Revolution in the Air: Sixties Radicals turn to Lenin, Mao and Che

Rating:
Summary: Good History of the NCM But Poor Advice to Activists
Review: A must read. This is an ambitious book, although too ambitious for a single volume. There is more than enough material here for two books: a history of the Maoist movement, and then a second book concerning Max Elbaums¡¦s advice to the young activists of today¡¦s mass movements. I liked the first part of the book. I hated the second part, which is tendentious and annoying.

Max Elbaum became the principal leader of Line of March (LOM) after the fall of its charismatic founder, Bruce Oceana. This book is, more or less, the ¡§official¡¨ Line of March history of the New Left, in that it reflects the consensus thinking of Max and his circle of comrades from the defunct LOM who remain engaged in politics and loosely consolidated around their old political line. Their main current project is the ¡§War Times¡¨ newspaper.

The first part of the book is a fair-minded account of the rise of the Maoist parties of the 1970s. This is a story that has not been told before. Max is scrupulously fair in describing the political controversies and the ideological contests between the groups. This is, in my opinion, an important contribution to the history of 1970s activism that will now be accessible to everyone. I wish it had been dealt with in more depth.

The second part, the lessons learned from the New Communist Movement (NCM), represents the consensus post-LOM cadre view on politics, organization, and ideology. These views are presented in the form of ¡§lessons¡¨ Max learned in his analysis of the failures of the New Communist Movement. These lessons happen to be identical to the views that the LOM circle held before Max began work on the book. I did not like this part of the book because I disagree with the analysis.

Oddly, the lessons for the movement, presented at the end of the book, undercut the avowed central thesis of the book¡Xa critique of the ¡§good 1960s/bad 1960s¡¨ thesis that Revolution in the Air overtly attacks but ends up reinforcing! Max¡¦s final summation, in the form of his final advice to today¡¦s activists, is that the New Communist Movement was in fact fatally dogmatic, intolerant, etc. Here in Max¡¦s own words, is his final condemnation of the bad 1960s NCM, as it appears on the last page of his book, ¡§But they became mired in dogmatist orthodoxy and moralistic intolerance, reproducing the worst traits of their predecessors instead of their strengths. They ended up making party building a fetish and constructed only sects.¡¨ P. 338.

The reason, I think, for the disconnect between Max¡¦s intention of criticizing the good/bad 1960s line, but his failure to consistently do so, is the essentially social democratic line on working class organization that Max shares with Todd Gitlin and other non-Marxist critics of the NCM. Max (and the ex-LOM) believes that it is ¡§premature¡¨ to attempt to build Leninist parties when there is no radical mass working class movement that can serve as a corrective to the sterile ideological insularity of a self proclaimed vanguard party. This is a huge problem in a backward superpower like the USA. But what is the value, for today¡¦s activists, of the existing body of ML literature from the last century? Very little value in Max¡¦s view. The repeated criticism of dogmatism, and, especially, Max¡¦s use of the straw man of Stalin¡¦s ¡§Marxism and the National Question¡¨, to dismiss essentially all of Lenin¡¦s contributions to the theory of nations under imperialism, plays to the anti-intellectualism and the anarchist and anti-working class prejudices of many of today¡¦s young activists.

A final criticism of Max¡¦s book about the failure of the left is that it dodges the central issue surrounding the collapse of our movement. That issue is, was Gorbachev right or wrong? It was Gorbachev¡¦s reforms that led to the unraveling of Soviet Communism and shattered the American left too. Revolution in the Air is silent on whether the reforms were a good thing or a bad thing. The book mentions that they happened, that LOM supported Gorbachev, but that is all.

How can a book that purports to provide lessons for today¡¦s activists omit an analysis of the central event in the history of the movement the book chronicles? The answer, I think, is that Max does not have an answer to the Gorbachev question. For the soft left milieu of the ex LOM cadres, ex-CPUSA people like the CoC, and some others, the issue of the collapse of Communism, and especially the role Gorbachev played, remains, ten years after the event, a serious and unresolved ideological issue!

The final sections of the book, and especially the tendentious and, I think, incorrect ¡§lessons¡¨ mar the really interesting early chapters on New Left history. Despite the flaws, this is a must read book. There is no other history of the period that is done as carefully, as fairly, and as well as this one.

Rating:
Summary: Little Insight into Lived Experience
Review: Elbaum begins his book with the insurgent promise of 1968. Together with other forms of rebellion the Tet offensive in Vietnam and Black rebellions in more than 100 cities, with flames reaching six blocks from the Whitehouse, meant that "For several years after 1968 the US could not conduct business as usual." Radicals who were not yet born at this time and who will never have the opportunity to visit the US are often inspired by accounts of this opening in American politics. Malcolm X's biography and George Jackson's prison diary remain, for example, standard reading for many young radicals from Gaza to Johannesburg.

