U.S Campaign for a Mass Party of Labor

[Commiechu]

Since America's independence from Britain the bosses have run this country, in fact they have repeatedly run it in to the ground. Now it is our turn to turn things around, but the only way we can do this is by fighting for genuine socialist policies. But how are we to do this with no party to fight for workers' demands? The bosses have their two parties, now it is time we have one! Join the WIL and help us build a genuine party for the voiceless majority.


The vast majority of people living in the United States are part of the working class: people who depend on wages and benefits linked to their jobs to support themselves and their families. And yet, we to have our needs overlooked by those in political power. The reason is clear: the richest one percent of the USA owns more than the bottom 95% of the population, and they want to keep it that way. These rich individuals and corporations use their wealth and influence to ensure that the government passes and enforces laws that defend their interests, not the interests of the majority.
Sick and tired of Bush and the Republicans, millions of Americans poured onto the streets during the 2008 election with a burning desire for change. They sincerely hoped that Obama’s policies would be fundamentally different. But the results are in: more of the same. As Dennis Van Roekel, President of the National Education Association put it: “This is not the change I hoped for.”
The fact is, both the Democrats and the Republicans are controlled by the tiny minority that lives off the wealth it gets by exploiting the workers. It should therefore come as no surprise that despite this or that difference on this or that issue, they promote and implement policies that benefit the interests of their largest financial contributors. Without a mass political party of our own to defend our interests, workers are forced to fight against the attacks of big business with one hand tied behind our backs.
For these reasons, the Workers International League has decided to launch a Campaign for a Mass Party of Labor (CMPL). Our purpose in launching this campaign is the following:
1. Explain the need for the labor movement to break with the Democrats and Republicans, run independent labor candidates, and build a mass labor party based on the unions.
2. Connect this idea with the struggles of workers and youth.
3. Show how a mass labor party could change society for the benefit of the working class, which makes up the vast majority of the population.


Ever since we founded of the Workers International League and published the first issue of Socialist Appeal, the need for a mass party of labor has figured prominently in our program and work. The objective need for such a party has been explained in countless editorials and articles. The lack of independent political representation for the US working class is an urgent problem and contradiction, which can only be resolved if the labor movement breaks with the parties of big business and forms a party of, by, and for the working class majority.

As we head toward the midterm elections, the economic “recovery” has stalled. After a weak upsurge in growth that benefitted only the rich, we are now told we may already be headed back into recession. The job market remains weak, the housing market is again in crisis, and millions of jobs have vanished into thin air. The solutions offered by the Democrats and Republicans are no solution at all. They all limit themselves to tinkering with the existing system, which means that nothing is ever actually fixed and workers are forced to bear the brunt of the failure of capitalism. Surely there is a better way!

Under the two party system, midterm elections are a kind of referendum on the incumbents. Dissatisfied with those in power, “the other guy” usually benefits from voter frustration. But the “lesser evil” approach to elections means that no matter who wins, the workers have to deal with some form of “evil”. With voters increasingly turned off by Obama and the Democrats’ utter inability to deal with the crisis, the “greater evil” Republicans stand to make big gains in November. In Florida, some Teamsters locals are even supporting the anti-worker “moderate” Republican candidate in order to stop the “even greater evil” Tea Party candidate! This is just one example of the irrationality of this approach to politics. We think the national and local labor leadership needs to put forward a different political strategy, a strategy that can actually lead to concrete improvements in workers’ quality of life.

In North and South Carolina, the beginnings of state-wide labor parties are an example of the way forward. We think the time is ripe for this to be replicated around the country. The Democrats have had every opportunity to pass legislation that addresses the needs of the workers and youth. For nearly two years, they have controlled the White House, Congress, and many states. Now, as a result of their failed policies, they are opening the door to people even more vicious than Bush and co. This is why the members of the Workers International League, our sympathizers and supporters, have decided to launch a Campaign for a Mass Party of Labor (CMPL) , in order to give more concrete form to this demand.

We seek to build a broad-based campaign that reaches out to all those who agree that running independent labor candidates and building a labor party based on the unions is the way forward. Many rank and file union members and some leaders are already beginning to draw this conclusion. Unfortunately, other leaders seem determined to continue their allegiance to the Democrats come hell or high water.

