Wpa

[Wobblie]

What is the history of the Workers Party in America? What tendency are they, or are they multi-tendency? How active are they? I tried to find this on their website, but have been unsuccessful.

Thanks :D

[CH405]

^ Obvious troll.

[Wobblie]

^ Obvious troll.

Fine, then I retract my question. In fact, just delete the whole thread.

[Tablo]

Someone please ban CH405. He has been trolling in every post he has made.

[Tablo]

What is the history of the Workers Party in America? What tendency are they, or are they multi-tendency? How active are they? I tried to find this on their website, but have been unsuccessful.

Thanks :D
Which Workers Party are you referring to? I think there are a couple that use Workers Party in their name.

[Wobblie]

Which Workers Party are you referring to? I think there are a couple that use Workers Party in their name.

workers - party .com

I know I saw a post on them by someone on this forum, so I'll try to look it up.

[Wobblie]

^ See? He's implying that the Worker's Party is divided and weak, therefore an asset of the bourgeoisie. Pure flamebait.

???

[Tablo]

Based on what I could find about them they appear to be multi-tendency or something. I'm really not sure since they don't even talk about Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Trotsky. You might be able to figure it out by reading all of their stuff, but they don't put themselves in a particular school of thought.

[Lolshevik]

Based on what I could find about them they appear to be multi-tendency or something. I'm really not sure since they don't even talk about Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Trotsky. You might be able to figure it out by reading all of their stuff, but they don't put themselves in a particular school of thought.

That's true and not true. The WP doesn't have an enforced line on the nature of the USSR, Cuba, etc - whether they were deformed workers' states, state capitalist or whatever... but the Workers Party isn't just a multi-tendency 'club.' It bases itself, among other things, on revolutionary industrial unionism, which is similar to the socialist industrial unionism of Daniel De Leon, and advocates building a mass democratic radical union movement as a counter to the yellow unionism of the AFL-CIO and to better prepare the workers' movement as a whole for the revolutionary conquest of power.

[Tablo]

That's true and not true. The WP doesn't have an enforced line on the nature of the USSR, Cuba, etc - whether they were deformed workers' states, state capitalist or whatever... but the Workers Party isn't just a multi-tendency 'club.' It bases itself, among other things, on revolutionary industrial unionism, which is similar to the socialist industrial unionism of Daniel De Leon, and advocates building a mass democratic radical union movement as a counter to the yellow unionism of the AFL-CIO and to better prepare the workers' movement as a whole for the revolutionary conquest of power.
Thanks for letting me know. I just made a guess based on what little there was to read about them. :)

[Martin Blank]

What is the history of the Workers Party in America? What tendency are they, or are they multi-tendency? How active are they? I tried to find this on their website, but have been unsuccessful.

The WPA is only about a year old. We're a multi-tendency communist organization and claim no doctrine (Trotskyism, Marxism-Leninism, etc.). Our party members are active primarily in their workplaces, but are also participate in other political and economic movements (antiwar, antifascist, anti-eviction, labor-community support, etc.).

The WPA was sponsored into existence by the Communist League, which is a Charter Organization for the party. The multi-tendency character was one of many things that the WPA took from the League's experience.


Based on what I could find about them they appear to be multi-tendency or something. I'm really not sure since they don't even talk about Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Trotsky. You might be able to figure it out by reading all of their stuff, but they don't put themselves in a particular school of thought.

No, we don't. The only "doctrine" we subscribe to is Marxian communism. In the League, we've had members who held varying positions on these individual self-described communists, and we were nevertheless able to be united as a single communist organization, based on our Basic Principles. The experience we had there we've brought into the WPA.


That's true and not true. The WP doesn't have an enforced line on the nature of the USSR, Cuba, etc - whether they were deformed workers' states, state capitalist or whatever... but the Workers Party isn't just a multi-tendency 'club.' It bases itself, among other things, on revolutionary industrial unionism, which is similar to the socialist industrial unionism of Daniel De Leon, and advocates building a mass democratic radical union movement as a counter to the yellow unionism of the AFL-CIO and to better prepare the workers' movement as a whole for the revolutionary conquest of power.

Yes, and it's that support for revolutionary industrial unionism that leads us to value unions like the IWW and WIIU over the AFL-CIO business/company unions, and see that the more revolutionary workers' organizations grow and overtake the pro-capitalist ones.