Elbaum goes on to show how many young people radicalised in the late 60's moved towards a range of small Leninist organisations that he collectively identifies as the New Communist Movement. This new movement distinguished itself from the American Communist Party by its focus on the third world, and often China in particular, (as oppose to the USSR) and by its commitment to anti-racism in the US and internationalism abroad. Elbaum estimates that by the mid 70's the number of cadres had grown to almost 10 000 and he explains that many of these people subordinated themselves absolutely to the discipline of their organisations - often taking up jobs in factories and committing a major part of their time, skills and resources to building organisations that they hoped would develop into vanguardist parties. But sectarianism, fundamentalism and authoritarianism took a high toll on the movement during the late seventies and early eighties and although there were still enough cadres around to help to build Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition in the late eighties the movement effectively collapsed with the Berlin wall and cadres, often exhausted and disillusioned, had to adjust to civilian life.

Elbaum gives his readers very little insight in to the lived experience of life in New Communist Movement organisations or the workplaces and communities in which the Movement worked and struggled. This book is primarily a mapping of the trajectories of various communist sects and will certainly be useful to anyone seeking an account of the rise, fall, ideological commitment, structure and strategy of these sects.

Elbaum affirms the movement's commitment to anti-racism and internationalism and is critical of its aggressive factionalism, authoritarianism and "never ending quest for orthodoxy and constant suspicion of heresy." His affirmation of the movement's anti-racism is persuasive but his affirmation of its internationalism is less persuasive. On occasion it seems that the movement's solidarity was with Communist leaders and parties in other countries rather than with the people and communities in those countries. His critiques of sectarianism, fundamentalism and authoritarianism are merely noted, briefly, and are not explored in any significant depth. He says that they are unfortunate but does not make a serious attempt to theorise why these pathologies were so persuasive in the movement or to think a way through them. In fact he is often quite defensive and is even dismissive when he writes that "every tendency from left to right...made errors" or that these "afflictions...can be rationalized by a multitude of ideological prescriptions." He doesn't take seriously the possibility that the New Communist Movement made a particular and ultimately fatal error by taking 'Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought' and its high priests as a transcendent end in-itself at the expense of an understanding and engagement with the actual struggles of actual people. He mentions that Fanon's Wretched of the Earth was an influential text but doesn't consider Fanon's commitment to thought and action on the plane of immanence and to the view that an authentic consciousness must recognise that "the unemployed man, the starving native do not lay a claim to the truth; they do not say that they represent the truth, for they are the truth." When Fanon insists, further on in the same book, that "the tool never posses the man" he means that theory and political ideology are tools with no value in-themselves and must, therefore, be subordinated to humanity just as firmly as any machine in any factory. Although Elbaum writes about cadres' commitment to the American working class and communities of color, a commitment that was solid enough for cadres to be murdered by the Klan and agents of the Marcos dictatorship, he gives us no real sense of these people or their struggles. The real focus is always on the organisations and their theoretical disputes. In fact he often slips in to a discourse that assumes or explicitly states that the success of Marxist ideas or organisations rather than transformative action towards social justice is what really matters. For example he celebrates the success of the South African Communist Party in being a key part of the alliance that took power after apartheid. But in the realm of lived experience the South African Communist Party is widely acknowledged to be an authoritarian force that intervenes to defend bougoise nationalism and neo-liberalism from much more militant and democratic community movements and trade unions independent of the party. Its success may have been good for Communism's scoreboard but it has been a disaster for the poor in South Africa. And, indeed, Elbaum does not have one word to say about what the South African Communist Party has actually done for the oppressed in South Africa. It seems that his politics is more ontological - one must be communist - rather than a practical commitment to effective, transformative struggle.

Elbaum's book is strangely empty of actual people, communities and struggles. The absence of a substantial account of the desires and hopes of the cadres in these organisations and their struggles means that the book is, to a significant degree, a rather arid collection of lists of acronyms and publications and dates and events. I cannot imagine anyone being inspired by this book. But it certainly does give a comprehensive overview of the various organisations and sects that made up the New Communist Movement.

Rating:
Summary: Good Chronicle and Analysis of the Movement
Review: Having participated in the New Communist Movement (as a member of
the WVO/CWP) I was delighted for many reasons to read this book.
First of all, it was delightful for nostalgic purposes. For many years I have wanted to compare notes with some of my old political colleagues and try to evaluate what happened during the movement and what went wrong. This book definitely sets a framework for analysis of the movement.

A couple of criticisms of the book. I felt that it was quite good about summarizing the period 68-73 but was a bit shallow on the period 1974-1980. For example it barely mentioned the huge
miner strikes that took place in the late 70s and the involvement
of the NCM in that and its ramifications (having grown up in West Virginia, this is how I got involved). Also, I thought the few lines devoted to the Greensboro massacre and the CWP5 warranted more attention as this had huge ramifications not only for the CWP but for the rest of the Left as well. Another important struggle going on at that time was the student anti-apartheid movement, in which the NCM was heavily involved,
which gets no mention at all in the book.

The author does a good job of pointing out the overly optimistic
expectations of the movement, the top-down anti-democratic
vanguard leninist structure of the movement's groups, the movement's tendancy to be blinded by marxist-leninist dogma,
and it pursuit of ideological purity as opposed to building
a movement based on existing conditions.

