Article II: Membership
SECTION 1: Membership is open to all who share the commitment of the organisation to democracy as a means and as a social goal.
SECTION 2: SDS is an organisation of and for democrats. It is civil libertarian in its treatment of those with whom it disagrees, but clear in its opposition to anti-democratic principle [illegible] as a basis for governmental, social or political organisation."
From the constitution of the Students for a Democratic Society.
Thus stood and still stands the constitution of the SDS. But by the end of the stormy five-day convention held in Chicago June 18-22, such provisions of the SDS constitution had been rendered meaningless by the bureaucratic expulsion from SDS of all members of Progressive Labour and anyone agreeing with PL on certain questions. Meeting in closed caucus, a minority of the convention [illegible] those who agreed [illegible] voted to expel PL and all with their IDEAS from SDS.
The organisation which was founded nine years ago as a "new" experiment in building a political group free from ideology and programme, trying to escape the "sterile political squabbles" of the "Old left," and hoping it had found a way to escape the bureaucratic, undemocratic methods of Stalinism and social democracy - that organisation has now come almost full circle. The "new left" failed to examine and take sides on the burning issues that divided the reformists and revolutionaries in the past, that divided the Stalinists, social democrats, anarchists and others from the Marxists, the Trotskyists....
The convention strikingly reconfirmed that there is no way to cheat history by trying to avoid political programme; that in the end politics is always decisive; that the debates which have divided the political tendencies in the working class movement for almost 70 years, far from being "sterile", remain the most fundamental and burning questions of today. It also showed that the "new left", like the Communist Party and Social Democracy, is entirely capable of violating the basic democratic rights of members - when it fits their needs - not because they WANT to be undemocratic, but because they are politically incapable of dealing with serious, organised opposition.
From the moment the convention opened it was dominated by the fierce factional struggle between supporters of the current national leadership of SDS - Mike Klonsky, Bob Avakian, Bernadine Dohrn, Mark Rudd, Jeff Jones and others (who have differences among themselves) - and the Worker-Student Alliance caucus (WSA), which was led by the Progressive Labour Party. The supporters of the National Office organised themselves in the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) caucus.
There was also a significant number of delegates who supported neither caucus.... These other caucuses, some organised around specific programmes, generally disagreed with both major factions on one or more points, and many of them were opposed to the split that occured.
During the first two days of the convention little of substance took place, but several questions over which there were sharp differences came to a vote, giving both factions an opportunity to gauge their strength. The results were reassuring to PL and the WSA caucus, and, consequently, quite unsettling to the RYM faction.
PL won two such votes - to exclude the commercial press and to schedule more workshops - while the national office faction won a vote to give the floor to Chris Milton, an American student who joined the Red Guards in China for a while. PL charged that Milton had been cashiered out of the Red Guards and shouldn't be allowed to speak.
Apart from the vote itself, which was 586-577, the incident was also significant as an example of the method used by the national office throughout in trying to combat PL. Unable to answer PL's utterly false political line, they attempted to "out-Mao" the Maoists, to prove, by frequent reference to and quotations from the Red Book, Lin Piao, and similar sources, that THEY were the REAL Maoists. The country which has had the most consistently revolutionary line for more than a decade - Cuba - received no attention.
The split which occured at the SDS convention has been maturing for well over a year. As the PL-led caucus grew from one convention and national council meeting to the next, the inability of the national leadership of SDS to meet the challenge became more and more obvious. At this convention, when the national leadership realised that PL might be able to win a majority of the delegates on some of the key resolutions, and perhaps even win the leadership, they precipitated the split without waiting to see how many they could win over in political discussion.
On the [illegible] main political issue [illegible] before the [illegible] Revolutionary rhetoric is nothing but [illegible] SDS abstention from the [illegible] the world [illegible] today. They condemn the leadership and the policies of the NLF and North Vietnam, refusing here in the U.S. to build the mass anti-war movement. They condemn all nationalism as reactionary, including the revolutionary nationalism of the oppressed, and even attack as "bourgeois" the struggles by oppressed national minorities for university education. They condemn struggles for women's rights unless they are directly tied to the struggles of women workers for [illegible]. SDS proved incapable of engaging in a political debate with PL.
For example, whenever anyone attacked PL's refusal to support the struggle for black control of the black community, open admissions, and many other demands of the black struggle, they were answered not by political argument, but by 500 voices screaming "Smash racism." The usual response of those supporting RYM was limited to a near-hysterical "Free Huey". And so it went on throughout.
