trade unionism& anarchism

[Anarchist Freedom]

Is trade unionism a tool that can be used to bring about a revolution and change for an anarchist future?

[The Grapes of Wrath]

Now, that is an interesting and relevant question. However, the question that arises for me is on the question itself. Do you mean "skilled" worker unions, like the UAW or say, a Plumbers Union, some organization that requires a specialization such as that? Or do you mean merely unions in general, such as an agricultural union, or a miner's union, or other similar "unskilled" labor unions?

I am assuming, given your identification as an Anarchist, which is very respectable I must add, that you are agreeing with the latter. Now, in regards to the former, I must make the point that these "skilled" unions must be radicalized, for they hold some key positions (firefighters, teamsters, city transportation workers, teachers, some federal jobs, and yes, even police). However, the last two unions will of course never advocate radicalization, and actually hold the most key positions. Without these two unions (and I'm sure many more) I don't think the movement would get as far as Anarchism, or bring about enormous change, given how most (at least American) workers are non-union members.

The American union movement has been floundering for decades now. Since the elimination of many manufacturing jobs which have either gone to non-union states (ie New Mexico, etc) or else to non-organized nations (ie China despite what they may say about being 'Communist', Indonesia, etc) where they hold the real power through economics. These industries terrorize the local population with talk of relocating to "greener pastures" if the business climate goes sour there, while, at the same time commanding the government, through threat of the same means or else threat from some sort of intervention.

So, the power that at least the American manufacturing unions used to hold has all but collapsed. And since a move to Anarchism would require more than simply a collection of Carpenters and Plumbers (not discouting their contributions of course), it seems unlikely that unions alone could be used.

Many who work in non-unionized "Wal-Mart" jobs and/or white collar workers (who, we must not forget, are workers too) are not organized and cannot be overlooked, afterall, a move to Anarchism would require their help as well. A move to any major social change would require everyone's help.

Only through social revolution, whether with unions as a subsequent vanguard or else simply an all-around move to left thought , will things ever amount to Anarchism.

So, to answer the question I believe you asked, can unions be a tool towards anarchism? Yes, but merely that, a tool. For Anarchism to spread, for the required social revolution to take place, all workers must realize who they are and their significance to the economy. That means everyone, from librarian to computer engineer, from insurance underwriter to "lowly" janitor.

I hope that answered your question, or at least gives it another light. After reading through it, it seems a rather weak reply. Well, maybe I was being ambiguous(?).

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Anarchist [email protected] 19 2004, 09:54 PM
Is trade unionism a tool that can be used to bring about a revolution and change for an anarchist future?
The short answer is No.

I think however that it's important to differentiate between Trade Unions and industrial action.

Trade Unions are hierarchical organisations who's bosses have a very specific agenda. Trade Union bosses are paid vast amounts of money, which is no surprise. The government leaders need to keep them happy. If the Union bosses get paid ten's of thousands of pounds, then they are easier to control.

Trade Unions are controlled by people who serve the interests of the ruling class. The fire-fighters dispute is an example of where Trade Union bosses capitulate to the sound of the bosses. They rally the troops, but then when the going gets tuff, they pull the reigns back. Why? Because £100,000 a year is a lot of money to throw away. Andy Gilchrist has nothing to worry about, yet the fire-fighters are still underpaid, they are still under staffed and they are still no better off.

If we can't trust the politicians who are paid £100,000's, why would be trust Union leaders? There's really no difference.

Industrial action, though, does pay off. The fire-fighters strike was an example of mass workers action. If that action was independent of the treachery of trade union bosses things could have been different. If the fire-fighters had stuck in and ignored their union leader they could have fought on. The government was about to make striking for fire-fighters illegal in order to get them back to work! That was a massive thing to force on an apparent "democratic" government.

Many Trotskyists and other socialists will probably say "how can you have workers action without an organisation to direct it." The answer is that the workers are the organisation and their decisions are how you direct the action.

Anarchists do and can work within trade unions, and it can be useful to push for strike action etc but once that strike action happens, it is important to agitate that breaking from the unions and forming a "united workers front" (for example), controlled from the rank and file will be the only way to make real gains, and it can only break up when they decide, not when the bosses sell them out!

Industrial action is also a great basis for spreading anarchist ideas among workers. They are ready and angry enough to listen.

[enigma2517]

What about anarcho-syndicalism. I thought that was like "guild socialism", with the emphasis placed on the workers, and that syndicates evolve from unions originally established within the capitalism system. Simply, I think that its another primitive form of worker organization, until that organization can grow into more developed structures. Can it acheive revolution on its own? No. Is it a start? Quite possibly.

[SonofRage]

One Big Union

[komon]

never forget you are a slave and a man.the rest is up to you.

[Morpheus]

Trade Unions are hierarchical organisations who's bosses have a very specific agenda. Trade Union bosses are paid vast amounts of money, which is no surprise. The government leaders need to keep them happy. If the Union bosses get paid ten's of thousands of pounds, then they are easier to control.

You can have unions that aren't organized hierarchically, like the classical anarcho-syndicalist unions.

[Guest1]

Agreed, unions are a very important place to concentrate organizing, not just for Anarchists, but all Communists.

