whole responsible for its revisionist line. However, when it comes to arriving at an overall estimation of the surplus- value extraction and where it is coming from and going, the blame has to go principally to people like Bob Avakian and Raymond Lotta for not asking and coordinating answers to the question. It's one thing to be confronted with the question by MIM and honestly realize that you don't know the answer. It's another thing to accept as leaders people who have also not done the same. When you accept those leaders, you also take the blame. The point is that if you yourself have never done much to penetrate the issue of super- exploitation by the united $tates, you better find someone who has. It is the duty of the comrades based in the united $tates to check through what Avakian and Lotta and other party leaders have done. Where did they say how much surplus-value is being extracted? How much is super-profit? Where did it come from? Where did it go? We at MIM can tell you right now that the "RCP-USA" never answered the questions. In contrast, since publishing in a new magazine format, MIM has shown how in an overall way repeatedly and with hard facts that it is simply impossible that all the surplus-value being sucked into the united $tates is not also going to the vast majority of Amerikkkans. MIM has had the experience of walking through many cities and visiting many workplaces and factories, and not just in the united $tates, but you cannot tell just by looking at an object from outside where that object came from. Just because your white friend went shopping at Walmart does not mean the things there are from exploited Amerikkkan workers. Even if you read the fine print on the back of a commodity, like "made in USA," a lot of times the imperialists lie about that in order to get around trade regulations and taxes. Furthermore, just because someone goes to work every day does not mean most of the work that goes into a product actually comes from the persyn or like people who you saw. It is the job of communists, especially those claiming to be leaders, to show how this question can be penetrated. Otherwise, we will always be mistaking appearances for essences. Just imagine the "RCP-USA" comes to power. When the international proletariat asks it about reparations, it will say, "OK we will go conduct an investigation in the garment district" or some neighborhoods of Los Angeles. The "RCP-USA" does not feel any obligation that it is supposed to know the overall question of super-exploitation and just how far reparations have to go. People need to get some experience by looking at commodity production and service work in various places. They need to ask why everything is cheaper coming from certain countries and who benefits from that and how it was arranged. In MIM Notes we have done that for places as far- flung as Detroit, Riga and Hong Kong. We did that in MIM Theory #1. We had a follow-up to some theory aspects of that in MT#2/3. There was a little more in MT#4 and MT#7. MIM Theory #10 was again, like MIM Theory #1 all about the labor aristocracy and again included articles on how you can account for the surplus-value. That was already 1996, six years ago with no parallel investigation by the "RCP-USA." Finally, we went so far as to put a whole book online on the subject and there is no "RCP-USA" response. http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/mt/imp97/index.h tml The kind of investigation they want is to make a "living" endorsement of parasitism. They expect us to be shocked when the millions of labor aristocrats do not come forward to set everybody straight about where the surplus-labor on display at Walmart all came from. They'd rather hear from the "living" labor aristocrats who take credit for the labor of other people. Well there is a living class struggle going on against u.$. exploitation and the surplus-value that finds its way to the Amerikkkan majority, but it would be making "RCP- USA" assumptions to believe we would find most of it in the united $tates or even the sum total of imperialist countries. That is a matter of understanding the living reality of the principal contradiction. MIM has conducted its investigation, and actually we find that a large portion, maybe even most of the population is prepared to admit where its bananas, sugar, coffee and clothing comes from and at what wages. Yes, Amerikkkans do know where their food, clothing and raw materials come from. It's one thing to know that reality and another to expect that these same people will come forward to serve as "living" empirical guideposts for revolutionary theory like the "RCP-USA" says. It requires an act of leadership to put together the pieces that will be available to anyone.