SPLIT NUMBER ONE
On Friday evening, when the discussion on resolutions was to begin, the convention proceedings were suspended to hear a delegation from the Illinois Black Panther Party. Stating that he was speaking on behalf of the national organisations of the Black Panthers, the Brown Berets and the Young Lords, Panther Bobby Rush launched into a vitriolic attack on PL for its refusal to support the black liberation struggle in [illegible].
(Undoubtedly, some hoped this would produce an anti-PL stampede in the convention, but the Panther statement did not have the desired effect. One reason was that the previous evening the same Panther spokesmen had seriously discredited themselves and had been literally booed off the platform for their male-chauvinist remarks about "pussy power". When they mistakenly assumed that [illegible] happened succeeded in making matters worse by saying: "You sisters have a strategic position for the revolution...prone." The hall burst loose and the ensuing chaos prevented the Panthers from saying any more.)
In denouncing PL, Rush accused them of "deviating from the Marxist-Leninist position of the right to self-determination of peoples," and declared, "they will be considered as counter-revolutionary traitors" if they don't change their attitude. "SDS," he said, "will be judged by the company it keeps and the effectiveness with which it deals with factions within its organisation."
As the convention neared chaos once again, Jeff Gordon of PL took the floor to defend PL's position, denouncing the SDS leaders for trying to use the Panthers as a club against the WSA caucus and for their inability to carry out a political debate themselves.
Bernadine Dohrn, Mike Klonsky and other SDS leaders responded by declaring that it was impossible to remain in the same organisation with people who opposed self-determination in practice and demanded an immediate split. Then Bernadine Dohrn announced she was walking out and invited all those who agreed with her to follow. The convention was in such total chaos that few people even heard what she said. Less than half followed.
From Friday evening till late Saturday evening the SDS convention met in two different wings of the Chicago Coliseum. Those who had walked out, and others who had joined them later, debated whether or not to split SDS, and if so how. Those who remained with the WSA caucus held general workshops and waited to see if the others would "return to SDS." Throughout the day the RYM caucus fluctuated between 500 and 700, reaching its peak late Saturday night.
SPLIT NUMBER TWO
When the final decision was reached, the RYM caucus voted to expel PL, and all those who agreed with them, from SDS. About 10-15 per cent of the RYM caucus voted against expulsion. Abstentions were not counted.
In short, a minority of the SDS convention, in a caucus which excluded those to be expelled, voted to expel what might have been the majority of the convention. They were expelled not for specific acts against which they could defend themselves, but solely for their ideas. Technically they have no means to appeal against the expulsion.
The RYM caucus returned to the convention hall and read a statement enunciating two principles which henceforth are supposedly criteria for membership in SDS. (RYM leaders shamefacedly admitted the next day that they had forgotten to read a couple of additional points.)
"One: We support the struggle of the black and latin colonies within the U.S. for national liberation and we recognise those nations' right to self-determination (including the right to political secession if they desire it.)
"Two: We support the struggle for national liberation of the people of South Vietnam, led by the National Liberation Front and Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam. We also support the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, led by President Ho Chi Minh, as well as the People's Republics of Korea and Albania, and the Republic of Cuba, all waging fierce struggles against U.S. imperialism. We support the right of all people to pick up the gun to free themselves from the brutal rule of U.S. imperialism."
The statement stipulated that in addition to PL, "all people who do not accept the above two principles are no longer members of SDS." Where this could lead was made abundantly clear the following day when Bob Avakian (creator of the out-Mao-the-Maoists strategy), running for national secretary, announced that if elected he would work to exclude members of the Independent Socialist Club, a group which does not support the governments listed.
After reading the statement, during which screams of "bullshit", "shame" and similar political slogans reached their convention peak, the RYM caucus filed out of the hall.
TWO, THREE, MANY SDS's
On Sunday afternoon the two sections of the SDS convention met on different sides of the city.
Four to five hundred gathered in the Coliseum to constitute the WSA caucus as SDS. PL, perhaps emboldened by the fumbling ineptness of the national office leadership, succumbed to the temptation to try to become SDS and bullied ahead. Instead of deciding to appeal to the ranks of SDS against the undemocratic expulsion, the WSA caucus passed its resolutions, elected its officers, and scheduled a press conference to declare itself THE SDS and to denounce "the splinter leadership" for "anti-working class politics and practices." In a painfully slow and lifeless meeting, SDS (WSA) elected John Pennington of Boston PL as national secretary, Pat Forman of San Francisco as inter-organisational secretary, and Alan Spector of the New England Regional SDS as educational secretary.
