Of Unionism and Autonomy

[The New Manifesto]

So, I am currently unsure of where i stand amongst the Left. I am a marxist, but what strand of Marxist...I'm still unsure. I am finding my self having a growing interest in two fields in particular.
Unionism, and Automous theory.

So, does anyone subscribe to the theory's above? Anyone strongly detest them?

[piet11111]

do not bother to stick a label on yourself just take the ideas that you like and stick to them.

[Pogue]

By unionism do you refer to Anarcho-Syndicalism/Revolutionary Syndicalism? And by Autonomy do you mean Autonomism?

If you do, I subscribe to both of these ideologies to some extent, and so do a number of other comrades on the board. Do you have any paricular quesitons you want answered?

[The New Manifesto]

1. I'm not looking for a label, I'm looking for idea's that i might be interested in.

2. And no...I dont think I'm refering to Anarcho-Syndichism. And no, There are no questions in particular, except what works you recommend to read and:

a. Why are Unions the preferable orginization of the working class v. political parties?

b. How does Autonomism work? How does the working class just rise up without the support of a vanguard party or Union or some kind of orginization?

[BobKKKindle$]

On the issue of unionism, the term is generally used to refer to building trade unions within the framework of capitalist society in order to extract concessions, such as improvements in wages and working conditions, from employers, and unions generally do not work towards the destruction of the bourgeois state, because they are essentially reformist organization. Marxists would argue that trade unions in their current form do not offer the possibility of overthrowing capitalism and do not serve as the most effective form of organization, because they involve the whole of the working class and are therefore likely to reflect a mixture of progressive and reactionary ideas in the way they interact with employers and other workers who are not part of a union - in the UK, for example, workers in the energy sector have recently taken action against their employers and are protesting against a decision to hire Italian workers through a contractor on the grounds that this will deprive British workers of the right to work, and during these struggles the workers have gained the support of their trade unions. The workers involved have unfortunately raised reactionary slogans because they have incorrectly identified other workers as the source of their problems, whereas the correct response would be to pressure the government to create more jobs, instead of fighting over who should have the limited amount of jobs currently available. A party, by contrast, is comprised of the most militant and class-conscious section of the proletariat, and so is able to maintain a consistently revolutionary position instead of following the most dominant prejudices and misconceptions amongst the mass of ordinary workers. The role of the revolutionary party is to intervene in workers struggles (including working inside trade unions) in order to combat reactionary ideas and win other workers over to a revolutionary position. This is why Marxists adopt the party as the best form of organization.

[Sasha]

on autonomism; i recomend the book mentioned in my signature, most of it is excelent on autonomist history, theory and praxis

[Pogue]

on autonomism; i recomend the book mentioned in my signature, most of it is excelent on autonomist history, theory and praxis

Comrade I'd say you know the most about autonomism on this forum out of all of us, and so it'd be wicked if you could explain it to us in your own words more often :)

[Sasha]

yeah i know but the problem is that one of the main points (and both strength and weaknesses) of autonomism is it lack of an concrete, easy to explain ideology.
people who try to formulate one (whether its the author of the book i recomended does in the last chapters, negri or crimithink) all seem to fail completly, although all for completly difrent reasons.
not even subcomodante marcos managed to write a clear articel on the subject.
and i'm a humble person so i'm not touching that one with a ten foor pole, the only thing i realy could offer is to come over here and dive in the autonomist scene/movement and i will be willing to be your guide.

for me autonomism involves a deep longing for freedom, a big drive for social justice, a rejection of all forms of political theory as an "religious" end goal but instate as a means, not willing to wait for the (perfect set of circumstances for a) revolution but starting one every day, comradship, both strong subcultural ellements aswell as the willingness to work with all people on a grassroots level and much much more.

to be realy short i feel its realy conected with the Leval quote in my sig.

sorry but this is the best i can do

[apathy maybe]

@psycho

But isn't a lot of Autonomist theory Marxist based?


Edit: psycho, if you see this, do you know where one might find a copy of that book in HTML format? Reading the PDF is a real pain, having to scroll left, then down and right, and then left, repeat...

[Sasha]

no, some automist have read marx and do or dont like what he have said or come from more "orthodox" marxist backgrouds wich reflect in their actions or thinking, but ellements of anarchism, left communism, situianism, pirate/bucaneer-liberalism etc etc can be found in about the same amount among autonomism/autonomists.

and if you read the book i mentioned you will see that for example the autonomist movement in greece is also completly difrent of that in italy wich is again diffrent of the one in germany or holland or denmark etc etc. and yet they are also unmistakenly conected/fruit of the same tree
fuck even here in tiny amsterdam the sub-movement in the southern part of the city is in some ways realy difrent than the one in the center or west or east.

i think its because of the fact that autonomism/autonomist movements because or their reactive (as in topic based) nature are undinaible connected/intwined to to the circumstances/dynamics of their suroundings.
thats also why attemps by (most notebly american) actvists to try and import "autonomism" fail, its not sommething you and your friend just can convert to, its sommething that spawns and grows (and need fertile ground for that), but as soon it estabeslises it self its almost impossible to weed out.

[Sasha]

psycho, if you see this, do you know where one might find a copy of that book in HTML format? Reading the PDF is a real pain, having to scroll left, then down and right, and then left, repeat...

a. stop being a cheap skate and just buy it: http://www.akpress.org/2006/items/subversionpoliticsakpress & http://www.amazon.com/Subversion-Politics-Autonomous-Movements-Decolonization/dp/1904859534

b. copy & paste the download pdf adres for each chapter in google (for example with the intro: http://www.google.nl/search?gbv=2&hl=nl&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eroseffect.com%2Fbooks%2Fsubver sion%2Fsop_intro.pdf&btnG=Zoeken&meta=) and click on read in html (wich will give you this: http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:E_n7uCNcc8AJ:www.eroseffect.com/books/subversion/sop_intro.pdf+http://www.eroseffect.com/books/subversion/sop_intro.pdf&hl=nl&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=nl)