The CMPL will begin modestly at first. We understand that our small forces alone cannot have a decisive impact on the politics of a country as massive as the United States. But we can play a role in raising these ideas and helping prepare the ground for making such a party a reality in the future. We are confident that life experience will lead more and more union members to pressure their leaders to “stop the madness” of supporting the corporate parties. If they continue this policy, they will eventually be replaced by leaders more in tune with the needs of the rank and file. And as new layers organize and join unions to fight back against the bosses’ attacks, the call for a mass political alternative for workers at the polls will gain more and more support.

We therefore invite you to join the CMPL and help us raise this idea in our unions, central labor councils, workplaces, schools, neighborhoods, on picket lines and anywhere workers and young people are in struggle.





Campaign Website: http://www.masspartyoflabor.org/
Campaign Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=140893022618834&ref=ts

[Lolshevik]

now's the time!

I have a problem with the six point program though.


3. Stop bailing out Wall Street and instead invest massively in public education, day care, social services, and in new and improved roads, bridges and other infrastructure.

why not explicitly call for full employment? that's the best way to cap off the demand for citizenship for all; it gives you an opportunity to explain that there are enough jobs for everyone, that the only group blocking that reality is the capitalist class, not our latino brothers & sisters, etc.

Also, is this group initiated by the WIL alone or are there other backers too?

(If I sound overly critical it is not intentional. I think overall this is very good!)

[IndependentCitizen]

I wish the group luck, but I think majority of Americans have had enough spoon fed anti socialist propaganda to last them century. I can't seethes being successful. It sounds incredibly good, but I suppose we just have to wait and see.

[Commiechu]

now's the time!

I have a problem with the six point program though.



why not explicitly call for full employment? that's the best way to cap off the demand for citizenship for all; it gives you an opportunity to explain that there are enough jobs for everyone, that the only group blocking that reality is the capitalist class, not our latino brothers & sisters, etc.

Also, is this group initiated by the WIL alone or are there other backers too?

(If I sound overly critical it is not intentional. I think overall this is very good!)
I'm actually not sure why that didn't figure in to the plan, it is in the program of the WIL itself -


Full employment and housing
No to lay-offs. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay. The right to a secure, full-time job, full benefits, or a place in education. For a national minimum wage of at least $16 per hour. Wages to be adjusted for inflation through periodic Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA). For union control over hiring and firing. Establish union-controlled job training and hiring halls in communities with high unemployment. All temporary workers to be made full-time, with equal pay and treatment. Voluntary retirement at age 55 with full benefits. No to the privatization of Social Security. End homelessness: quality housing for all, with rent fixed at not more than 10 percent of wages. For a massive program of public works to create jobs and housing, and to rebuild our infrastructure, inner cities and the Gulf Coast.



The group was just started by the WIL (although we have been advocating the idea since our founding) but we have sympathizers in other groups and in the labor unions (especially AFL-CIO).

[The Hong Se Sun]

I don't really see this being a success, there is no REAL demand from the public for this. Mainly it is the WIL calling for this but I think if this was a real possibility then one of the older more established LP's would have done this. Plus I do not see where any larger org's/unions are openly supporting this.

I was told that "the WIL and some grass roots activist are making a call for forming a MPL" but I just don't see that happening. Plus I was told that the WIL is a revolutionary socialist org. So why are they campaigning for reformism? Even sadder is that I fear this party if it were to be a success then it would become imperialist and bourgeois (and kick the WIL out like it did the SA in England) before it installed any real reforms to this system. I hope I'd be wrong and good luck but I just personally don't have faith in this furthering socialism in the USA.

[Die Neue Zeit]

WIL has a shallow approach to zero unemployment. It should borrow from Minsky, Wray, and the post-Keynesians. Public employer of last resort for consumer services is how you do zero unemployment structurally and cyclically.

[hemlock]

I would join as well, but I placed a lot of faith into the Dems and Obama, and that got me nowhere. I, like millions of other dissappointed americans, are not as quicly trusting as I once was.

If this group picks up, I will be the first to send in the largest donations. Even if it does not pick up, if it can get a bit more airtime on MSNBC or Progressive Radio, or any progressive outlet (even an ALFCIO or SEIU newslatter for support) Ill be all over this.

I would recommend looking into EFCA, it is a potential rally issue for this new movement (like the healthcare bill was for the republicans). PM me to talk a little more about it, I may be able to be convinced to submit a donation.

[Commiechu]

I don't really see this being a success, there is no REAL demand from the public for this. Mainly it is the WIL calling for this but I think if this was a real possibility then one of the older more established LP's would have done this. Plus I do not see where any larger org's/unions are openly supporting this.

