Why I didn't sign the 'transparency pledge' of DSA national leadership candidates

[The Democratic Socialists of America is holding their convention in Atlanta August 1-4. As I've already explained, I am running for the group's National Political Committee. The majority of other NPC candidates have signed a Transparency Pledge, but I refused to sign. Following is what I posted in the internal DSA Discussion Board explaining my decision. I will add that although I raise a number of issues with the pledge, just the first one was more than enough for me to reject it.]

Patronizing tokenization
The pledge commits signers to ensuring that "all text is translated into spanish within a reasonable timeframe." That's bunk: it is not going to happen. I'm a professional translator and interpreter. I guarantee you: the cost is prohibitive and the product is worthless. We have no use for it.

Language justice for Spanish-dominant people is an extremely important, serious matter that the resolution I wrote on orienting to the Latinx communities barely takes the first baby step in broaching. And it is not a question of translation, but of creating spaces where Latinx people --and especially immigrants and the sons and daughters of immigrants -- feel at home.

I can't possibly express my disappointment that concern about the Latino community has been expressed this way, through patronizing tokenization, nor how much I resent having to write something like this once again.

Transcription is not the way to get highly accessible transparency
The translation promise is put in the context of "Ensure that all audio communication is transcribed, and all text is translated into spanish within a reasonable timeframe." Well, everything said in a meeting is "audio communication." Is this serious? A day-long meeting will produce a book-length transcript (+/- 50,000 words).

And does this include translating the transcript of every meeting? Both the transcript and the translation are very expensive undertakings and by far not the best way of guaranteeing transparency.

One thing that could be done instead is to have a good quality video transmission and recording of the meeting. This means multiple mics, an audio board or mixer, multiple cameras (2 or 3) to have a good view of the speaker, and use of a computer program like Vmix that basically gives you the capacity of a small TV control room. It might cost a couple of thousand dollars for the equipment.

And, yes, it is possible and not that hard. We do it every day at Radio Información. You do need trained people, but tons of students are learning this in college.

Wrong-headed or misworded provisions
I disagree with "Ensure final meeting agendas are published no less than 72 hours prior to the meeting." I have no problem with updated agendas going out three days before, but the "final agendas" should be those voted by the NPC itself at the beginning of the meeting. I would refuse to be locked in or censored by whatever the agenda-makers decide is worth discussing.

I also object to "Refrain from holding NPC/SC calls, votes, or other discussions of official business outside of official NPC/SC meeting settings." A National Political Committee has to react to real-world politics, a role the current committee has failed to fulfill. That is going to mean holding meetings on short --even very short-- notice or continuing to abdicate that responsibility. Since the statement doesn't make it clear, I don't know if that falls outside the "settings" the email refers to.

I can't support "Hold office hours remotely for 2 to 4 hours each month, which are scheduled at least two weeks in advance and published to membership" without a lot more being said. We are not officers individually empowered to deal with matters. Our function is as members of a committee. There would need to be strict guidelines, mechanisms and safeguards that all matters that properly belong before the committee are communicated to the entire committee. And let's not be disingenuous: everyone knows that certain NPC members have used their positions to build caucuses and uncaucuses. [We have one internal grouping called "Build" that claims not to be a caucus but has resolutions and candidates before the convention].

And I can't "Commit to the work being done by the membership to improve the grievance process and handle those in a timely manner." without knowing which members are being referred to or what improvements they propose. Otherwise, it is just a blank check.

The elephant in the room: factionalism
I believe the real motive for the pledge is trying to do something about the paralysis and lack of transparency that has resulted from factionalism in the NPC. Other points were added --like the translation point-- in an effort to face up to the blatant failures of the previous NPC.

Transparency measures are very much needed but as I tried to illustrate with the video proposal above, there are other solutions that have not been analyzed. A hastily thrown together pledge drafted by a small number of comrades is likely to be flawed. These things need to be seriously analyzed in a process that is open to the entire membership, in order to develop and refine proposals.

The previous NPC was completely irresponsible in failing to deal with issues like transparency, dues distribution, regionalization, the structure of the national leadership, language justice and many others.

Serious proposals for a convention in 2020
In my opinion, except for amendment 15 enlarging the size of the NPC, ALL of the resolutions on structure, dues, etc., should be tabled to the incoming NPC with a mandate to form open, broad-based commissions to draw together ideas and create one or more proposals in each area for a convention a year from now to consider.