If you have any other questions, you're welcome to PM me.

[Wobblie]

Thanks, very helpful. :D

[Decolonize The Left]

^ Obvious troll.

I have removed all this now-banned member's troll posts from this thread.

- August

[Musa Abdulrashid]

I understand that this organization probably takes the political line of DeLeon and the "Detroit IWW", but this begs the question: where did the "Communist League" come from? How do we know this isn't a fake socialist group that just took DeLeon's ideas and put them on a website?

I don't think anyone would want to give their time and energy to a group that they don't know the history and motivations of. Why is that so hard to find this with the Communist League/WPA? Is it a split from the SLP? What is the deal here?

The WPA is only about a year old. We're a multi-tendency communist organization and claim no doctrine (Trotskyism, Marxism-Leninism, etc.). Our party members are active primarily in their workplaces, but are also participate in other political and economic movements (antiwar, antifascist, anti-eviction, labor-community support, etc.).

The WPA was sponsored into existence by the Communist League, which is a Charter Organization for the party. The multi-tendency character was one of many things that the WPA took from the League's experience.



No, we don't. The only "doctrine" we subscribe to is Marxian communism. In the League, we've had members who held varying positions on these individual self-described communists, and we were nevertheless able to be united as a single communist organization, based on our Basic Principles. The experience we had there we've brought into the WPA.



Yes, and it's that support for revolutionary industrial unionism that leads us to value unions like the IWW and WIIU over the AFL-CIO business/company unions, and see that the more revolutionary workers' organizations grow and overtake the pro-capitalist ones.

If you have any other questions, you're welcome to PM me.

[Invincible Summer]

I understand that this organization probably takes the political line of DeLeon and the "Detroit IWW", but this begs the question: where did the "Communist League" come from? I am a little suspicious of why this party wouldn't want people to know about where they're coming from ideologically. How do we know this isn't a fake socialist group? There are very negative precedents of groups that at one time claimed to be Marxist or socialist, like the "Peoples Temple" or the LaRouchies, so it's a real danger.

I don't think anyone would want to give their time and energy to a group that they don't know the history and motivations of. I think that during the 60s many leftist "parties" were founded for dubious reasons, but at least the PLP and RCP have a traceable history and ideology. Why is that so hard to find with the WPA? Is this the Scientology of the left, where you learn as you pay (with either time or money)? What is the deal here?

Miles said it's only a year old. Give them a break.

[Martin Blank]

Where did the "Communist League" come from?

Sigh! You could have just asked.

Anyway, the League was formed in November 2004. We came out of a correspondence and discussion group that was made up of former members of a lot of organizations (ex-DSA, ex-SPUSA, ex-RCP, etc.). We're not a split from any "parent" organization. That's why you won't find any kind of "red thread" lineage thing. Being non-doctrinaire and multi-tendency from before the League was formed, there's no "there" there.

And, yes, you can still PM me with any questions.

[RED DAVE]

Yes, and it's that support for revolutionary industrial unionism that leads us to value unions like the IWW and WIIU over the AFL-CIO business/company unions, and see that the more revolutionary workers' organizations grow and overtake the pro-capitalist ones.

If you have any other questions, you're welcome to PM me.Do you advocate working within existing unions or replacing them? If the latter, what is your strategy for doing this?

RED DAVE

[Martin Blank]

Do you advocate working within existing unions or replacing them? If the latter, what is your strategy for doing this?

Our members who are in business unions (UAW, AFT, UTU, Teamsters, etc.) do work inside them with their co-workers on defensive issues, but we reject the idea that the apparatus of a business union can be "captured" and/or "transformed" into something that class-struggle-oriented workers can utilize for their own purposes. Over a century of experience with intra-union struggles, in the U.S. and internationally, shows that one of two things happen to "opposition caucuses": either they are co-opted and become just as tied into the capitalist order (or worse -- TDU, anyone?), or they are smashed and atomized by the union officials and bureaucracy.

(A personal story: They tried both with me when I was working at a railroad yard in Detroit. First, they tried to buy me off by trying to appoint me as a steward; I refused, saying I wanted an election. Then, they tried to smash me ... literally. It was a mob-run outfit. For months, I carried a loaded .45 to work after I received death threats from paid thugs for the union officials.)