I was told that "the WIL and some grass roots activist are making a call for forming a MPL" but I just don't see that happening. Plus I was told that the WIL is a revolutionary socialist org. So why are they campaigning for reformism? Even sadder is that I fear this party if it were to be a success then it would become imperialist and bourgeois (and kick the WIL out like it did the SA in England) before it installed any real reforms to this system. I hope I'd be wrong and good luck but I just personally don't have faith in this furthering socialism in the USA.

The WIL is supporting the creation of a mass party so that there is an organ which workers can use to gain transitional demands - it is roughly equivalent to the PSL practice of running candidates for political office, it is a stepping stone, not a solution. The only real solution is a Socialist Revolution. This does not mean however that organizing in this way will not bring us closer to our goal, it will help group together class conscious workers and allow us to better spread our ideas and organize a revolutionary party.


I would join as well, but I placed a lot of faith into the Dems and Obama, and that got me nowhere. I, like millions of other dissappointed americans, are not as quicly trusting as I once was.

If this group picks up, I will be the first to send in the largest donations. Even if it does not pick up, if it can get a bit more airtime on MSNBC or Progressive Radio, or any progressive outlet (even an ALFCIO or SEIU newslatter for support) Ill be all over this.

I would recommend looking into EFCA, it is a potential rally issue for this new movement (like the healthcare bill was for the republicans). PM me to talk a little more about it, I may be able to be convinced to submit a donation.

We have been trying to spread the message to other groups and some seem to have a genuine interest in the idea. I am sure you know that the Pennsylvania labor movement recently had talks about running independent labor candidates against the Democrats. The WIL fully supported this, and we actually released an open letter to the Pennsylvania labor movement calling for the creation of a labor party. The leadership failed the workers as usual, but there is still a section of the labor movement which is really open to the idea, and so we hope to tap in to this force and hopefully spread the ideas further.

[The Hong Se Sun]

All the WIL members Ive talk to seem pretty focused on the LP idea and besides you have never heard a call for revolution. Ive had WIL members argue til they were blue in the face that a Party of mass Labor made up of the unions is the only way to bring about socialism.

"it will help group together class conscious workers and allow us to better spread our ideas and organize a revolutionary party." -what if the same thing that happened in Britan with your socialist appeal happen here? Not trying to be attacking but doesn't that kind of ring out as supporting and working to form a bourgeois soon to be imperialist party that you HOPE to have a Marxist/Trotskyist influence in like in the BLP?

I mean, if it turns a few people socialist cool. But I think this was started prematurely and with out a lot of thought about the end results. And with out some of the older more experienced (socialist/socialist labor) parties support and help along with a endorsement from some huge unions I honestly don't see this being a success.

In the PSL the election is like a after thought and we openly call for a revolution during our campaign. I didn't see any call for socialist revolution on the CMPL site. I don't think I even saw the word socialism. Like I said, I hope you guys the best but I don't see this as realistic.

[devoration1]

The mass parties died with the Second International. With the change in epoch around the time of the first world war, capitalism has changed significantly. That is no longer a legitimate method of organization. The Third International should be the inspiration for a future international revolutionary party (a world party made up of the revolutionary minorities in every nation- rather than mass workers parties in every nation).

Plus.. you know that the 'Labor Party' in the US was founded in 1996 by prominent members of the US official labor movement, and is mainly animated by union members and mostly by the UE (famous independant union that refused to kick out the Stalinists when the AFL-CIO unions were falling over themselves to appease Red Scared politicians and signing 'anti-Communist' affidavits).

Since such a party already exists, I'm not sure why someone would start or support a campaign to simply make another one.

http://www.thelaborparty.org/

[Die Neue Zeit]

You should read this review:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/review-restoring-power-t141297/index.html


Realistically, it is hard to see the 1930s wildcat strike coming back, no matter how the militants dream. But the two-pronged approach of grassroots organizing and comprehensive campaigns, along with the tactical strike, might indeed lift unions out of their slough — and begin the long process of creating greater equality and upward social mobility in the American economy.

If this applies to mere economic struggles, the more it applies to political struggles. Real parties are real movements and vice versa. The model of the International Working Union of Socialist Parties - and neither that of the original Socialist International or the turned-sectarian Communist International - is the one for today's circumstances.