We will clearly need a convention then anyways to decide what to do about the fall election, and if we decide to actively intervene, to organize and mobilize for that effort.

I make an exception for amendment 15 to enlarge the NPC. It may not be ideal but it is the most direct, immediate measure we have available in an attempt to prevent factionalism from dominating the incoming NPC the way it has the past one, and to make it more representative.

The pledge I want: dissolve the factions
The pledge I would have liked to have supported is one demanding that all the factions --including Build-- dissolve. I call them factions because that is what they are: highly structured membership organizations seeking to put their people in the leadership and thereby impose their politics as the politics of the national organization.

You might say that doesn't happen in the DSA but I contend there is no other explanation for the failure of national DSA to deal adequately with what Trump has made the top ongoing political issue in the country, immigration, and the failure of our national organization to reach out to Latinos, the largest oppressed minority. It is a reflection of the narrow, economist, class-reductionist politics of the leading faction in the NPC.

I think comrades who want to advocate a particular point of view should function instead as an ideological current, putting forward their ideas through a web site or blog, maybe with an editorial board but without an elected leaderships that serves as a board or executive committee for the group, membership requirements, bylaws, polls and elections and all the rest of it.

The organized factions and their paralyzing squabbling are alienating big sections of the membership: it needs to stop or we are going to pay a very heavy price, and possibly destroy the DSA as it exists now.

Why I am running for the DSA's NPC

[The Democratic Socialists of America are holding their national convention in Atlanta August 2-4. I am a candidate in the elections for the DSA National Political Committee. This is a leaflet I wrote for the convention to explain why I am running.]

• Make immigrant and refugee rights a national priority
• Publish a Spanish website and orient to Latinx communities
• Focus on smaller cities, the South and Southwest
• Oppose U.S. wars and military bases abroad
• Transparent, participatory and democratic functioning
• Create an inclusive socialist movement for the 21st Century

José G. Pérez, NPC candidate

I am running for the NPC in support of two resolutions, one on making defense of immigrant and refugees a national priority and the other on orienting to the Latinx communities beginning with creating a website in Spanish.

The DSA needs to focus on working with people of color and their organizations, understanding that our role is to support, not supplant, the struggles of oppressed peoples themselves.

This also implies orienting to the South and Southwest where the majority of people of color live. It means taking conditions there into account in our national policies. The electoral policy, for example, says nothing about giving non-socialist candidates critical support. It ignores important battles, like for control of state legislatures ahead of reapportionment in 2021. The policy works for heavily Democratic cities, but not for smaller cities, rural areas or the South.

Yet the South and Southwest are essential to transformative change in the United States: the reactionaries have to be fought and defeated where they are strongest.

And a focus on the South means the global South also. International solidarity should be a hallmark of our organization. We must demand lifting the blockade on Cuba, independence for Puerto Rico, an end to the economic attacks on Venezuela, immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, and dismantling of the network of U.S. military bases that have spread across the globe like a cancer.

The NPC should function as a political leadership, not just an administrative body. We need to defend and expand our place in national politics. The NPC should encourage chapters to take initiatives in fights like the defense of the “squad” of four righteous Congresswomen of color against Trump’s diatribes by protesting at Republican headquarters or confronting Congressional Republicans at town halls during the August recess.

But consolidating the DSA also requires participation, transparency and democracy. Issues like dues sharing, creating regional structures, electoral tactics and national priorities should all have been handled by creating wide-open ways for members to take part in thinking them through together to come up with one or more options for the convention to consider.

The outgoing NPC’s inaction has led to an unwieldy set of resolutions that have neither been tested by, nor benefited from, a multifaceted discussion.

Finally, I am running against factionalism. We need to channel our discussions and collaboration through structures and spaces which are open to everyone in the DSA.

Members have a right to form caucuses, but caucuses carry a price. Separate discussion lists, private zoom calls, by-invitation-only conventions, “whipping the votes” through one-sided phone conversations, these practices undermine the cohesion of the DSA and can even compromise the integrity of the organization.

And we should remember we are not a consolidated organization. We did not find most of the people who joined in the last three years: they found us. And like them, there are tens of thousands more who just haven’t paid dues yet.

We have to bring together all those comrades to create the socialist movement of the 21st century, and we need everybody's participation to achieve it.

