E> |BOOKS : Timely GilGreen THE NEW RADICALISM— ANARCH- IST OR MARXIST? by Gil Green, International Publishers, New York. 189 pp. By Rick Nagin a A narchism, taking on a wide variety of disguises, has been a major fac- tor undermining the great youth move- ment that arose, primarily on the na- tion’s campuses, in thé last decade. It has kept this movement disorganized, undisciplined and isolated from the masses of the American people. It fin- ally brought about the destruction of the Students for a Democratic Society, the only organization with a mass base which could claim the allegiance of the millions of white youth radicalized by the deepening crisis of U.S. imperial- ism, A book which brings to bear a Marx- ist analysis of the various anarchist the- ories and currents which wreaked such _ havoe in the youth movement is ‘The New Radicalism—Anarchist or Marx- ist?’* by Gil Green. Written.in a fast-moving, lively style the book examines such anarchist themes as individualism, opposition to leadership and authority, opposition to all forms of state power, support for in- dividual acts of terror, belief that the lumpen proletariat constitutes a revo- lutionary force, and illusions that U.S. capitalism is so strong it can contain all protest and co-opt all demands. The book places all these notions in a well-rounded historical and theoreti- cal context. None of these ideas are new and Green quite effectively brings out the futile and destructive role they played in a number of historical situa- tions. In addition, the telling arguments made by Marx, Engels and Lenin against anarchism are quoted in rela- tion to the current scene. Green shows that anarchism is a rad- ical expression of bourgeois individual- ism. This individualism classically gives rise to liberal ideology, Green says, but now with the bankruptcy of liberalism becoming more and more evident, it gives rise to anarchism. However, while intending to reject liberalism, anarchism, Green shows, has exactly the opposite effect of pro- moting liberalism among the people. “Decrying program, organization, mass movements and leadership,’ he writes, WORLD MAGAZINE PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18; 1972—PAGE 10 ay ne Oe lar a Ate - “(anarchism) makes it easier for lib- . erals to capture and lead the struggles and movements around vital needs, while pseudo-Leftists stand aloof from them.”’ Revolutionaries must be deeply im- mersed in all the democratic struggles of the people, Green states, and at the same time must constantly link the fights for immediate gains to the over- all battle for power. _ The question of violence is taken up in a chapter, which had previously been published as a pamphlet, “Terrorism— Is It Revolutionary?” The basic point made is that Marxism does not reject any form of tactics in principle, but that the choice as to forms of struggle depends on the concrete historical situ- ation. Violent tactics, Green shows, are | totally inappropriate for the present moment. While the book shows that vi- olent tactics are something forced on the revolutionary movement by its op- ponents, it does not make clear that the possibility of avoiding such tactics ex- ists. No one can predict the tactics of. the future and, as the events in Chile have shown, revolutionaries have every interest in the continual expansion of the possibilities for peaceful struggle. Green also takes on the profoundly anti-Marxist notions of Herbert Marcuse and Eldridge Cleaver that the working class has somehow become “‘integrat- ed’’ into a capitalist society, which is - now capable of ‘‘containing’’ all protest - and revolt. Green shows that this is nothing but a-surrender to bourgeois propaganda and that U.S. capitalism is, in fact, wracked by profound economic and so- cial crisis which the government seeks increasingly to resolve at the expense of the working people. While written be- fore the Nixon wage freeze, the book predicts that the administration would resort to such a policy. Green also shows why the working class is the only stable,. organized, dis- ciplined force capable of overthrowing monopoly capitalism and replacing it with a rational socialist society. While the book does an ‘effective job in refuting the more @penly articulated anarchist viewpoints prevalent in the movement, there are omissions when it comes to dealing with some of the more subtle and deeper forms of an- archism. In particular the book does not adequately challenge the anti-Com- munism and anti-Sovietism of the new radicals, which dovetails with the in- cessant propaganda drive of the ruling class on these questions. The view that the world revolution- ary workingclass movement is at best irrelevant and at worst an obstacle to be overcome is widespread on the stu- dent left. Yet the advanced