Unionisation of State Forces

[BOZG]

I have never seen this topic on the site before so I thought it would be good to start a debate on it. Basically the debate is on the idea of whether we should call and support the idea of the forming of trade unions for the armed forces of the state; the police and military. At the moment I'm not totally decided on the issue but at the moment, though it could change with further thought and debate, I'm opposed to the left calling for unionisation of state forces, on the grounds that they have chosen to make their bed with the state and have consciously signed up to protect the state in antagonism with their class, which essentially makes them class enemies. And its essentially calling for the bettering of our class enemy. I do see where people who support the idea come from, hoping to prey on the fact that the majority of rank and file members of the state forces, are from the lower-middle or working classes and that as workers, we should support their rights. It's an issue that I had never really though about and thus I haven't reached a full conclusion on the issue and would like to see what other comrades think of it. Also I think that it could become relevant that, we discuss the issue, seperating the military and the police and analysing their roles in society because under revolutionary circumstances, I believe they're could be huge differences in how each force reacts.

[redstar2000]

Police no, Army maybe.

A union of conscripted soldiers would probably be very useful in the period leading up to the revolution.

But professional soldiers, like the police, have "taken sides" against us. I don't see any reason why that would change, even if they were "unionized".

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[BOZG]

At the moment that's pretty much my stance, I've yet to hear any real alternative argument to it.

That's why I thought it was important to analyse the army and police seperately.

[redstar2000]

It's interesting that the last defenders of the Czarist regime during February 1917 in Petrograd were the police.

There was not a great deal of violence in that revolution, but what there was consisted mostly of armed clashes between revolutionary soldiers and the police forces of the old regime.

The police formed "sniper squads" and randomly shot at people from Petrograd rooftops; the soldiers had to go from building to building to trap and kill them.

It's something to remember when the time comes.

http://www.sawu.org/redgreenleft/YaBBImages/smoking.gif
___________________________

U.S. GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
___________________________

"...a disgusting and frightening website"
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.sawu.org/redstar2000)
A site about communist ideas

[Severian]

Many police, prison guards, etc are "unionized" at least in the U.S. These "unions" typically defend the right of these cops, guards, etc to brutalize workers. When cops are (occasionally) prosecuted for beating or shooting people, their "unions" organize demonstrations to defend them.

There was a guards' strike at NYC's Rikers Island prison in the early 90s: they beat up an ambulance driver who was trying to cross the bridge for a sick inmate. Then, when the city authorities met their demans, the guards celebrated their victory by charging back across the bridge and carrying out a police riot against the prisoners.

Cops, prison guards, etc are not part of our class. Rather they are organized to repress our class.

In contrast, most enlisted soldiers are part of our class. Heck, most of 'em probably don't intend to stay in for life.

Whether unions are the best form of organization I would tend to doubt. They haven't actually caught on in any military I know of.

And I think the demands communists would promote re workers in uniform wouldn't be for higher wages, and other typical union demands, but things like:

Bring them home from Iraq, etc., now.

Full constitutional rights for citizen-soldiers, including the right to speak out against war. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is not higher than the Bill of Rights.

Against abuse by, special privileges for, officers.

During Vietnam, and even more in the period immediately after WWII, antiwar, "bring us home", organization actually caught on among U.S. soldiers. Indications are that a lot of soldiers today are becoming quite dissatisfied with extended deployment in Iraq. Some have criticized Bush et al, and been threatened with disciplinary action for it. WashPost article - they make ya answer a couple questions before reading it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31317-2003Aug7.html)

Even more of soldiers' families have been speaking out, probably influenced in part by letters home.

On the Russian Revolution, there also it wasn't union organization, but soldiers' committees and soviets (characteristic of a revolutionary situation, of course.) And the demands of the soldiers didn't center around wages, but around ending the war and going home, democratic rights, abuse by officers....and going beyond that into questions of who controls the army, officers or soldiers' committees.