Log in

View Full Version : may 68



bur372
26th February 2005, 23:14
After reading about May 68 ( in may 1968 2/3 of frances working class were on strike) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_68
I am starting to begin thinking that a strike could be used instead of a revoloution. I suppose that a strike could be classed as a democracy beacuse you can only really strike in a society which belives in freedom of speech and freedom of expression. You could not strike in nazi germany.

However one paragraph of the article I found very intresting



These strikes were not led by the union movement; on the contrary, the CGT tried to contain this spontaneous outbreak of militancy by channelling it into a struggle for higher wages and other economic demands. Workers put forward a broader, more political and more radical agenda, demanding the ouster of the government and President de Gaulle and attempting, in some cases, to run their factories. When the trade union leadership negotiated a 35% increase in the minimum wage, a 7% wage increase for other workers, and half normal pay for the time on strike with the major employers' associations, the workers occupying their factories refused to return to work and jeered their union leaders, even though this deal was better than what they could have obtained only a month earlier.

Could the idea of workers striking without a union be considered as a true Anarcho-syndicalism? Is a strike without a union more revoloutinary than a strike with a union?

Jesus Christ!
26th February 2005, 23:19
I think it would definatly take much more work to get a strike without a union to be a success but wether or not it's more revolutionary is a very hard thing to judge. I think it would be very revoltionary if 2/3 of the work force of any country went on strike it would also be a very powerful force with which to negotiate. I don't think it would be enough to over throw a government but I'm sure it would get the worker's needs met.

KptnKrill
26th February 2005, 23:25
Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 11:14 PM
Could the idea of workers striking without a union be considered as a true Anarcho-syndicalism? Is a strike without a union more revoloutinary than a strike with a union?
Well yes because it implies that society is ready for a change... instead of a group of people working in a particular mill or whatnot. And usually unionised strikes have fairly specific goals, I wouldn't say that is true (at least not to the same extent) in this scenario.

If it could be used instead of revolution... of course not. To supplement or initiate it, yah why not, it worked for the french in 68 ;)

Non-Sectarian Bastard!
26th February 2005, 23:31
The CGT was aligned with the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) of France. Once again Leninists proofed themselves to be reactionary. Interesting though that a large number of Leninist individuals joined the striking and protesting "mass".


Could the idea of workers striking without a union be considered as a true Anarcho-syndicalism? Is a strike without a union more revoloutinary than a strike with a union?

Sure, why not. Anarcho-syndicalists have been known for their support of wildstrikes, especially in the US where they were in the IWW. Whetever striking with or without an union is more revolutionary, really depends on the union. The French CGT par example who in the midst of revolutionary activity tried to stop it all, could be counted as very reactionary. The Spanish CNT-FAI on the other hand played an important role in the 3 years of Anarchism.

I do still wonder, "what if". Had the French state been overthrown.

EMS
27th February 2005, 00:12
thats strange i was reading taht same article, and i think if france had fallen the world would be very different, ussr wouldnt have hesitated to knock out west germany, two fronts, then britain would have fallen in a few days, things would have been very different, with the industrial power of those three nations, (spain portugal would fight, but eventually fall, and italy would fall too) you could advance the world revolution, to think we were just days from a different world, it saddens me

Non-Sectarian Bastard!
27th February 2005, 10:22
I don't think that the USSR would have attacked. If the strike had succeeded, then France wouldn't have been Marxist-Leninist.

bolshevik butcher
27th February 2005, 13:23
Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Feb 27 2005, 10:22 AM
I don't think that the USSR would have attacked. If the strike had succeeded, then France wouldn't have been Marxist-Leninist.
It would probably have causde a nuclear war as well. Anyway the uusr was socialist in name only.

Non-Sectarian Bastard!
27th February 2005, 13:58
What are you talking about? Are you nuts?

The USSR wouldn't have dont anything.