LETTERS
cases, it is not possible. In any
society, let alone the small radical
community, resources are limited,
and choices have to be made. The
two aims are strategically incom–
patible and tactically irreconcilable.
This is not to say that both will
not continue to play a role in
radical circles. They will, but each
individual radical must choose how
best to allocate his time and ef–
forts. And in arguing for an im–
probable coalitionism, Howe leaves,
by default, some variety of extra–
political protest as the only avail–
able option for radical change.
And tlus protest tends to be in–
creasingly revolutionary. Yet, cer–
tainly the history of radicalism in
America, as well as the current
political climate, would give scant
support for any hope that direct
revolutionary action can success–
fully transform the American sys–
tem. (Perhaps that same history
would also show that coalitionism
has
not achieved much of lasting
significance, but the progressive era
and the thirties have left at least
a residue of legal and structural
changes.) Thus, if Howe's pre–
scription seems implausible and a
revolutionary approach is equally
inappropriate, we are apparently
faced with
no
effective choices.
But if one believes that coalition–
ism can theoretically be effective,
because coalition politics clo at–
tempt to seize and wield the tradi–
tionally available channels of power
in our society, I think we must
not allow Howe's particular kind
of coalitionism to stand as our
only answer to the revolutionaries.
The search must be for the kind
of coalition that reflects the shared
interests of those who are alienated
from society. This is obviously dif–
ficult, for the real problem in
American society is that so few
159
groups realize the extent of their
powerlessness. I t seems to me that
any radical coalition must include
those who ordinarily do not have
paths of influence to the regular
power structure. That leaves out
most unions, or at least their lead–
ers, who now hold a rather secure
place in the national power struc–
ture. In searching for the power–
less and the deprived, we must
turn to the poor, the Negro, the
lower middle-class consumer and
the white-collar worker who are
exploited by the market economy
and the corporate system of private
power. The support for the recent
Labor Leadership Assembly for
Peace in Chicago provides hope
that some elements of the labor
movement can still play a role in
some of the areas of radical poli–
tics; but by and large, the labor
movement no longer shares the
goals of the "dispossessed" groups
mentioned here. (For more de–
tailed evidence of the current lack
of empathy between the unions
and the other members of Howe's
coalition, I recommend Paul Ja–
cobs' essay "What Can We Expect
from the Union" in
The Radical
Papers-edited
by Irving Howe.)
It is true that any coalition can
arise only
if
the powerless elements
in American society become aware
that they lack any adequate politi–
cal and economic voice in society.
And although the New Left may
not have had much success in di–
rectly changing national policy, it
may have had an indirect impact
in helping these elements to realize
that they are not really partici–
pating in the processes of decision–
making in America. The New Left
is helping to destroy the economic
and political myths which have
prevented the consumer and the
white-collar worker from seeing his
