Monthly Archives: April 2017

If you are courageous and tenacious about your cause, whatever it is, you will eventually,  it may take a while, reach the same conclusions as the rest of us.


I think of it as battling one tentacle of a monster. Darned thing will just about strangle you if you don’t fight it off. But, if you stay with it long enough, you’ll find that your tentacle leads to a monster with many other tentacles. Various other people are fighting one tentacle or another. If they don’t give up, they’ll all find the many-armed monster.

I didn’t start out with a radical world view. I started with only one cause: corporal punishment in the schools. I wanted school personnel to stop beating on the kids. I think it took me more than a year to realize that many of the school torturers were being encouraged by the kids’ parents. Then I started arguing against all kinds of aversive control of children.

One thing led to another. I no sooner quit criticizing teachers and parents than I started criticizing school administrators, then school boards, then the entire educational system. I even started a special non-aversive school and tried to get people to emulate it.

Then one day I realized that if the schools weren’t the way they are, then young men and women would stop volunteering to join the military to fight and die for someone else’s peace and happiness. Something was wrong, I figured, and it wasn’t just the schools. That thinking process took me several years. I went on from there.

Doesn’t Matter Where You Start

I was reading a long e-mail from a group that calls itself, I think, “Women’s March for Freedom.” They were passing on their revelation that women’s oppression isn’t the only kind of oppression. They listed homophobia and a couple of other forms of chauvinism. They had realized this since they organized the biggest protests in American history on January 21, 2017.

They started with the women’s oppression tentacle, the one they were feeling the most, and then generalized to a broader definition of chauvinist oppression. If they keep at it, don’t get discouraged, and keep on thinking it through, they’ll find the monster.

I think one of the problems in America is that people are too afraid to go on fighting. Many a young radical becomes a frightened, inactive, middle-ager. Maybe most of them.

Follow the Money

On the streetcar this morning, a young man drinking chocolate milk pointed out a motorcycle cop hiding behind a fence. He gestured with his bottle: “Where does he get his authority?” the guy asked me. “I think you already know,” I told him, but apparently he didn’t because he rephrased and asked the same question.

“Police, like anybody else,” I suggested, “work for whoever signs their paycheck.” I thought that was erudite enough, but it didn’t satisfy the young fellow. “And where do THEY get their authority?” he asked me. By then I had decided I was the victim of some long-range Socratic argument and didn’t really want to go on. But there was nobody else in the streetcar to talk to, so I resigned myself to being sucked in and told him, “Whoever signs the policeman’s paycheck works for whoever signs his, and then the next level and the next level until you finally get to very rich people, the 1% so to speak, who are using their money to keep this system running for their own profit.”

Following the money is like following the tentacle. It leads to the same monster.

It sure would have been cool if he had said, “Oh, I get it,” but he just glanced at the ceiling of the streetcar and resumed drinking his chocolate milk. I like to think that he might have pondered my words later, but he probably didn’t. For all I know, there might have been something pretty raunchy in his chocolate milk.

Read a Good Biography

Malcolm X started out in prison. He figured out, or was taught, that white people oppressed Black people through their Christian religion. So he became a very effective Islamist fund raiser. He didn’t stop there, and was a much broader kind of revolutionary before they killed him.

Eugene Victor Debs was just a very good trade unionist when he started bucking the system. He tried to bring the railroad unions together and nearly succeeded. They put him in jail for it, and he came out a much broader, much more capable kind of revolutionary before they put him in jail again.

Almost all of us are familiar with aspects of the life of the good Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr. His cause was racial discrimination on public transportation, when he started. Then he went on to lead the entire struggle against racism, and didn’t stop there, even for a minute. He linked up with the union cause quite a lot. Lots of people, including a lot of his devoted followers, were shocked when he denounced imperialist war before they shot him.

Just from those three, you can see the two most important aspects of my exposition: 1) courageous and consistent struggle will reveal the monster and 2) Lots of people don’t keep up the “courageous and consistent struggle” because they are afraid of what they will learn, or rather, they are afraid of the thing about which they will learn, i.e. the monster. BTW, I’m not saying people should be afraid, or not any more afraid than they already are, but I do recommend being careful.

The Monster Isn’t A Person

There are nice rich people and there are lousy rich people. I think the widow Joan Kroc, who gave away the Ray Kroc McDonald’s fortune, was probably a nice rich person. I got a book against nuclear war from her once. I think she had bought thousands of them to give away.