About José G. Pérez
I am an immigrant from Cuba and a life-long socialist, but a relatively new member of the DSA. I am the Treasurer of the Atlanta Chapter and a member of the National Immigrant Rights Working Group Steering Committee. 

Throughout my life I have been involved most of all with Latinx communities. Since 2002, I have been associated with the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights (GLAHR), and currently I produce and co-host "Hablemos con Teodoro," a daily 2-hour news, analysis and call-in show on Radio Información, a streaming station founded by people from GLAHR.
I have worked as a journalist both inside and outside the movement. Until the mid-1980s, when I moved to Nicaragua for several years during the Sandinista Revolution, I was editor of the Spanish-language socialist magazine Perspectiva Mundial. Before helping to launch Radio Información in 2012, I worked at CNN en Español for two decades. I am also an accredited translator and interpreter.
Hatuey's Ashes is my blog. You can check out “Hablemos con Teodoro,” at facebook.com/RadioInformacion.

A discussion on a proposed 'Open Borders' resolution for the DSA convention

[Today I received the link to a "Resolution on Open Borders" posted on Medium that is being proposed for the DSA Convention. As I explain in the comment below that I posted to Medium, while I share the sentiment behind the proposal, I think presenting open borders as a demand, rather than as an aspiration, is a mistake.

[It should not be demanded of countries that are victims of imperialism because abolition of their border controls and defenses would facilitate attacks against them, primarily from the United States. Yet viewed solely as a demand on the U.S. government, it not only would  be impractical but also lead to victimization of refugees and other immigrants in Europe who likely would be expelled and deported to the United States. And in the fight for immigrant and refugee rights, it would take the focus away from the fight for legalization of the undocumented and accepting Central American refugees.]

I very much agree with the sentiment and much of what this resolution says, but I think it suffers from a one-sidedness and lack of precision that would be very unfortunate for the organization to apply -- even though, again, I completely agree with the sentiment.

What do I mean by "one-sidedness?" I think this captures it:

Whereas border and immigration enforcement are tools of white supremacy, capitalism and imperialism

What is wrong with that?

• Well, are Cuba's borders a tool of "imperialism" or rather a barrier to imperialism? 
• Should Venezuela not have enforced its borders against the "aid caravan" that Washington was pushing to legitimize "President" Juan Guaidó? 
• Are we really for Iran not defending its borders against American Imperialism's Fifth Fleet and CentCom troops? 
• Do we think Yemen would really be better off if the savagely barbarous medieval family dictatorship of the Sauds were allowed to invade and take over the country?

I know the comrades will answer, "that's not what we meant." Of course not. But it's what the text says:

Be it resolved that DSA supports the demand for open borders
Be it resolved that DSA supports the the uninhibited transnational free movement of people....
Be it resolved that DSA recognizes and reflects our support for open borders in our evaluations and endorsement of political campaigns.

Some comrades will respond, "C'mon José, we're in the United States, nobody will think we're talking about some other country's borders."

But if that what was meant, that is what should have been said, if for no other reason that to avoid distracting polemics. (And even then, applied only to the United States, I don't think it is right, as I will explain further down).

But first, as to what "nobody will think," that's strictly from the perspective of an "American" (i.e., someone who indentifies solely as being "United Statesian," to use what would be the English equivalent of the Spanish word "estadounidense.")

But there are tens of millions of us born in or descended from Latin America who have a very different set of lenses through which we look at the world.

As Latinos in the United States we demand we be treated as "Americans," that our undiminished human, civil and political rights as members of U.S. society be respected.

Yet at the same time many of us identify with the sentiments expressed by Malcolm X in his famous 1964 speech, "The ballot or the bullet."

No, I'm not an American. I'm one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So, I'm not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag-waver -- no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare. 

And then, as in this clip from the 2015 Latin Grammy Awards, we all sing together the song by Los Tigres del Norte, "And if we look at the centuries, we are more American than the children of the Anglo-Saxons."

So Latinos --especially immigrants-- will look at this demand very differently than most Anglos would.

But there is also a more immediate reason. This is not a demand raised by the immigrant rights movement, not even the Latino immigrant-based left wing of the movement. And it takes the focus away from where it should be, which is on the most immediate victims of U.S. policy: the undocumented already in the country and their families, as well as the refugees at our southern border.