In places where there are union shops, we advocate dual-carding with the IWW or WIIU. If there is a possibility of voting to switch from one union to another without a de-certification period, we would organize for such a vote after an in-place contract expires (which is generally when you'd be able to do it). If it is a situation that requires a de-certification period between switching union affiliations, we would advocate the organizing of workplace committees, affiliated to a revolutionary union, to wage a fight to win leadership of the workforce away from the business unions, and to force both the union and the bosses to have to deal with the workplace committees if either of them want to get anything done.

In the rare situation where a local or independent business union may be able to be "captured" by the membership, the WPA supports the guidelines adopted by the WIIU's First Convention on the process of their en bloc affiliation.

[Musa Abdulrashid]

And, yes, you can still PM me with any questions.

Will do.

[RED DAVE]

Our members who are in business unions (UAW, AFT, UTU, Teamsters, etc.) do work inside them with their co-workers on defensive issues, but we reject the idea that the apparatus of a business union can be "captured" and/or "transformed" into something that class-struggle-oriented workers can utilize for their own purposes.(1) Do your people refuse to run for shop steward positions?


Over a century of experience with intra-union struggles, in the U.S. and internationally, shows that one of two things happen to "opposition caucuses": either they are co-opted and become just as tied into the capitalist order (or worse -- TDU, anyone?), or they are smashed and atomized by the union officials and bureaucracy.(2) Over a century of experience can just as easily be used to show that the IWW has failed to take root.

(3) What is your objection to TDU (I assume you mean Teamsters for a Democratic Union)?

(4) What do your people inside unions do during contract negotiations?


(A personal story: They tried both with me when I was working at a railroad yard in Detroit. First, they tried to buy me off by trying to appoint me as a steward; I refused, saying I wanted an election. Then, they tried to smash me ... literally. It was a mob-run outfit. For months, I carried a loaded .45 to work after I received death threats from paid thugs for the union officials.)I salute your courage.


In places where there are union shops, we advocate dual-carding with the IWW or WIIU. If there is a possibility of voting to switch from one union to another without a de-certification period, we would organize for such a vote after an in-place contract expires (which is generally when you'd be able to do it).(5) Has this tactic every been tried in practice?


If it is a situation that requires a de-certification period between switching union affiliations, we would advocate the organizing of workplace committees, affiliated to a revolutionary union, to wage a fight to win leadership of the workforce away from the business unions, and to force both the union and the bosses to have to deal with the workplace committees if either of them want to get anything done.(6) This sounds like a rank-and-file committee to me. And how would you "wage a fight to win leadership of the workforce away from the business unions"? Besides the use of revolutionary rhetoric, how will you will the allegiance of the workers?


In the rare situation where a local or independent business union may be able to be "captured" by the membership, the WPA supports the guidelines adopted by the WIIU's First Convention on the process of their en bloc affiliation.(7) So you do advocate, under certain circumstances, struggling to take over unions.

RED DAVE

[Die Neue Zeit]

Then, they tried to smash me ... literally. It was a mob-run outfit. For months, I carried a loaded .45 to work after I received death threats from paid thugs for the union officials.

WTF???

All the more reason for my take on collective bargaining. :mad:

[Martin Blank]

(1) Do your people refuse to run for shop steward positions?

If co-workers want one of us to become a steward, or if an election comes in the middle of an ongoing struggle inside the business union, we would agree to do so. But our steward candidates would be open about their politics and take the opportunity to explain our views to co-workers who may be unaware or not fully understanding of our positions. At the same time, we do not take appointments to such positions, even if an appointment is considered "popular" among co-workers (as it was in my case).


(2) Over a century of experience can just as easily be used to show that the IWW has failed to take root.

I think it was James Cannon who called the IWW the "Great Anticipation". I tend to think that is an excellent way to describe revolutionary unionism at the beginning of the 20th century. The IWW and the WIIU were ahead of their time, and I think that accounts for some of the long-term difficulty they had with growing (that, and, of course, government suppression). The relative growth of the IWW today, through the Starbucks Workers Union and other organizing efforts, I take as a greater acceptability of their message these days -- and this in spite of the fact that the IWW is racked with internal conflicts between certain anarcho-syndicalist elements and more open unionists.


(3) What is your objection to TDU (I assume you mean Teamsters for a Democratic Union)?

Hmm, other than its collaboration with the government in their takeover of the Teamsters? Other than its acceptance of Washington's IRB having control over the selection of officials, how union money is spent, and how the IBT operates? Other than its acquiescence when Ron Carey was framed up and ousted from the leadership by the government? Not much.