[Commiechu]

Here are some answers to questions about the CMPL -
http://www.socialistappeal.org/content/view/895/71/

[The Hong Se Sun]

"the left sectarians spend their time living in their own little world, divorced from the real concerns of the workers. Even if the WIL put out a call for all of these groups to unite, Sean does not explain why a call from the WIL would succeed in this respect," (from the article)-I think this campaign is kind of what the WIL says about the other "Tiny" left orgs in that they are only living in their own sectarian (all WIL members Ive met are ultra sectarian) world divorced from the real world which is why they lost so many members earlier this year.

[Rusty Shackleford]

how does the CMPL plan to work with already existing working class parties?

also, would this party basically function as the Peace and Freedom Party but nationally? basically an organization that runs socialist candidates from any party that wins the nomination?

[Zanthorus]

Two points:

First of all, it wasn't bad enough that the Trots had to cede into the parties of the labour lieutenants of capital in the mid-30's, now they're creating them as well?!?

Secondly, the only two times in American history where mass socialist movements have been successful have been first under the leadership of the American Socialist Party at the beggining of the century and then under the leadership of the CPUSA in the 30's and 40's. This suggests that the creation of a so-called 'labour party' is not the way forward for the American working-class.

[The Hong Se Sun]

I can't believe I just agreed with a left communist lol

[Rusty Shackleford]

I can't believe I just agreed with a left communist lol
it happens. there are some legitimate claims in all tendencies, and not all posters are ideological

[Zeus the Moose]

I can't believe I just agreed with a left communist lol

Eh, Zanthorus is all right as far as Left-Communists go :tongue_smilie:

Despite my general opposition to "labour parties" and Labourism in general, I've been following the back and forth on this with great interest, and am working on a more thorough critique which will hopefully see the light of day soon. Right now, some quick points/questions:

What lessons are the CMPL attempting to draw from the Labor Party of the 1990s (which still formally exists, and is actually engaging in electoral politics this year through running Brett Bursey for SC state house and supporting Dan La Botz's campaign for US Senate in Ohio)? In particular, are there points on the structure of that LP that the CMPL finds particularly positive or negative? In my view, too much power was given to the affiliating unions, and there were very high thresholds on what it took to form geographically-based locals. One source I read mentioned a local needed 150 members before it was an official LP "local."

Perhaps most importantly, have there been any considerations about programme? There are 6 Points mentioned in the "About Us" section of the CMPL's website, but most of them deal solely with economic issues, and points 3 and 4 are based around particular issues of the day. Pretty good points to form campaigns around on, but it doesn't really seem like a programme for worker-class political power.


Also, for folks who are interested, there are old issues of the 1996 Labor Party's magazine online here: http://lpa.igc.org/lppress/lpp_arch_idx.html It helps give some insight into the debates within that organisation, though certainly doesn't tell the whole story. The FSP used to have some old articles from their participation in the Labor Party on their website, but they apparently were lost after it was redesigned.

[Kibbutznik]

What would it accomplish, really? And given the constraints of the American electoral system, does anyone really expect us to be able to dethrone one of the major parties to any significant extent in the forseeable future?

[The Hong Se Sun]

What would it accomplish, really? And given the constraints of the American electoral system, does anyone really expect us to be able to dethrone one of the major parties to any significant extent in the forseeable future?


or that they would actually have a socialist influence on the LP itself. That is my whole point is that even it becomes a success then the Trots who started this party would be thrown out eventually because the republicans will just yell communist and the LP losses every election ever.

[RedTrackWorker]

The link in my signature "No to new reformist parties!" is a long and in-depth essay taking up this question in detail. To sum up: the proper response of a revolutionary worker from say, Australia or Britain, to the call for a campaign for revolutionaries to commit to building a labor party would be "Take ours!"
I mean, if you want to tell workers that the system can be reformed and build organizations to that effect, go right ahead--just don't claim it's revolutionary or Marxist. The bright, red dividing line is the question of revolution. The workers confronted WW1 with "mass parties of labor"--far larger in Germany at least than anything you can even imagine building here, and what did that get them? They had mass parties of labor setting the workers of all countries at one another's throats! Then at the end of the war, workers rose up across the world, showing they were willing, prepared and able to sweep away the capitalist rulers and build a new society, and except in Russia, where did they find an organization built on a theory of revolution that could match in theory what the workers were showing the need for in action? And the theoretical idea of "mass parties of labor" played no small role in this, not just with the out-right reformists, not just with the vacillating centrists, but also with some of the greatest revolutionaries this world has yet seen--it is part of why Rosa Luxemburg hesitated to do what had to be done in Germany even though she saw earlier than Lenin its necessity there and it is part of why Lenin had not extended his developing political strategy internationally yet as well.
What workers need is an international revolutionary party. Campaigning for a labor party in the U.S. or these various growing reformist and so-called anti-capitalist parties around the world is campaigning for obstacles to that at this point.