The monster isn’t a person, it’s a system being run by several persons. Fight your tentacle long enough and you’ll find it.

–Gene Lantz

I’m still on 89.3FM and at 9AM Central Time every Saturday.

The New York Times published a long liberal’s lament on the situation in France:

SundayReview | OP-ED COLUMNIST

France in the End of Days

Marine Le Pen’s road to victory is clear enough.
Can a pragmatist stop the extreme right?

Is the history of human progress a story about losers?

I am enjoying a book, “American Dreamers” by historian Michael Kazin. He describes the “leftists” of American history. For each of them, Kazin adds in the reasons that they didn’t succeed. The Industrial Workers of the World were too radical, the People’s Party wasn’t radical enough, etc.

I can see why a historian would think we’re all losers. After all, none of us ever became President of the United States, and lots of us, like Frank Little, were lynched.

What’s a Leftist Anyway?

I’ve never cared much for terms like “leftists” or “right-wing” or “conservative” or “liberal.” They’re not very clear. I prefer “progressives” for people who want to see the human race better off and “reactionaries” for those who would like to see our conditions worsen. But I’ll admit before God and Mr Kazin that we progressives never achieved a perfect world, nor even one that could be called socialism in stability.

What’s a Success?

I wrote a song about George Meyers once. It’s somewhere on Youtube I think. Meyers was a lifelong American Communist. He had a quirky slanted smile that pretty well took over his face most of the time. I never knew anyone happier than George Meyers.

And yet, he had been reduced from being a top union leader and someone who hobnobbed with the best of history. He had been a top officer of one of the most powerful and respected communist parties in the world. They had tens of thousands of members. But nearly all of that was taken away by the witch hunt before I met him.

He’d spent years in prison. When I knew him he was old and scraping by on almost no income. His health wasn’t so great. I never knew anyone happier.

My song said, “They never stopped his smiling/ no matter how they tried/ because in his heart he always knew/ he was on the winning side.

In my fifty years of progressive activism, I’ve known a lot of old-timers like George Meyers who were still in the struggle, and I never knew a happier bunch of people. It seems to me that they enjoy better health and live longer than other seniors who aren’t doing anything socially worthwhile.

Success isn’t achievement. Ask Alexander the Great, who wept after he conquered the entire world. Success is feeling good about yourself every day. We progressives, we have that down!


Germans embraced the Nazis, not because they were tired of freedom, but because they believed they had found a cure for capitalism.


From the time it began to take over the world, mid 17th century, until the late 19th century, capitalism provided a better life for its subjects. That is, it was better than serfdom. Serfs were landless farm workers, one step above slaves, who had to take whatever their lords dished out. “Free” labor could leave one employer for another and, to some extent, dicker over conditions of employment.

Capitalism Works Best With Limited Democracy

If workers believe they have a voice in government, they don’t have to be guarded, guided, and pushed to do everything. They don’t run away or deliberately smash the equipment, the way slaves or serfs might. They can be educated for the higher forms of labor that capitalism needs. Consequently, the more successful capitalist economic systems use a limited democracy form of government.

From the beginning of the Republic until after World War II, American struggles made good improvements in our democracy.

What Went Wrong, When Did It Go Wrong?

Capitalism stopped benefiting workers after it conquered the world. When there were no new markets, the capitalists had to turn against one another to fight for the markets they had already saturated. That’s not what they called it. They called it “The war to save democracy,” and “The war to end all wars.”

But WW I was really a bloody turf war between gangsters. For a short period, the winners enjoyed their spoils, but it didn’t last very long because  the basic problem of saturated markets and international competition was still there.

So, they decided to have another world war. This one was complicated for workers, because the Soviet Union, try as they might, couldn’t stay out of it. After they began to fight the invading Nazis, they were incorporated into the same side the United States was on. The U.S. ended the alliance as soon as the Nazis were defeated, of course.

No More World Wars

After the U.S. nuked Japan, actually, after the Soviets and other nations showed that they could do the same thing, world wars lost their appeal as a temporary solution to the capitalist crisis. Even the gangster capitalists weren’t crazy enough to blow up their only planet. So, since the late 1970s, capitalist nations have gotten by on small regional wars, lowering their production costs by attacking their workers, and carrying a whole lot of debt. I recently read, in an investment newsletter, that all growth in the United States since 1980 basically came from debt!

