Krönungswalzer, op.133

I recently went through a jazz-waltz phase, and decided to go back to the 'roots' of the style. Of course, this entailed listening to more Strauss and other Vienna composers, in addition to the vast corpus of the classical genre's composers who used the waltz. Somehow, that led me eventually to Joseph Lanner, a key figure in the history of the waltz. There's something irredeemably uplifting and soulful about the waltz.

Bureau d'Ethnologie

While perusing old issues of Conjonction for articles on specific topics in Haitian literature and history, I came across the above image in an issue dedicated to Jean Price-Mars. Unfortunately, Jacques Roumain, a key figure in the Haitian ethnological movement's left, is not included, but it's fascinating to see some of the major figures involved with it together. One also sees how an interest in folklore and culture could align with any political orientation, as the examples of Price-Mars, Duvalier, and Roumain demonstrates. However, since Haitian anthropology has been a tool to combat racial inequality since the 19th century, a further examination of its impact on Haitian socialists, nationalists, and Duvalierists is necessary. Perhaps this will be the topic for a future post...

Testament

A fascinating and interesting video of Justin Castera speaking about the Duvalier dictatorship in the 1970s. Very educational and useful context for understanding what was going on in Haiti at the time as well as the activities of the Haitian Diaspora opposed to the dictatorship.

Notes sur le développement du mouvement syndical en Haïti

One of my current long-term interests is the historical and ideological foundations of radicalism, labor movements and socialism in Haiti. Although I still have a long way to go in terms of access to specific reading materials and primary sources, Notes sur le développement du mouvement syndical en Haïti, coauthored by Marxist historian Michel Hector (Jean-Jacques Doubout) and labor organizer Ulrick Joly, provides a succinct overview of the Haitian labor movement from its origins to the fall of l'Union Intersyndical d'Haiti (UIH) in 1963. While the authors have their biases as Marxist-Leninists and Joly's past in the UIH adds a personal dimension, this is an important overview of the Haitian labor movement and Duvalierism from a Haitian left perspective. 

Unfortunately, the study skips over most of the period prior to the US Occupation, and focuses for the most part on 1946-1963, covering the role of the 1946 revolution against Lescot, the brief period of democratic reforms and progressive labor laws, and then the repression of labor under Estime, Magloire, and Duvalier. While partial to the PSP, PEP, and PPLN parties, this study is more sympathetic to fignolisme and the MOP than Hector's major study of labor and socialism. Fignolisme combined charisma, social reformism, noirism, and demagogy with labor but was too limited to Port-au-Prince and its environs. The Federation of Haitian Workers (FTH in French) was more influenced by the PCH (Parti Communiste Haitien of the 1940s) and the PSP (Parti Socialiste Populaire). The other labor union federations were either phantom unions tied to the state or led by opportunists. The PSP sounds like the most coherent socialist political party with the most determined support for labor militancy and union democracy during this period (1946-1950). 

However, the main utility of this important work for me is detailed breakdown of affiliated unions with the UIH in the 1958-1963 period, when Duvalier finally cracked down on democratic labor unions. I once asked a Haitian academic about labor unions among the trieuses of the coffee sector in Haiti after reading that Jean-Jacques Dessalines Ambroise had helped organize workers in the industry, and this book gives the names of two specific unions of trieuses for Maison Madsen and Maison Vital plus their delegates to the UIH. Furthermore, the transformations in the Haitian economy during the 1950s and 1960s under US imperial capitalism helped explain why socialists and syndicalists were able to made impressive gains for labor as the number of companies employing vast numbers of workers increased, including rural areas with agro-industrial US companies and mining. Indeed, some of the strikes launched by regional peasant unions and rural proletarian unions, such as in the Nord-Est, involved thousands of people and were able to win concessions from the labor department of Duvalier into the early 1960s. 

Perhaps most useful, however, is the reflection of Joly and Hector on the weaknesses of the labor movement and internal flaws of UIH. Like economist Mats Lundahl, they point to the lack of a united front of the labor movement as the reason for its inability to defeat Duvalier, but they offer a more nuanced interpretation of the various historical actors and their role in the social totality. Like Lundahl, they acknowledge how the labor movement between 1946 and 1963 was too centered on Port-au-Prince and its environs, did not encompass the poor peasants, and was divided ideologically by fignolisme and socialist currents, but the UIH itself fell victim to economism and winning direct victories for affiliated unions instead of democratic political reforms. The pro-democratic forces were already divided, but by not actively encouraging support for it, UIH may have lost sight of the larger vision for democratic reforms to ensure protections for the growing number of unions affiliating with them. Moreover, the rise of regional federations or confederations of peasants and agricultural workers, partly tied to the political conflicts of 1956 and 1957, proved they were useful for labor organizing in the rural areas but UIH was probably not as proactive in connecting the urban working-class and countryside, despite the involvement of figures like Rodolphe Moise. 