Another immediate reason not to adopt the wording in this resolution is the election campaign. Obviously, given what I've said, I'm not for injecting this demand into electoral politics.

Although I think the way he has argued for his position is narrow and even reactionary, I agree with Bernie Sanders in not calling for open borders.

The U.S. unilaterally abolishing all immigration restrictions would simply be an invitation to the European imperialist countries to forcibly deport to the United States all refugees and even non-immigrants their Trumpites don't want, i.e., facilitate a generalized "ethnic cleansing" that, without a vastly broader transformation of U.S. society, would be impossible to handle and further victimize those expelled from Europe.

You might say, well, we won't accept people who are being forced to come to the United States but that implies border controls, not open borders.

And more practically, it is simply not a demand that American working people, including most of the tens of millions who view themselves as sympathetic to socialist ideas, can possibly understand. Trump uses this to demagogically claim that his critics want to flood the country with cartel hit men, human traffickers and drug dealers, and the way to counter that is to point to the thousands of refugees, minors and families, who are in fact arriving at the border.

While I agree with the sentiment of "open borders," I think it is better expressed as a desire for no borders, as in "for a world without borders."

I think it was a weakness of my resolution that it did not deal with the issue, and have actually drafted an addition to it but have not added it yet because I had already circulated the resolution for signatures without it. I am hoping after the June 2 deadline for submitting resolutions and verifying the signatures there will be some guidance on whether you can refine your own resolution and how.

That addition would be a new point IV under "Therefore be it resolved" and would say:

The Democratic Socialists of America reaffirm that the aspiration of the socialist movement is a world without borders, while recognizing that slogans that point to this ideal, such as “Open Borders,” are not current demands of the immigrant rights movement.

It might seem very modest but I actually think it is important to add it, because I very much agree with the idea in the "open  borders" resolution that

DSA develops political education resources to be shared with chapters across the country to deepen and broaden the understanding of the demand for open borders and how to fight for it. 

Finally, I want to express my gratitude to the comrades who worked on this resolution because I think it is very important to have an open but comradely discussion on these sorts of issues and I believe that the end result in this and many other cases will be converging towards a more balanced and nuanced position, and even if not, a better understanding of the differing points of view in the organization.

Why is the DSA so white? Does working for Bernie make it harder to change this?

My friend and comrade, the chair of our Atlanta DSA chapter, just caused a shitstorm on twitter with by saying that the DSA focusing on the Bernie campaign is not good for a lot of chapters, especially in the South, where it gets in the way of important work we needed to be doing to change the group's composition.

I'm not sure I agree with saying that it is getting in the way but I absolutely agree that it does not get us one flea-hop closer to changing the DSA's composition.

And a big part of the reason I don't think it gets in the way is that I don't think the Bernie work is making us look like a Bernie organization. It is a confirmation that we are in fact a Bernie organization. Our saving grace is that we are not just a Bernie organization.

The reality is that the DSA’s composition is disproportionately white, male, millennial and college-educated. Therefore, both comrades and critics say, we must be doing something grievously wrong and must extirpate the toxic white supremacist and patriarchal atmosphere that has led to this result. 

But the DSA’s spectacular growth over the past three years should give us new insight. We say we “recruited” tens of thousands of people, but that’s not true. They joined, and they joined through no fault or merit of our own. 

Their joining had nothing to do with the tenor and culture of the DSA Local in their area. And they are precisely disproportionately college educated white male millennials. That is the composition that social processes much broader than our own internal culture imposed on us.

You might say that makes perfect sense. Bernie is white, male, conforms to gender norms and so we get Bernie Boys. But last June a young Puerto Rican woman, a member of the DSA, pulled the biggest political upset in many a season. A thousand people joined the DSA the next day. Another 9,000 in the month after her victory. Was it a flood from the Latinx community? Not in Atlanta.

Since then the face of democratic socialism has also been the one that graced the cover of TIME magazine a few weeks ago. She has higher name recognition than most of the Democratic presidential candidates. I don’t believe that in recent decades, there has been a political figure from our Latino community that is as well known and popular as she is among us.

Has that made a difference in the composition of those joining?  I think if it were so, we would have certainly heard.

The starting point of our discussion has to be the fact that the composition of the DSA is about American society, not just the DSA.

You might go “Pfew, that’s a relief!” But you shouldn’t.