I definitely recommend this book to those interested in US Leftist history, those who were in the movement and still licking their wounds, as well as young people who are getting politically involved now and who want to avoid the errors of the NCM...

Rating:
Summary: A Well Thought Out Chronicle, If Uneven
Review: I found Max Elbaum's book on the New Communist Movement (NCM) interesting and informative. Max's factual and historical account of the rise and fall of the NCM is helpful for those of us who lived through it and can be valuable for today's young radicals. His attention to detail and analysis of what went wrong were compelling. His description of the heady days of the surge in mass movements and their precipitous decline provided the backdrop for the voluntarism and dogmatism of the NCM.

I came into the movement at a time when Third World revolutions headed by Marxists seemingly had U.S. imperialism on the ropes. As a African American activist, I was greatly influenced by the struggles and revolutionaries from Guinea Bissau, Angola, Mozambique, South Africa and Namibia. I and many others espoused the "Third World Marxism" that Max writes about.

More time could have been spent in the book on the influence of the African National Congress and the South African Communist Party on budding revolutionaries of the time. I would have also liked more discussion on the role of the FBI's COINTELPRO in infiltrating and disrupting organizations.

Overall Max's book helped me to take a step back and understand the contributions and failings of the NCM. I would recommend this book to anyone trying to understand the history of the left in the U.S.

Rating:
Summary: A Well Thought Out Chronicle, If Uneven
Review: Max Elbaum's Revolution in the Air is a book that should be mandatory reading for any activist in any movement today. Unlike most books on sixties-era radicalism, Elbaum's chronicle of the era is refreshing for its lack of sentimentalism or blanket condemnations. For the purpose of this book, Elbaum refers to the mainstream of the radical current as the "New Communist Movement" - groups organized (and often patterned) after Chinese and other Third World communist movements.

The best parts of this book essentially center around the time at which Students for a Democratic Society was hitting its stride and breaking new ground for activists. Elbaum gives an idea of what materially made that possible - the unprecedented white middle class prosperity that allowed for full time organizers to work, the contradictions within the Democratic Party, and the international scene.

Elbaum also conveys the anguish over the feuding that came after the Progressive Labor Party entered into SDS, and does so in a much more objective manner than ex-SDS members David Horowitz (who has since become a neo-conservative) or Todd Gitlin (who has since given up radicalism for left liberalism). For instance, Elbaum shows how complex issues became during the fights between the Weatherman faction (later, the Weather Underground) and the PLP faction of SDS; how the issues of race, gender, and the Vietnam War became polarizing factors that neither was willing to give up ground on.

In general, the chapters that follow trace the paths of New Communist Movement party groups. While it certainly is instructive, especially with regard to the blunders of the Revolutionary Communist Party and the Communist Party - Marxist Leninist, it does suffer from a lack of listed sources. I would better trust Elbaum's recollection of the RCP attempting to shake down writers of the Guardian newspaper were a source named. Otherwise, it just seems like sour grapes.

The later chapters, which cover the period following the creation of Elbaum's own group, Line of March, to modern day are schizophrenic at best. It provides a good understanding of how the Rainbow Coalition helped galvanize the better part of the New Communist Movement, and how a good portion later split after the death of Mao and fall of the Soviet Union. On the other hand, I think far too much energy is wasted on describing the in-jokes of Line of March, while neglecting to provide a good idea of how Third World solidarity groups came into existence as descendents of the New Communist Movement.

Overall, I think that Elbaum provided a good introduction to what foundation the left stands on today. It would be best, however, for those whose interest Revolution In the Air piques to investigate the groups by experience.

Rating:
Summary: Important Movement History, Critical Lessons for Today
Review: Revolution in the Air fills a huge gap by giving today's activists and students access to previously unrecorded history of the rise and fall of the post-60s New Communist Movement. A leading organizer of one wing of the movement, Elbaum explains why so many '60s movement activists turned to revolutionary politics from 1968 to 1973 and then tells what they did in the 70s and 80s. He highlights the strengths and insights of the movement that have been left out of the historical record, while providing a balanced, critical and self-critical accounting of its weaknesses. Unlike many other many other 60s books, it gives due attention to 60s-generated revolutionaries from all sectors, particularly to movements in communities of color.

For young activists and more experienced ones trying to get our bearings in a right-wing world, Elbaum's book offers positive lessons about what we should learn from the new communist movement's experience -- like its emphasis on anti-imperialism and anti-racism -- and mistakes we should avoid. Especially important is Elbaum's argument that the New Communist Movement inaccurately assessed the historical conditions they faced, leading them to wrongly prioritize party-building and internecine warfare on the left over building a broad movement of resistance to the right.

The book is accessible, engaging, and clear. It relies heavily on written materials from the movement's organizations. More interviews with activists from the period would have strengthened the book, but this is a minor quibble. Overall, this book is one of the best I've read on the radicals of the 60s and what today's radicals have to learn from them.