Yes, they have been co-opted, yes the leadership is very corrupt, but you can't abandon those organized by unions to their masters. If you work at a unionized shop, no matter how corrupt the leadership, it makes sense to be there and agitate. There is nothing inherently hierarchical about unions, so if Anarchists are there when the bureaucrats sell out the strike or factory takeover, we're there to say "onwards without the bureaucrats!".

It's the only way. I don't know what it's like in Britain or the US, but we just had something like 5 general strikes go through in the vote in 5 different provinces around the same time. The bureaucrats stepped in and shut it down, overturning the will of the grassroots, but it was a sign of how radical workers were becoming. More importantly, the grassroots called it for what it was, a betrayal, they were damn angry.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 22 2004, 01:11 PM
Agreed, unions are a very important place to concentrate organizing, not just for Anarchists, but all Communists.
As I said, libertarian union organisation can be very effective I think that this is how the workers should be encouraged to organise independently of the normal union's, because there is nothing that can be done, not in the way Anarchist Freedom asks, by being apart of them.


Yes, they have been co-opted, yes the leadership is very corrupt, but you can't abandon those organized by unions to their masters.

No, you can start other unions.


There is nothing inherently hierarchical about unions

Not in the idea necessarily, no. But they are hierarchical.

[Guest1]

When it comes to unions, I'm all for joining the IWW or whatever, but if you're at a workplace already organized by another union, it makes no sense to "start your own". If you can get the support to start or join a radical union, great! But in most situations, the support isn't just there. You gotta join the workers in the union they organize with, and fight side by side with them in their struggle. Everytime their leaders fail them, and they are outraged at their inneptitude, you are there to say fuck bureaucrats. Onwards without them.

When the time is right, they will break from the bureaucracy. But working outside the unions will make it that much more difficult for workers at that local to relate to you. They need to see you there, see you are one of them, instead of assuming you're just a competing bureaucrat feeding them lies.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 22 2004, 03:39 PM
if you're at a workplace already organized by another union, it makes no sense to "start your own".
Right.


But in most situations, the support isn't just there. You gotta join the workers in the union they organize with, and fight side by side with them in their struggle. Everytime their leaders fail them, and they are outraged at their inneptitude, you are there to say fuck bureaucrats. Onwards without them

Why can't you fuck the bureaucrats of in the first place?


When the time is right, they will break from the bureaucracy.

Right.


But working outside the unions will make it that much more difficult for workers at that local to relate to you.

To follow on from what's been talked about, yes.


They need to see you there, see you are one of them, instead of assuming you're just a competing bureaucrat feeding them lies.

Yes, working within Unions does have its upside, such as spreading anarchist ideas and encouraging industrial action.

[Zingu]

More democractic or ideologically backed labor unions could block out any capitalist corruption, take for example the IWW. But the problem is, once we have our unions, what is our next step? Keep protesting for our wages and benefits? When do we take the great next revolutionary leap in progressing for a revolutionary society? Of course before this, we have to educate the workers where they stand, what they can do, and what it up to them.
Basically, what I am asking is, how to we break the back of the capitalists and the government supporting them through union action?

[komon]

stop working for them ;)

[Zingu]

Yes, but we couldn't do that forever, we would have to seize control of the factories, sack the boss, make everything union controlled, but then that would be open revolt, it would escalate very fast, we would have to arm ourselves, the government would send the national guard, ect. It would happen very fast when we started a revolution, we would have to be prepared so we could mobilize when the time comes, so we aren't crushed in a matter of days, it would call for pre planned militant unions, arms caches ect.
Just seems to be very risky and unstable (which it would be in any sitiuation), but how would we plan for such a time?

[komon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2004, 05:23 PM
Yes, but we couldn't do that forever, we would have to seize control of the factories, sack the boss, make everything union controlled, but then that would be open revolt, it would escalate very fast, we would have to arm ourselves, the government would send the national guard, ect. It would happen very fast when we started a revolution, we would have to be prepared so we could mobilize when the time comes, so we aren't crushed in a matter of days, it would call for pre planned militant unions, arms caches ect.
Just seems to be very risky and unstable (which it would be in any sitiuation), but how would we plan for such a time?
that what revolution is over,and of course it will escalate,but number and conciousness of the people could do it.believe and work together.

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 22 2004, 12:39 PM
When it comes to unions, I'm all for joining the IWW or whatever, but if you're at a workplace already organized by another union, it makes no sense to "start your own". If you can get the support to start or join a radical union, great! But in most situations, the support isn't just there. You gotta join the workers in the union they organize with, and fight side by side with them in their struggle. Everytime their leaders fail them, and they are outraged at their inneptitude, you are there to say fuck bureaucrats. Onwards without them.

When the time is right, they will break from the bureaucracy. But working outside the unions will make it that much more difficult for workers at that local to relate to you. They need to see you there, see you are one of them, instead of assuming you're just a competing bureaucrat feeding them lies.
There are a good number of people in the IWW who are "dual-carders" meaning that they are in an AFL-CIO union as well as being in the IWW. I think radicals who are in business unions can do good buy joining the IWW and perhaps forming a dissident caucus. They can promote IWW principles.

[komon]

here is linkCNT (http://www.cnt-f.org/)

http://www.cnt-f.org/IMAGES/Logos/poisson2.jpg

but in french :(


no wars between people
no peace between classes