If we believe what is going on at www.2changetheworld.info,
a former member of Bob Avakian's Revolutionary Union (RU) has
connected the "RCP-USA"'s stand against busing children in 
Boston in 1974 to integrate schools to the question of the "masses"
and the labor aristocracy.

The "RCP-USA" 's predecessor RU called to "smash busing" in 1974
in Boston, where various neo-Nazi demagogues had geared up
the most backward section of Boston to oppose integrated schools.
Busing was a court-ordered solution to break up the segregation
of schools and prevent tax dollars being applied in a 
racially discriminatory way in education.

The reasoning of the RU was that busing was a "reformist" approach.
Of course, it is true, busing was a reformist approach.

Now I want to say that it's one thing to say that you want
Black children to have the option of both Black nationalist
schools and properly integrated schools. That's called being
for self-determination.

It's another thing to do what the "RCP-USA"'s predecessor did
then openly and what it has been doing in other guises since that 
time. (There was a self-criticism eventually.)

We all know that mousnonya@yahoo.com who posts frequently on this
list has admitted to playing with Nazi fire. I don't know if
s/he ever organized demonstrations whose slogans would be the 
same as the Nazis'. That is what the RU did.

Opportunists throughout the imperialist countries tell us they
cannot take the strategic and tactical implications of the MIM
line, even if it is scientifically correct. We've heard it many 
times, but do these opponents of science ever stop to think about
the consequences of living without Marxist science (usually
while still claiming to be Marxist in the 
frequent but worst possible case).

The MIM opponents say there is a massive multinational proletariat
with false consciousness. Nonetheless, this false consciousness
is not supposed to prevent the stirrings of the multinational
proletariat. In fact, there must be some evidence that the 
alleged white proletariat has some political thrust against the 
system or either most of Marxism is wrong or the analysis of the
alleged white proletariat is wrong.

What ends up happening in the imperialist countries that have
not had a communist revolution in 100 years since Lenin's 
"What Is To Be Done?" is that reactionary 
and parasitic phenomenon become
relabelled as stirrings of the alleged multinational proletariat.
That is inevitable as long as the underlying class analysis is wrong.
The "left" stunt assuming a revolutionary class with
predominantly revolutionary interests led to the Boston 1974 stance
of the RU to "smash busing." The RU wanted us to picture the
Archie Bunkers rising up in revolution if properly led against
reformism. Hah.

The left-face of the underlying
revisionism on the class structure will attempt stunts 
to bring forward the nascent consciousness of the supposed white
proletariat, but in fact what will be accomplished is sparking
fascism. The right-face of the underlying revisionism will
merely spark paralysis and social-democracy--which also stirs up
fascism. Thus there will be a lack of concrete analysis of economic
struggles, or a tailing of certain struggles, like the "RCP-USA" 's
tailing of reactionary anti-NAFTA struggles.

That's the criticism. What is the replacement? Now imagine that
you are in 1974 in Boston. You have already seen that the
vast majority of whites is labor aristocracy thanks to a 
MIM Thought class integrating Maoism with u.$. conditions you took.
In fact, you believe that a whole stage of the dictatorship
of the proletariat will be necessary before whites can
be cleansed of the material conditions that lead them to fascism
and national chauvinism spontaneously. Do you expect a slogan 
like "Smash Busing!" to be appropriate and spark a revolutionary 
movement? Yes, you do, but a revolution for fascism. You quickly 
take the comrades proposing "Smash Busing!" to the nearest bar
to talk to them about materialism and if need be, drink them
under the table before they put forward such an embarassing line.

Now imagine you are in the "CP-USA" and you have just heard for
the umpteenth time that you should support Democrats against
Republicans, based on Republicans' open hostility to unions.
Do you keep quiet? Do you end up saying more or less the same thing
while opposing Democrats? Or do you realize that the "CP-USA"
is labor aristocracy politics and that is why their position
is no good. The MIM line on the labor aristocracy keeps you out
of "CP-USA" trouble. Instead of talking endlessly about lay-offs
and agitating for resentment against outsourcing, you look
at other issues that do not lead directly to Le Pen.

Whether social-democratic politics that lead to Le Pen or
RU politics that lead to Le Pen, the common denominator is the
wrong analysis of the class structure. The real lesson is
not that the "Smash Busing" campaign was some kind of tactical
mistake by the RU. It was an inevitable expression of 
the underlying analysis of the class structure.

--maoist3@yahoo.com for the Maoist Internationalist Movement