Different views on independent political action

Scan page 7

Ed Ott:

This month's FORUM section is devoted to a discussion/debate on the Rainbow Coalition and the perspectives for independent political action in this country.

As in previous issues, we have invited leaders and activists in the movements for social change, who do not necessarily agree with us, to express their views. Our goal in this section is to encourage a wide-ranging discussion on subjects of interest to all those involved in the unions, the antiwar movement, and other social protest movements.

In this issue we are presenting the views of Ed Ott, labor activist in New York City; Terry Bouricius, leader of the Progressive Coalition in Vermont and member of Burlington's city council; and Joe Ryan, staffwriter for Socialist Action.

In addition we are including letters to the editor by John Trinkl, an associate of The Guardian newspaper and one of the coordinators of the recent West Coast Conference on Socialism and Activism; Erwin Knoll, editor of the Progressive magazine; and Lucy Rideout, a reader in Berkeley, Calif. These letters are accompanied by a response by the editor of Socialist Action.-THE EDITORS Rainbow iș inconsistent with building a labor-party formation. We want an independent political party. That is needed. There is no disagreement on that.

In fact, one of the positive things about the Rainbow is that it may split the AFL-CIO leadership within the Democratic Party. You've already got several national labor leaders who, for whatever reason, are on the national board of the Rainbow. And that sends a very clear message inside the labor movement that there is the need for a discussion.

We must realize that there is the potential for sharper political discussion in the unions, using the Rainbow as the vehicle. I think that we can raise the need for a labor party if we can get serious political discussion going in the labor movement. That is certainly part of my own agenda.

S.A.: You have stated that it is necessary to go beyond united-front type coalitions like the one that arose against U.S. intervention in Vietnam. What, in your opinion, are the limitations of these coalitions?

Ott: I think there are some practical problems for the the left in working within the antinuclear, solidarity, and anti-intervention movements. If you look at these movements from 1975 on, they are movements that go up and down in terms of their numbers, but never sink identifiable roots in the community.

Most people in those movements believe-and I think correctly-that they are expressing the views of the majority of people in this country when they fight for peace and disarmament and against U.S. policy in Central America. Yet they remain the political minority.

The people who advocate a united-front strategy have failed to consolidate these movements into any organizational or political form.

In addition, the advocates of united-front coalitions have failed to build the left. If anything, the revolutionary left has diminished in size and influence and is unable to lead mass forces in opposition to the government's policies in Central America or on nuclear weapons.

We don't have enough of a mass movement to make the political process respond to us by putting people on the street. Certainly, in the labor movement, if there are any strikes going on they are largely defensive. They are not of the nature that the powers-that-be are going to notice them and call for reform.

If there was a mass movement out there, the Democratic Party would not be coming to the conclusion that the answer to its problems is to drift to the right. There would be a real attempt to offer reform.

But today we're no threat. We've got to find a way to hook up with the masses somewhere.

The debate around the Rainbow is key. It has made me alter my views, although I am hesitant about the Rainbow because I don't know if it will get it together. The Rainbow could easily be a potential not realized.

But if it does take off organizationally, you're going to see some real fireworks. It's going to help revitalize the left, the real left. We'll be able to engage in some real politics and affect events and agendas, which we are not doing today. ¡T ACTION 7