In their defense, state repression placed limits on how much could be done, and despite their shortcomings, UIH supported literacy campaigns, a cultural center, a clinic, fought for the rights of Haitian migrant workers in the DR and Bahamas, and produced a party organ for political education. In short, the UIH, which was supported by PEP and PPLN, was perhaps lacking in a a concerted effort to promote democratic reforms to safeguard the gains of the labor movement while having to deal with an increasingly fascist regime which continued to pretend it was the natural supporter of workers. Moreover, while praising the unification of the PEP and PPLN for the formation of the PUCH by the end of the 1960s, perhaps Hector and Joly's defense of vanguardism may be a blindspot. Indeed, if fignolisme was characterized by the MOP's refusal to trust the Haitian masses with the decision making processes itself, and the UIH did indeed attempt to ensure affiliated unions and their rank and file were involved with democratic decisions of the organization, perhaps the vanguardism of the PSP and PUCH were closer to fignolisme and what Nicholls referred to as the technocratic character of Haitian socialists?

And what does one make of the paternalist mentality and belief in charismatic figures which supposedly characterizes pre-capitalist societies and helps explain, perhaps, the fatalism of the Haitian poor and working-class? Presumably, this fatalistic belief of the Haitian lower classes that a state or individual will save them is part of the same trope among other Haitian leftists that the Haitian people need to develop class consciousness as a class for itself, in itself, and take ownership of its own destiny (masters of the dew, perhaps?). Claude Souffrant once made a similar argument about the religious fatalism of the Haitian peasant. However, is it a just a strawman? Did the Haitian Left have its own CLR James or Joseph Edwards, Caribbean leftists who championed the self-activity of the workers and opposed state bureaucracy and vanguards? UIH came somewhat close to this by trying to stay accountable and include rank and file workers in the decision-making apparatus, but Joly and Hector never denounce vanguards. 

Orlando Patterson

I've been reading more authors across the ideological spectrum lately, and I find myself more and more intrigued by the works of Glenn Loury, Orlando Patterson, and even Thomas Sowell. While there's much to disagree with here and there with all of these scholars and commentators, I find Patterson's work interesting in terms of the culturalist and structuralist arguments about race, class, and inequality. Patterson, unlike conservatives, acknowledges the role of structure but argues for studying culture so as to prevent the right from dominating the discussion of culture's role in inequality and social stratification. I still have much to learn and read of Patterson, but this lecture is a good start for getting an idea of where he's coming from.

Waltz For Bill Evans

I have long been a sucker for the elegant jazz-waltz. Here is an example of one, a tribute to the master of jazz-waltz, Bill Evans. Although Chick Corea is not my preferred jazz pianist, this is an interesting and dark jazz-waltz featuring some of my favorite musicians. Enjoy!

Facing Reality

Facing Reality is the one essay by C.L.R. James that I have been meaning to read for the last year. Well, I finally completed it within the last week or so. Here are some of my rambling thoughts on this most anarchist of James's theoretical works. First, I must admit that I have long been sympathetic to forms of anarchism and direct democracy. James, Boggs, and Castoriadis develop a critique of the dominant Communist and Trotskyist parties as well as the Western liberal welfare state model. 

Indeed, to them, "Fascism, Corporate State, One-Party State, Welfare State, Totalitarianism, all of these are ways in which rationalism attempts to adapt itself to the modern community." Building on their insights from State Capitalism and World Revolution, James argues for the self-movement of the workers as the path toward socialism. Like The Invading Socialist Society, autonomous and self-directed action initiated by the working-class against union bureaucracy, the state, and employers is the beginning of socialism. 

Since the work was published after the Hungarian Revolution and in the midst of the Cold War, the analysis is centered on workers in the advanced economies of the US, Britain, France, and the USSR. Clearly, the influence of self-directed workers in Detroit's  auto industry influenced James, Boggs, and Castoriadis, pushing them away from vanguardist socialist parties of the Leninist mould. Indeed, like James's view of popular democracy in ancient Athens, the working masses, when trusted to act of their own volition, shake the world and challenge technocratic elites, the political forms of rationalism, and offer the only solution to the dilemma of state capitalism and nuclear annihilation. 

However, if James et al. were correct, why did things turn out so differently in the advanced industrial nations? The shifting spatial and social relations within the factory and global economy suggest that the authors were guilty of a romanticized and unrealistic perspective on the attainability of workers councils. I remain sympathetic and find their views of events in Hungary or wildcat strikes in the US fruitful for study, but when large industrial workplaces are less common in the US, how can the self-directed workers establish workers councils and seize the means of production? How can the libertarian socialism espoused here, opposed to vanguards, remain relevant to 2018? Even if it proved to be somewhat prophetic about social change in the 1960s and in terms of Solidarity in Poland?

Despite its limitations, Facing Reality is one of the more intriguing theoretical works of James. It shows, as scholars like Matthew Quest have argued, how James's Marxism was influenced by anarchism (libertarian socialism?) and a rejection of central aspects of Leninism. Furthermore, it persuasively suggests the capacities for the masses are far more developed than we realize. Instead of a fear of the crowd, James and company argue that the masses know their interests and can act in it, for a more egalitarian society. The professional bureaucrats and technocratic elites block this aspiration among the working-class, hence the critiques of rationalism and a call for philosophy to become proletarian. Indeed, this central insight to the role of the division of labor and knowledge in a society is one I find powerful. If we want a more egalitarian society, then every cook must be able to and allowed to govern. Perhaps unrealistic, but it remains a powerful idea.