Ah. I think I get it now. Thank you (sorry if I'm being dense at all... I've been having a weird couple months)
I think there is a difference between organizing on a group based level and organizing on an individual level. In addition there is the line where your politics and real world activity attracts people from the opposing camp (hence why I use the term 'defect'). I do not think any revolutionary organization should commit significant assets towards pandering at the bourgeoisie yet at the same time statements and policies must be erected regarding their existence and interaction among the progressive camp leadership. Again: my focus here is more on internal policies and exterior action attracting persons, not necessarily creating cadre policy for conversion of ruling class segments.
And by this the minority groups? Individual bourgeoisie i could get. But a minority group bourgeoisie just as a whole? Im on the fence about that. I just wonder cuz i know a guy irl into black liberation that exclusively wants to organize with proletariats. So I wanted to see what the Maoist perspective would view.
All right, I was confused was all. I tend to look at classes slightly differently regarding activity in the revolutionary movement. There are (in imperialist centers) two classes: the working class as well as the ruling capitalist class (there used to be that fictitious middle class before it more or less dissolved). In addition to these classes, however, there are oppressed strata which may be called upon to assist during the revolution. So while I do not shun involvement from class elements which defect from the reactionary camp ("middle class" remnants, small businesses, etc) there is more to waging revolutionary struggle than simply classes, we must also look upon societal strata which may be located outside of class, existing in a "semi-classless" state.
I mean "national" as a form of independent culture. Like, how the black struggle si sometimes referred to being analogous to national liberation. And by class background I meant bourgeoisie, petty-bourgeoise, and proletariat.
I think you are using an odd definition of national liberation in regards to the theme of queer liberation. To answer your question, however, yes: the revolutionary process will require Queers from all (oppressed) class backgrounds as well as those who can be won from the petty-bourgeois backgrounds. The national liberation aspect, however, depends on the country at hand.
So, as a maoist, do you view queer liberation as a form of national liberation? That is, incorporates queers from all class background?
Look up: Queer Nation's manifesto as well as either the manifesto to the G.L.F or Downcast Gays. Both are interesting pieces from the past. Start with the links I mentioned and be on the lookout when you see Leftist sites. It takes time to find and internalize this theory so don't be too hard on yourself.
yeah. Pamphlet's could work good as well. I feel a bit odd, being a gay revolutionary, but not knowing anything about queer liberation theory...
While they are not written by Marxists I could give you links to some liberation pamphlets. In addition, you should check out Lavender & Red as well as Queering the Revolution.
