The editorial Young refers to pointed to why Proposition 227 got such a broad hearing, including among a significant number of Latinos. While the big majority of Latinos opposed it, sensing its reactionary character, more than a third of Latinos who voted June 2 approved the measure. A larger proportion of workers who are Black and white voted for it as well. The big-business promoters of Prop 227 - who included some prominent Latino figures - did not wage a racist or openly anti-immigrant campaign around the measure. Instead, they played on real concerns that many working people have over the abysmal quality of the education that working-class youth receive in the public schools, in order to win support for a measure that, as the Militant editorial pointed out, is "designed to deal blows to the rights and confidence of the oppressed." That's why the editorial explained that the role of education under capitalism - with or without bilingual education - is "to prepare working people for a life of toil in the mines, mills, and factories." While defending the right to bilingual education - and public education in general - as gains for working people, class-conscious workers shouldn't try to pretend that these institutions are better than they are. The fact that only a government of workers and farmers can open the door to education as a lifelong right for all is one good reason to join the fight for socialism.

It's worth adding that the main focus of the June 15 editorial was correctly on the significance of the defeat of another referendum, Proposition 226. That measure challenged the right of trade unions to give money to political campaigns, and sought to increase the ability of the employers and government to intervene in internal union affairs. While it had been clear for months that Proposition 227 would be approved, the rejection of Proposition 226 by a 53-47 margin was an upset of what the polls had forecast. It registered the fact that in the final weeks before the elections, as working people began to smell that Proposition 226 meant deeper employer and government intrusion into the rights of the unions and their members as well as broader assaults on working people, the tide began to turn against the measure. A big part of the capitalist class got cold feet. They feared provoking deeper anger among working people.

"Supporters in California," an article in the June 4 New York Times noted, "attacked the Republican National Committee for not channeling significant resources into the drive. Republican officials in Washington criticized the backers in California for bickering over how best to pitch the initiative. And supporters everywhere criticized major California business organizations for their refusal to take on labor." The defeat of Proposition 226 was a victory for the working class.

- NAOMI CRAINE  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home