Did the Nazis Solve the Capitalist Crisis?

To Germans between, say, 1933 and 1939, it appeared that fascism was the right way to go. Unemployment dived from 25% into low numbers. Lots of infrastructure was rebuilt. National pride was soaring.

But they had only changed their form of government from limited democracy to fascism, they hadn’t changed their economic system. It was still capitalist and it was still in crisis. The only real way toward a temporary solution was war. Even then, as long as they were winning, fascism still seemed pretty good to the Germans. After that, not so much.

What Looks Good to You Right Now?

To a lot of Americans, the Trump Administration and Republican political domination look pretty good. They think there will be more and better jobs. They think they’ll be making a better living and that the steady abatement of basic democracy isn’t too high a price to pay.

But we are still living in an economic system that has provided all the good it is going to provide, and things are only going to get worse if we can’t save and expand our democracy.


I recently wrote down a decent political program, but how could it be implemented?


The Trick Is to Know What You Want

If a political program is to be implemented, its supporters have to be clear on it and keep it fresh in mind. That’s why the one I wrote is so brief.

Everyone has a certain amount of resources and a certain number of opportunities. Nearly all of us are short of money and time, but we usually have some of one or the other. But we have to pick and choose, carefully, which opportunities we will pursue with our limited resources. Some of them move us closer to the ultimate goal of the political program, and others not so much.

All Strategies and Tactics are Good

The catch is that strategies and tactics are only good in their proper place and time. A mass rally might be the best thing for a May Day activity, or a general strike might be. A letter writing campaign might be good in some situations, but probably not for May Day. It’s all good, but only when it fits the situation!

Can You Trust the Leadership?

Nowadays, new “leaders” are under every rock in the garden. We’re being pulled every whichaway by this or that organization or cause. As I explained in another blog, I tend to follow the AFL-CIO organized labor federation because, whether they are right or wrong, they are always working class and a united working class is the only long-term solution. Also, I’ve been working with these guys for a long long time, so I know their abilities, their intentions, and their shortcomings.

Whose Ax? Whose Ox?

Nearly all organizations and all their activities have short term goals. Some of those short-term goals advance a decent long term political program, but not all of them, and some always more than others. What they do depends on whose ax is being ground, and whose ox has been gored. Even some of our greatest leaders have to be viewed with a certain skepticism.

Take Bernie Sanders, for example. Senator Sanders is probably the most widely respected progressive leader in the United states today, and one would have to go back several years to find someone as deserving of respect. His book from September 2016, which I reviewed, has a wonderful list of things that need to be accomplished. And yet, they consist in their entirety of reforms which, if won, could still be taken away in another period.

None of Our Gains, So Far, Have Been Permanent

There are not and will not be any permanent gains for working people as long as our bosses run the system. Everything we can win — civil rights, voting rights, pay raises — can be taken away by the bosses, and will be taken away whenever they get the chance!

Even the finest organizations such as NAACP and Children’s Defense Fund have limited, temporary, goals. Not that activists shouldn’t support them, but we should support them with the realization that they will only take us a limited distance toward our ultimate goal.

Who and What Shall We Shun?

Are there arenas of political activity that we should avoid? Lots of “radicals” don’t believe in elections. Lots of liberals don’t believe in street actions. Hardly anybody in America believes in general strikes because we don’t know beans about them. Some unionists are always wanting to strike, others are always wanting to cozy up to the bosses. Some people make a fetish of civil disobedience, other people wouldn’t go near it. Some would say that only economics matters, while others would say that art and culture are the only way to make a difference. All of them are wrong.

As I said above, all strategies and tactics are good in the right place and time. The same goes for arenas of struggle. People who eschew elections are non-thinking zealots. People who will never support a strike action are probably cowards or sell-outs. Or, at least, we should admit that, even if we’re not zealous, venal or cowardly, we’re all ignorant.

The test of any opportunity is “How far does it take us toward our ultimate  programmatic goal?

There are no blueprints. We may study previous situations and their heroes until our eyes pop out, and we still won’t know exactly what to do in the next situation. But, if we apply ourselves consciously, study, collaborate with people we respect, stay active and keep our programmatic yardstick handy, we can refine our ability to choose.

That’s an organization plan.