The problem is exactly the same as if it were completely about the DSA. Only now we know two things.

Thing one: It is mostly not our "fault" because of what we do or don't do. It is much worse than that. We are much more a reflection of our white supremacist, patriarchal, and class-exploitative society than we think. Our current composition has been imposed on us from the outside by powerful social forces over which we have no control.

Thing two: we have to overcome this just the same. Otherwise there is no point to the DSA. And I believe it will be much harder and more painful than we think.

For the DSA convention: Resolution on orienting to Latinx communities

[I drafted the following resolution for submission to the convention of the Democratic Socialists of America to be held in Atlanta Aug. 2-4. DSA convention rules require 50 signatures from members  for the resolution to be considered, so I urge DSA members who agree with it to sign it. The links to the signature form can be found here on the DSA's members-only discussion board.]  

Whereas: The Latinx community is now the largest oppressed minority in the country, with 18% of the country’s population, some 60 million people, and concentrated among young people. One in five millennials is classified as “Hispanic” by the census bureau; among post-millennials, one in four.

Whereas: The United States has the second largest number of Spanish-speaking people in the world after Mexico, some 55 million people over the age of five. Some 41 million are considered native speakers as that is the main language used in their homes, a number comparable to native speakers in Colombia, Argentina and Spain  itself.

Whereas: Due to a common oppression and modern communications and media, as well as language and common cultural elements, this community has developed a common identity as shown by the immigrant rights protests in the spring of 2006. It was the most massive wave of sustained protests ever, anywhere.

Whereas: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a millennial Puerto Rican woman and democratic socialist, has become by far the single most prominent Latinx political figure in the community and media, which presents extraordinary opportunities to increase the presence and influence of our movement in that community.

Whereas: Addressing the Latinx community in the language most people of Latin American origin or descent use at home is not  just a needed practical measure, but a political statement of utmost importance given the size of the DSA and its presence in national politics.

Whereas: A socialist transformation of the United States is impossible without the massive, militant participation of Latinx working people.

Therefore be it resolved:

1. The incoming National Political Committee is instructed to devote all necessary resources and attention to guaranteeing that a Spanish-language web site of our organization is launched within 90 days after the close of this convention.
2. The web site will have both translations and material directly generated for it under the leadership of an editorial board.
3. The incoming National Political Committee is instructed to initiate the organization of this editorial board.
4. The board should include not just Latinx comrades, but as diverse a group as possible of other comrades, especially those who have a working command of the language, even if not fluency, but not precluding the inclusion of others.
5. In collaboration with the National Political Committee, this editorial board shall also have the additional responsibilities of promoting the development of our work with Latinx communities, establishing relations with organizations based in the community, and promoting collaboration and the exchange of information between Locals involved in this work. 
6. These additional responsibilities are not permanent but a transitional step to the creation by the NPC of a working group or other body focused  on work in the Latinx communities and its issues, or some other modality for promoting and coordinating this activity. 

For the DSA convention: Resolution on immigrant and refugee rights

[I drafted the following resolution for submission to the convention of the Democratic Socialists of America to be held in Atlanta Aug. 2-4. DSA convention rules require 50 signatures from members  for the resolution to be considered, so I urge DSA members who agree with it to sign it. The links to the signature form can be found here on the DSA's members-only discussion board.]  

Whereas: The status of undocumented immigrants has been reduced to that of an inferior caste that faces official, legalized discrimination much as Blacks did during the era of Jim Crow.

Whereas: The goal of these laws and the deportation machine is not to remove those the ruling class denigrates as “illegal aliens,” but to keep the big majority here but “illegal” -- bereft of rights so they can more easily be superexploited and used to attack the rights and drive down the wages and standard of living of all working people.

Whereas: Donald Trump has made attacks on immigrants the centerpiece of his electoral messages, administration policies and efforts to develop a nativist and white supremacist movement.

Whereas: Excluding immigrants from programs like Medicare for All or free tuition to public colleges will undermine the programs themselves and turn them into tools for discrimination.

Whereas: The super-exploitation of poor countries by rich countries, especially by the United States, has created crisis throughout Asia, Africa and Latin America, leading to wars and failed states. Together with the impact of climate change, this is forcing millions of people to become refugees.

Therefore be it resolved:

The Democratic Socialists of America will make defense of immigrant and refugee rights a top national priority of the organization.