Across town some 700-500 members and supporters of the RYM caucus gathered to decide in what form SDS would continue. The general mood was one of great relief to have finally, somehow, been freed of the millstone. But very rapidly the political differences within the RYM faction intensified, and the national leadership found itself under attack from those who objected to the lack of democracy within SDS.
The first point of discussion was a set of five principles, drafted by the Avakian-Klonsky group and supported by the Bernadine Dohrn - Mark Rudd wing. The five points were intended to concretise and buttress the "principles" adopted to expel PL. The motion put forth was to adopt the five principles as the basis for membership in SDS. In response to a question from the floor, the chair ruled that the principles would definitely constitute the basis for excluding people from SDS.
The five "unity principles of SDS" proposed are: "(1) Oppose white supremacy. Full support for the national liberation struggles of oppressed peoples against U.S. imperialism. For the right of self-determination for the black and Chicano nations. Independence for Puerto Rico;
(2) Oppose male supremacy, support the struggle for women's liberation;
(3) Support for armed struggle;
(4) Exclude anti-communism; and
(5) Fight for socialism."
Strong opposition came from a minority of delegates who felt the principles were irrelevant to the day to day work of SDS and would not be acceptable to the bulk of the membership. They tended to want to return to the "old SDS" which was anti ideology and anti-programme, with everyone free to do his own thing.
The proposed set of principles, if adopted and enforced, would change the fundamental character of SDS as it has existed for nine years. Yet, the leaders tried to ram it through after 5 minutes of debate. But the opposition was vociferous enough to force a retreat, and it was decided to print the proposed programme in NEW LEFT NOTES and allow a written discussion.
ANTI-WAR INACTION
By far the most important issue acted on by SDS (RYM) was on the proposal for a fall action. Despite all the self-criticism about SDS's past errors and failure to make the fight against the war in Vietnam the central task, the action proposal adopted by the SDS (RYM) convention represented no fundamental change in policy.
SDS decided to call an action in Chicago in late September when eight indicted for last August's Chicago demonstration go on trial. The demands of the demonstration will be withdraw the troops, support the NLF, support the GIs, support black liberation, free all political prisoners. There was no mention, much less discussion, of how SDS could work with the anti-war coalition and other organisations to build mass demonstrations against the war and for the withdrawal of troops...
Far from being a turn to the anti-war movement, SDS's new action represents just one more variation of their five-year-old policy of hoping to substitute themselves for the mass anti-war movement in the U.S. Their adoption of the negotiation line, under cover of supporting the NLF 10-point programme, represents a retreat, not an advance for the anti-imperialist forces in the U.S.
[illegible] morning hours of Sunday with the election of Mark Rudd (who modestly labelled himself an internationally known "symbol of the movement") as national secretary, Jeff Jones of San Francisco as inter-organisation secretary, and Bill Ayers of Michigan as education secretary. Defeated in the [illegible] were two [illegible] candidates [illegible] Avakian-[illegible]-Wells ticket [illegible].
The new national interim committee is composed of Barbara Reilly from Columbia, Bob Avakian of Berkeley, Linda Evans of Michigan, Mike Klonsky, Noel Ignatin, Bernadine Dohrn of Chicago, Corky Benedict of Ohio and Howie Machtinger.
SDS has traveled a long way from the days of its founding as a liberal anti-communist organisation.
While the political level of the delegates at the convention did not accurately reflect the total SDS membership, certainly the majority of the delegates at this convention considered themselves "some sort of communist". This indicates the rising political consciousness of the American student radicalisation.
But at the same time, the shallow pragmatic philosophy on which SDS has based itself, and the lack of understanding of the need for principled politics and clear programme has permitted the factionalism, supposedly barred at the front door to come flooding in by the windows, and back-alley entrances. Along with the increasing Marxist jargon have come all the vices, but few of the virtues of the "old left".
The ninth national convention of the Students for a Democratic Society was possibly the most bureaucratic, undemocratic and factional youth convention in the history of the radical movement in the U.S.
In its wake, there are now two groups claiming to be the real SDS, each with an essentially factional and sectarian programme, and one excluding the other. The factional battle will now continue on campuses across the country. But the convention itself provided striking confirmation that an attempt to build a broad student movement by ignoring political programme can lead only to one variation or another of the current crisis. The steadily radicalising student movement will gain little from either warring groups.