In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C H A P T E R S I X People’s Power versus Propertied Elites 1977 The Coalition of Anti-Eviction Coalitions In 1977, a complicated network of supporters worked to give the International Hotel considerable grassroots political power. This network emerged from the various Asian American storefront radical groups early on in the struggle. When many of these radicals joined Maoist communist organizations by mid-1975, organizing public support became far more systematic and consistent. In the last year before eviction, three major groups or coalitions operated within the broader anti-eviction coalition, with significant political, organizational, and ideological disagreements among them. First, there was the IHTA with the KDP, along with large numbers of independent leftist and anti-imperialist activists. These supporters included Chester Hartman, a housing consultant, and members of the Northern California Alliance (NCA). The NCA consisted of activists whose views ranged from sympathy for the KDP’s flexible Marxism to affinity for the democratic-socialist wing of the American left. The NCA published a popular newspaper, Common Sense, and offered classes in politics and culture at its Liberation School. As a result, the NCA attracted a wide range of progressive activists, such as Mike Davis, Max Elbaum, Denise Lombard, and Ann Schwartz. The NCA paid particular attention to local electoral politics and played a key role in campaigns in San Francisco , such as winning district elections for the Board of Supervisors. This alliance of forces did not operate as a formal support group within the I-Hotel struggle but, rather, met unofficially in caucuses to follow the leadership of the IHTA and the KDP. Because this first group of supporters did not create a separate organization, many independent activists may not even have been aware of the IHTA–KDP–NCA alliance. P E O P L E ’ S P O W E R V S . P R O P E R T I E D E L I T E S 125 The second group, the Support Committee for the International Hotel, brought together a large number of independent leftists and grassroots activists, with I Wor Kuen (IWK) playing the leading role. A wide range of organizations participated in the Support Committee, including the People’s Food System, a cooperative food-distribution network that reached into the many collective households of the counterculture; the San Francisco Printing Cooperative; Bay Area Gay Liberation (BAGL), an important leftist voice in the city’s emerging gay politics; and the Maoist IWK’s mass organization, the Chinese Progressive Association (CPA). The IWK and the CPA often presented themselves as the Coalition to Support the I-Hotel, although that coalition did not operate as a separate organization outside the Support Committee. The KDP participated in the Support Committee , as well, although not as a leading force. So did NCA members and other KDP allies. The KDP backed the Support Committee as a public vehicle to mobilize supporters despite differences with the committee’s leading group, the IWK. Most of the organizations that supported the tenants could be coordinated through the Support Committee, which became the public face of those backing the IHTA. The third group, the Workers Committee to Fight for the I-Hotel and Victory Building, included members from the Asian Community Center (ACC), Everybody’s Bookstore, and Wei Min She, all of which had been affiliated with the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) since 1975. The Workers Committee refused to work directly with any of the other coalitions because of their political and ideological disagreements and emphasized doing its own mass organizing and recruiting within the Chinese community. The Workers Committee also did not coordinate any of its activities with the IHTA. Most independent activists did not work with the Workers Committee because of its ultra-Maoist politics and working style. All three groups were united in fighting the eviction, but differences over long-range revolutionary programs were often confused with consideration of day-to-day tactics. The Workers Committee, for example, refused to participate in common coalition with “reformists” such as the KDP, “revisionists” such as the IWK, or so-called bourgeois degenerates such as BAGL in the Support Committee. From the IHTA’s point of view, the Workers Committee acted almost as a rogue organization, mounting demonstrations on its own, disrupting city hearings with its own positions, and joining IHTA-sponsored activities without coordination. For the most part, outsiders could not tell the difference among the groups unless they made concerted efforts...

Share