The Democratic Socialists of America commit to internal education on the history and political economy of immigration, and how to argue against right-wing positions and respond to provocations.

The Democratic Socialists of America reaffirm our position that no human being is illegal and that all working and oppressed people are welcome in our organization on an equal basis regardless of immigration or citizenship status.

The Democratic Socialists of America stand for full human and civil rights for all immigrants. We demand:

• The immediate abolition of ICE and an end to the persecution, jailing  and deportation of immigrants.
• Legalization of the undocumented as permanent residents,  the same status other immigrants have, including the right to become citizens if they wish.
• Abolition of all anti-immigrant discriminatory laws including those denying equal access to education and social services.
• An end to the militarization of the U.S. border with México, including tearing down the walls, fences and barriers built under the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations as well as those that may be built under Trump.
• Respect for the rights of refugees, especially the principle of non-refoulement, that is, not returning people to places that they are fleeing from.
• An end to the Muslim Ban or other discrimination in the issuance of visas on the basis of the dominant religion, race or ideology of its government.

The Democratic Socialists of America support:

• The struggle of immigrant communities, including around partial, tactical demands such as restoring DACA for “Dreamers” (people brought here when they were minors), as well as against other aspects of their oppression, such as language discrimination.
• The right of immigrants and their communities to lead this struggle and determine its tactics, including in choosing to focus on individual cases, partial demands or specific concessions.
• Diverse initiatives and a multiplicity of tactics, such as moral and material solidarity with refugees on the border, visits to immigration prisoners and help for their families, work in coalitions, as well as militant, direct-action protests and other types of demonstrations.
• Putting pressure on all candidates claiming to oppose Trumpism, especially those who say they speak for working people, to take a firm and unequivocal stance in favor of immigrants, refugees and their communities.

My all-time favorite post: Ghosts of the SWP past -- Llover sobre mojado (1999)

At the end of the last century, as I was just shy of 50, I viewed my adult life as divided into two parts: There were the 15 years I'd spent as a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and an almost equal time since I had left, the first three spent in Nicaragua, then settling down in Atlanta with an English woman I had met in Nicaragua just after I left the SWP. 

In Atlanta I had wound up at CNN, despite having made a decision to abandon journalism. I was free-lancing as a translator and in June of 1989 was offered three weeks of work as a vacation replacement writer at CNN's Spanish-language division. They liked me and so I stayed. 

The events recounted here took place a decade after I first started at CNN, when my previous life as a Trotskyist had long receded into the past and I had made a new life as a parent and television producer. And on a Saturday in August of 1999, my previous life came back to haunt me.

I posted this on the Marxism mailing list that had a lot of former SWP members, or people familiar with the group, as subscribers. I apologize that now people and things I name will seem obscure, but explaining them would only get in the way.

So there I am, outside CNN Center on a very slow Saturday smoking a cigarette when I see a familiar, smiling face.

"Nancy? Nancy Ronsenstock?"

I struggle to recall the name from a life long past.

"José," she says, smiling brightly. She's wearing a badge that says, SWP Trade Union Conference.

We start to catch up. "Your pamphlet is still a best seller," she says, meaning one in support of Puerto Rican independence I wrote a quarter of a century ago. She's quite at ease, friendly as ever.

Turns out the SWP is having some sort of national trade union fraction meeting at the complex where CNN center is located. They're on lunch break.

I walk back into the huge central courtyard at CNN Center, occupied by tables, sort of a large mall food court, and there they are, two at one table, four at another: the ghosts of Trotskyism past. Standing Fast. Eating lunch.

I was overcome by a wave of nostalgia. There was Cappy, looking quite the prole with his neatly trimmed, salt-and-pepper beard, who'd been kind enough to visit me in Sarasota (he was in Tampa) when I was just an itsy-bitsy trot neonate, having joined the YSA as an at-larger at the end of 1970. With him I went to my first national SMC conference, in 1971, which was what really drew me into the YSA. And there was John Staggs, looking barely a couple of years older than last time I saw him. What was he doing at a trade union fraction meeting, shouldn't he be in the print shop?

And Connie, who used to set all the type for Perspectiva, slim as ever, her blonde hair all gray but coiffed as ever in a style I associate with Junior High and American Bandstand. Jerry F., who had been my colleague in the YSA National Office and his diminutive long-time companion Patty. Susan, who'd been my prize Spanish Student at the second session of the SWP leadership school in 1980. And Peter and Nancy and many --well in reality, not so many -- faces from the past I'd hardly expected to have seen together in one place.