[genstrike]

I don't know what's sadder, that the Democrats are so bad that even Grantites won't do entryism into them (and these are the people who still think entryism in the NDP and UK Labour is a good idea in 2010), or that the WIL is so desperate for something they can engage in entryism with that they're trying to start their own

Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what the difference between a Campaign for a Mass Party of Labor and a Campaign for a New Workers Party?

Also, for serious analysis, see: http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/labor-illusion.html

[Amphictyonis]

A mass party to represent the non union service sector workers? Fuck parties we need unions. We need class conscious American workers. You cant reform capitalism. That's all the labor party seems to do in England. Megh?

[RedTrackWorker]

I don't know what's sadder, that the Democrats are so bad that even Grantites won't do entryism into them
:laugh:
It's not like the class nature of the Democrats would stop them--note Pakistan and their entry there.


Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what the difference between a Campaign for a Mass Party of Labor and a Campaign for a New Workers Party?

Or, if you take their perspective, why not do an entry into the Greens instead of building your own thing? And for the Trotskyists who call for a labor party now but formally "recognize" the class nature of parties, how could you explain to a worker that you want to build a broad labor party but it would be unprincipled to start by working in an already established and much larger "progressive" organization like the Green Party?
Here's my take: you can't. When it's a tactic, like for the CIO in the late 30's to build a labor party, you can. Today, you can't and that should tell those Trotskyists something who think that this is the way to go.


A mass party to represent the non union service sector workers? Fuck parties we need unions. We need class conscious American workers. You cant reform capitalism. That's all the labor party seems to do in England. Megh?

I think I agree with your sentiment here Amphictyonis, except I wouldn't say "fuck parties we need unions," I would say "fuck reformist parties, we need mass struggle" (and of course a revolutionary party). The document I referred to in my above post ("No to new reformist parties") takes up this issue and talks about the general strike tactic for instance. Many leftists today say a general strike is "illusory" yet they'll go whole hog for a "mass labor party"?

[Charles Xavier]

now's the time!

I have a problem with the six point program though.



why not explicitly call for full employment? that's the best way to cap off the demand for citizenship for all; it gives you an opportunity to explain that there are enough jobs for everyone, that the only group blocking that reality is the capitalist class, not our latino brothers & sisters, etc.

Also, is this group initiated by the WIL alone or are there other backers too?

(If I sound overly critical it is not intentional. I think overall this is very good!)

Because they are social democrats not communists.

[chegitz guevara]

I have a number of objections to this campaign of WIL's, but chief most is that it is extra work for the same results.

First we build a reformist organization. Then we can build a revolutionary organization.

Or, we just build a revolutionary organization.

Either way, we must build a revolutionary organization, but we don't have to build a reformist one.

[The Hong Se Sun]

Yeah I must say that I agree with the fact that this is entryism and further more I don't care for this because it will do nothing to further socialism in the USA and will just change the name of the ruling party if this is successful (from the democrats to the LP) Not to mention as said before that no one is actually calling for a formation of a MLP and I don't think putting 'mass' in front of the word LP will make theirs more realistic or popular. I think this is doomed to fail, they should just join the green party. Most of their members I have met supported them in the last election anyway and actively work on their campaign trails locally so it is normal for them to work with liberals.

[graymouser]

Either way, we must build a revolutionary organization, but we don't have to build a reformist one.
This is assuming that the main problem is picking which to build. Unfortunately the reality is that a labor party* is probably the only way to break the pendulum swing of US electoral politics between the Democratic and Republican parties - building a "revolutionary organization" isolated from all that will get you a little way but not terribly far in the end. All of the attempts to "build the party" issuing out of the '60s radicalization have pretty much foundered on the rocks of this stalemate, leaving us with little to speak of for a left.

* I would argue that revolutionaries, in working towards the formation of a labor party, would have to argue for it to take up a full transitional program - but cannot premise their participation on this program.