I don't accept turning to the capitalist state to solve any of our problems.


(4) What do your people inside unions do during contract negotiations?

Contracts are like an armistice in a war: you want it to go into effect with your forces in the best possible position for the future battle. So, yes, we'll organize, educate and agitate for the best possible contract. At the same time, we know that the business union officials, especially these days, act more like company unions and agents (cops) for management, so we also use these situations as a "teaching moment" to demonstrate the need for replacing business unions with revolutionary industrial unions.


I salute your courage.

No need for that. I tend to think that anyone doing serious organizing will have their own ".45 moment" at some point, if they're doing their job right.


(5) Has this tactic ever been tried in practice?

Not by us (but we've only been at this for about a year now). I'd have to research more to see if/where it's been done before we came along. I do know it's possible, especially in places where union shops are not allowed by law.


(6) This sounds like a rank-and-file committee to me. And how would you "wage a fight to win leadership of the workforce away from the business unions"? Besides the use of revolutionary rhetoric, how will you will the allegiance of the workers?

Not all shopfloor battles happen through "official" structures. In fact, the best victories are often won when workers go outside of them and organize themselves. A workplace committee is a kind of rank-and-file committee, but it is not something that limits itself to working inside a business union structure. It would allow workers not covered under union contracts (e.g., temporary workers) to participate, and would not frame its activity by what union officials allow.

As for the kind of work it would do, I can give you an example from my own experience. At the railroad yard where I worked, the business union local there had never voted against a tentative contract in its 20-plus years of existence, even when those contracts were of the most horrible concessionary kind. Some of us organized a workplace committee, drawing in not only members of our business union, but also temporary and probationary members, mechanics (not covered under the contract) and workers from the other unions there. We not only talked about the kind of contract that was being proposed, but also what we thought should be in it, how it should address the needs of workers not covered by our local unit, and, generally, what kind of union we needed.

When the tentative contract was put in front of us, a week before we were to do our typical rubber-stamp vote for it, our workplace committee called for a No vote. We were able to anticipate everything that happened up to the point of the meeting: the appointed stewards and supervisors pressuring and threatening workers with "dire consequences" if they voted No; the sudden appearance of the Business Agent, clad in a nice silk suit, to back up this pressure; threats of a lockout by the upper management; red-baiting; threats of physical violence (mentioned before); and so on. We had explained that each of these was going to happen, but that was only a small part of it. What really got our co-workers was how we broke down each section of the contract and what it would mean.

When the union meeting came around, I personally chose not to attend. The accusation had been made that I was "bullying" members and would pressure them to vote No. I was personally confident enough in our work that I didn't feel I needed to be there. I told co-workers, "vote what you think is right". And they did. Only the two stewards and one other person (who was in line to become a supervisor anyway) voted for the concession contract. The mechanics and temp workers who were on shift that day cheered when the workers came back from the meeting, chanting "No! No! No!" as they came into the building. I came in after that to celebrate with my co-workers (I had been not too far away, and on the phone with a co-worker who was part of the committee).

Management was quick to try to retaliate, but it only made matters worse. We had received annual Christmas bonuses of about $1,000. Because the tentative contract had been voted down, management did not give out the bonuses, which meant that our co-workers with kids expected a shitty holiday. The business union officials shrugged their shoulders and took the management's line. So, our committee organized a holiday drive to provide presents and a "solidarity bonus" for our co-workers. We raised about $400 per worker, plus bought toys for all the children of our co-workers. We went around on Christmas Day distributing them. We even brought them to the home of the Chief Steward, gave him his check and presents for his kids.

If we hadn't already taken leadership away at that point, we certainly did then. That was in 2003. To this day, neither management nor the business union makes a move on a contract or a health-and-safety issue without looking to the workers who were a part of that workplace committee (there are still a few of them there; I was laid off in 2006). The WPA's Workplace Unit came out of that workplace committee, and it still operates there. We took leadership of that workplace by not only showing what a union should do, but by exposing what the business union wouldn't do ... and doing it ourselves.


(7) So you do advocate, under certain circumstances, struggling to take over unions.

As I said, there are very rare circumstances where a local business or independent union is susceptible to being broken away in the direction of revolutionary unionism. They are a rare exception that certainly proves the rule.