Warmest in her greeting was Olga, giving me a big embrace with her warm Chicana heart. Coldest, Doug Jenness, for many years my editor on  The Militant, who expressed --was it alarm?-- to see me in Atlanta. "I'd heard you were in Miami," he said quite pointedly. Where gusanos like me belonged, I thought. "No, I've been working here on Mr. Turner's farm for 10 years." It's safe Doug. This is just coincidence.

I talked to as many of the comrades as seemed inclined to chatting. Some were in a hurry. Late for the meeting, time to reconvene. Others --most-- were happy to take a moment for an old-timer.

"Do you still read the Militant," several asked. Must be time for the fall sub drive, I though.

"Yes, every week, I see it on the internet." Well, only a slight exaggeration. I do visit the gopher once or twice a month, usually. "Oh, I didn't realize we were on the internet," one said. She doesn't have a computer. I had a vision of her lighting a Coleman lantern as the sun set. "You know, Joe, we really might look into getting electricity put in. Even many of the comrades have it."

Things are going great, they all said. I smile appropriately as they recount some of their recent accomplishments, selling the Militant at this strike and that plant gate.

"That's great ... that's wonderful ... that's fantastic," I respond.

But no one has any stories to tell about their fresh batch of new recruits.

It was heartbreaking. I recalled the names of half the people with the white, stick-on badges, recognized the faces of virtually all the rest. There were three, perhaps five too young for me to have known them fifteen years ago. A paunchy, balding. graying crew -- though, or so it seemed, the years had been kinder to most of them than they had to me.

Going back to work, I imagined, looking down on the seating area of the food court from the second floor balcony, that I was some comrade who'd left in 1950, reappearing again in 1965. At this sort of meeting they would have seen, yes, the forty or fifty old timers. But sprinkled among them would be a baby-faced Jack Barnes and Mary Alice and Betsey Stone and the Britton brothers and Doug, Peter and Barry from Boston, Dan Styron before he killed himself, and so many others.

These are the last of the "Bolshevik-Leninists," I thought, looking down at them. The last of the Trotskyists. Heirs to the glorious October, keepers of the flame in the dark night of betrayal.

Then I thought better. The last of the Bolshevik Leninists died in a concentration camp decades ago. These, I reminded myself, had been a new generation of radicals, born of the post World War II prosperity, and now here because they are stuck with a decision made a quarter century ago to become something they were not, "worker Bolsheviks." When what they were, --American rebels-- seemed not quite enough to achieve their dreams.

It reminded me of seeing in a college labor history class a documentary about the Wobblies, including filmed interviews with some of the old timers. The last scene was of them at their Chicago headquarters, putting a new edition of their newspaper, the Industrial Worker to bed.

I remembered feeling a tremendous sadness as the announcer highlighted the surprising youth and vigor of these retirees. "But there are no young Wobblies," he said. "These are the last of the fellow workers.  Their kind we will see no more." I was determined that it not be so, wrote to Chicago, and was a member for a few months. But it was just a sentimental gesture. Their day was past. Their work was done.

I went back to my work, putting into Spanish a documentary series on the Cold War. I'm at the very end, Gorby has signed over the nuclear trigger to Yeltsin, a few mournful bars of the Internationale play over the lowering of the hammer and sickle over the Kremlin for the last time. It is time for Fidel --presented more or less as the last of the Communists-- to say his piece.

I had seen the whole interview with Fidel, not just the excerpts, and knew what had been left out, not just what had been put in. Asked by his American interviewer who had won the Cold War, he answered without hesitation. "You did. The United States did." It had been brought to mind by one of the comrades, who talked to me about some book by Jack Barnes, "U.S. Imperialism lost the Cold War."

That, I thought, would be a much better world to live in. I played the tape, with the excerpt from Fidel's interview that was in the documentary. Despite everything, he was sure of ultimate victory.

"Why believe that the ideals of socialism, which are so generous and appeal so much to solidarity and fraternity, will one day disappear? What would prevail -- selfishness, individualism, personal ambitions? That will not save the world; of that I am absolutely convinced."

I finished what I was doing, ejected the tape from the machine.