positions of the Communists as the leaders of the working class in power in one part of the world and struggling for power in the rest of the world must be the basic “Anarchism is a radical expression of bourgeois _in- dividualism . . . vi- olent tactics are totally inappropri- ate for the present moment.” exposure of anarchist trend ee Berkeley after it was dynamited. point of departure for Marxists. To hold that it is possible to engage in revolutionary activity without regard for these realities is the most basic and widespread position of anarchism in the modern world. Unfortunately, in Green’s book, the role of the socialist countries and the Communist Parties is left incomplete. In addition while the book is directed to radical youth, the need for Marxist- Leninist youth organizations, such as the Young Workers Liberation League; is not discussed. ; __Green does state, briefly, that the ex- istence of the socialist countries is ‘“‘the most important asset of the world rev- olutionary movement,’” but this is not ex- plained. Further one is left with the im- pression that all the socialist countries play more or less equal and valid roles. Yet it is essential when arguing with the new radicals to give a full explan- ation of the leading role of the advanc- ed socialist countries and, in particular, . the Soviet Union in the world struggle for peace, democracy and socialism and against imperialism. These countries are the chief source of political, economic, military and technical aid to the anti-imperialist movements in Southeast Asia, the Mid- dle East, southern Africa, Cuba, Chile and throughout the world. And_ this goes far to explain. why anti-Sovietism 1s promoted in every corner of Ameri- can life. Since the new radicalism owes so much of its origin to the anti-imperial- ist struggle, such arguments should be powerful in combatting anti-Sovietism. There are similar problems in the ts ia eceard to the role of the ommunist Parties and, in particular, the CPUSA. The vanguard poe that such parties play in the capitalist coun- tries must be fully explained when argu- ing for a Marxist orientation among the new radicals. This can be done without becoming sectarian. - Green primarily discusses the van- guard role of the CPUSA in the indus- trial organizing drives of the Thirties. While very valuable, this does not ade- quately combat the anti-Communist pre- judices of the young radicals and, by itself, may simply reinforce the widely held myth that the Communist Party is passe, part of the ‘Old Left.”’ One final problem in the book is that a strategy for socialism dis, not. spelled out. In two final chapters Green devel- ops an “approach’’ to a strategy around In September 1968, the Nayal ROTC building on the University of California campus -and white unity, to orient towalp . labor movement and to fight tof « which he feels everyone on thé can unite. q The approach advocated contall® ically sound principles. Green ¢ the new radicals to reject all fo snobbishness and elitism and rali show the utmost respect for the t of people who, ultimately, are ut ers of history. The new radicab says, must engage in mass, dem® struggle and they must do this organized, coordinated way. SY movement, in addition, must eng electoral struggle, but be “pou independent.” - : In addition, Green calls on U radicals to take up the fight for* ize the trade unions. These & principles. have all been challeni one way or another in the new f movement. They. constitute al proach” to a strategy, hence some) tions remain unanswered. For example, one reviewer what is meant by a ‘‘politically pendent’? movement particularly’ Green includes in this concept © developments within the existing geois parties, such as the electit Bella Abzug and Ron Dellums. parent contradiction can only be ed when one understands the cont the anti-monopOly strategy. : In a prior book, “‘The Enemy *® ten,” Green makes clear that the U.S. monopolfes are the chief ene the moment against which all we class, democratic and people's ! must unite if they are to solve problems and prepare the ground cialism. Unfortunately in this bod does not come through so clearly. — If the power and property of ti minority of monopolies were confist the problems posed by the re capitalists would be minor in ci ison. Thus, in terms of the electoral the Communist Party struggles on) levels: to encourage thé anti-moi currents within the bourgeois part build for a specifically anti-mo people’s party and to build the Ct nist Party itself. Such an approat vides an electoral program for al gressive forces regardless of thell el of political consciousness. | “The New Radicalism” is 2) hitting, richly documented critig many aspects of anarchism and 0 young radicals influenced by thi a fundamentally correct direction.