"De eso estoy absolutamente convencido," of that I am absolutely convinced. Fidel's words stayed with me. It is a stock phrase he uses when he speaks of his innermost convictions.

I remembered the first time I had ever seen Fidel in person, 20 years ago, at the inauguration of a theme park for the pioneers, Cuba's children. He had just told them it would be named for Ernesto Guevara, and the pioneers responded with their slogan, "Pioneers for Communism, we will be like Che!"

"And you will be," Fidel responded, "of that I am absolutely convinced."

I walked out of the editing suite where I had been working to the shelves where I keep the tapes and put them away. It was time to go home. I walked out of the facility onto the balcony and looked down. The comrades were now on their dinner break.

These may be the last generation of SWPers, I thought, but not the last of their kind, just as the new generations of American rebels did not call themselves wobblies, but were heirs to the best of that tradition, just the same. The new generation of rebels isn't down here, but it is out there, or will be.

I went down to talk to the comrades. There would be no social at this conference, all Saturday night was taken up by meetings. To everyone I saw I smiled warmly, wished them the best. No hypocrisy there. If dedication to a cause is worth something, these had surely earned the best of luck by it. Soon enough it was time for them to reconvene.

I'd though they'd all gone, when someone came up from behind, and said, "Hello, stranger." I did not know why I hadn't spotted her before, she and I had been lovers, once, briefly, when she had been very young and I only a little older, just enough to make it seem, in her eyes, that I knew everything. Later we were fast friends, until I left the party, when we lost touch.

We talked for quite a while, she told me of her life for 15 years, I, of mine. She'd never understood why I'd left the party, I explained as gently as I could, too gently. She told me of all the exiting strikes and Militant sales, as if I were still a member, just a bit down in morale, or perhaps one considering rejoining.

"Things are really looking up--" and then she added, totally changing her tone,  "I really used to look up to you." She said it lightly, flippantly almost succeeding in hiding her feelings of abandonment and betrayal.

The conversation drifted to what I was doing now. I told her about the cold war series, the flag coming down above the Kremlin, followed by the excerpt of Fidel's interview expressing his faith that, some day, socialism will triumph.

"I hope some kid in Venezuela hears it, and it means something to him."

"Why Venezuela?" she asked.

Really, because it had been on my mind. The day before the bourgeois legislature had tried to reassert itself against the popularly-backed constituent assembly. There had been a very nasty clash outside parliament. I'd noticed the American papers --and CNN in English-- paid it to no attention, but CNN en Español had broadcast a lot of it live, as well as much of a speech by President Chávez defending the Assembly and denouncing the old corrupt political system. But I did not tell her this. I did not want to get into a political discussion of what people should be doing, and why. Least of all with her. I had been her mentor, once. Look where it had led her.

"Just to name a country," I said. "It could have been any of them."

She really had to go, she was late for her meeting. I hug her goodbye. On the way home, I listen to Silvio Rodríguez, on the cassette player. I'd introduced her to Silvio, some of his songs still remind me of her.

By happenstance, the tape I play is one I'd quoted on this list a few days ago, about how socialism was made by plowing the future with old oxen. I hadn't thought then about the first lines of that verse. Now I did.




Salgo y pregunto por un viejo amigo
de aquellos tiempos duramente humanos
pero nos lo ha podrido el enemigo
degollaron su alma en nuestras manos

absurdo suponer que el paraiso
es solo la igualdad las buenas leyes
el sueño se hace a mano y sin permiso
arando el porvenir con viejos bueyes
viejos bueyes.

Valla forma de saber
que aún quiere llover
sobre mojado

Vaya forma de saber
que aún quiere llover
sobre mojado.

* * *

I go out, and ask about an old friend
From those harshly human days
But the enemy has rotted him
They decapitated his soul in our hands

It's absurd to think that paradise
Is just equality and good laws.
The dream is made by hand and without permission
Plowing the future with good oxen, Good oxen.

What a way to find out
That it's going to rain
On what's already wet.*

What a way to find out
That it's going to rain
On what's already wet.

----------------

* "Quiere llover sobre mojado" is a Cuban dicho, or saying, for which I've fruitlessly searched for even a rough equivalent. It can mean slightly different things, of someone stating the obvious, or something happening again, but mostly it captures a feeling that you've been here before, you've gone beyond it, and now you find yourself back here again.