infiltrating trade unions

[R_P_A_S]

I was watching some TV here at work. and its like this channel called DW-TV.. i never really seen it. but its mainly European news... there was a report about some Labor Lawyer in Milan, Italy who is like the head of a Trade Union and how some "extremist radicals" want to infiltrate the Trade Union. and how it's dangerous for such "radical leftist" to do this.

The Labor Lawyer has received dead threats and has to have bodyguards at all times. The group mention was an Italian Communist group, that I never heard of it.. i forgot the damn name.. but it was ROSS.. like.. RED something.. ahh!

anyways.. have you guys heard about them? and if so. is this a key move for communist? to infiltrate trade unions? if so.. what do you guys feel is the best way to do this?

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 06:31 pm
I was watching some TV here at work. and its like this channel called DW-TV.. i never really seen it. but its mainly European news... there was a report about some Labor Lawyer in Milan, Italy who is like the head of a Trade Union and how some "extremist radicals" want to infiltrate the Trade Union. and how it's dangerous for such "radical leftist" to do this.

The Labor Lawyer has received dead threats and has to have bodyguards at all times. The group mention was an Italian Communist group, that I never heard of it.. i forgot the damn name.. but it was ROSS.. like.. RED something.. ahh!

anyways.. have you guys heard about them? and if so. is this a key move for communist? to infiltrate trade unions? if so.. what do you guys feel is the best way to do this?
As many of us know, the trade union has been integrated into the bourgeois class and has came to serve as a ceremonial body rather than the weapon of the employed on their employers. Even if they are decayed and clearly beyond repair, we should still agitate within these bodies while forming independent organizations that would serve the intended purposes of trade unions today.

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

was the group the "brigade rosse"???

[Sentinel]

is this a key move for communist? to infiltrate trade unions?

I'm not saying that centrally managed trade unions are totally worthless, belonging to one is to prefer to not being organised at all as it brings at least some safety.

But they're hardly the best platform to radicalise workers, many of them are corrupt sellout orgs, and even the 'honest' ones are by definition not revolutionary at all but merely interested in lesser reforms at best while maintaining the status quo and kissing ruling class ass.

And even if you'de manage to 'infiltrate' one and affect it's politics it'd still be a centrally, top down managed organisation -- not very appealing to workers who are interested in having a say in their own affairs.

Nah, join a revolutionary, fighting, anarcho-syndicalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism) union instead -- if none is represented at your workplace, contact the closest one and ask for help in starting the organising! ;)

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Y Chwildro Comiwnyddol [email protected] 28, 2007 07:37 pm
was the group the "brigade rosse"???
BINGO!

[gilhyle]

Guess they dont know its dead.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 07:42 pm

is this a key move for communist? to infiltrate trade unions?

I'm not saying that centrally managed trade unions are totally worthless, belonging to one is to prefer to not being organised at all as it brings at least some safety.

But they're hardly the best platform to radicalise workers, many of them are corrupt sellout orgs, and even the 'honest' ones are by definition not revolutionary at all but merely interested in lesser reforms at best while maintaining the status quo and kissing ruling class ass.

And even if you'de manage to 'infiltrate' one and affect it's politics it'd still be a centrally, top down managed organisation -- not very appealing to workers who are interested in having a say in their own affairs.

Nah, join a revolutionary, fighting, anarcho-syndicalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism) union instead -- if none is represented at your workplace, contact the closest one and ask for help in starting the organising! ;)
good point. but at the same time aren't those workers people we will ultimately need in the movement?

I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?
what says we can't gain support from the workers?

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Unions are in 2007, the only real organisation for proles and other members of the working class.

There are no mass political parties for workers in the west, the trade unions are really all there is, even if they aren't the best thing.

Without a communists and socialists in the trade unions the workers are left unprotected. So, they sign give backs and cuts in hours or benefits with no militancy.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 08:09 pm
good point. but at the same time aren't those workers people we will ultimately need in the movement?

I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?
what says we can't gain support from the workers?
The Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA), actively participated in daily struggles within AFL through the Trade Union Unity League with hopes of forming duel unions that would permit the participating workers to gain a sort of political stronghold. They also worked within the CIO. They did this with some success, but with the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, Moscow demanded the necessity of an alliance of all political parties against fascism, so CPUSA found themselves endorsing the New Deal and the Democratic Party, which basically subordinated them to the ruling class.

But anyway, I would agree with Sentinel that we should form independent working class organizations. But I hold that it is absolutely necessary that we work within these other trade unions in order to propagate the class struggle and advance this alternating organization foward in membership through agitation.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by RedDali+April 28, 2007 08:24 pm--> (RedDali @ April 28, 2007 08:24 pm)
[email protected] 28, 2007 08:09 pm
good point. but at the same time aren't those workers people we will ultimately need in the movement?

I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?
what says we can't gain support from the workers?
The Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA), actively participated in daily struggles within AFL through the Trade Union Unity League with hopes of forming duel unions that would permit the participating workers to gain a sort of political stronghold. They also worked within the CIO. They did this with some success, but with the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, Moscow demanded the necessity of an alliance of all political parties against fascism, so CPUSA found themselves endorsing the New Deal and the Democratic Party, which basically subordinated them to the ruling class.

But anyway, I would agree with Sentinel that we should form independent working class organizations. But I hold that it is absolutely necessary that we work within these other trade unions in order to propagate the class struggle and advance this alternating organization foward in membership through agitation. [/b]
i guess they weren't really communist then huh?

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+April 28, 2007 08:30 pm--> (R_P_A_S @ April 28, 2007 08:30 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 08:24 pm

[email protected] 28, 2007 08:09 pm
good point. but at the same time aren't those workers people we will ultimately need in the movement?

I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?
what says we can't gain support from the workers?
The Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA), actively participated in daily struggles within AFL through the Trade Union Unity League with hopes of forming duel unions that would permit the participating workers to gain a sort of political stronghold. They also worked within the CIO. They did this with some success, but with the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, Moscow demanded the necessity of an alliance of all political parties against fascism, so CPUSA found themselves endorsing the New Deal and the Democratic Party, which basically subordinated them to the ruling class.

But anyway, I would agree with Sentinel that we should form independent working class organizations. But I hold that it is absolutely necessary that we work within these other trade unions in order to propagate the class struggle and advance this alternating organization foward in membership through agitation.
i guess they weren't really communist then huh? [/b]
What? CPUSA? I would argue that they lost their relationship to the working class once Moscow ordered for them engage in strategical and political support to the Democratic Party. So yes, I would argue that they ceased to be 'communist' in nature, since this objective was unreachable by such a subordinating policy.

[sexyguy]

What is all this fetishism about joining or not joining unions? Join anything if you can develop revolutionary understanding and/or organisation etc. Do something else if you can’t.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.


I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?

Communists built the unions! Who do you think did it?

The unions, 8-hour-day and all other major gains came from class struggle, often lead by communist workers. Unions like the ILWU have lots of communists in their ranks.. and the union itself was lead by a communist for a while. So were many others. Today there are some "communist" union leaders around the world, whether or not they actually deserve that label is up for debate.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 28, 2007 08:57 pm
Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.


I can see a communist infiltration in a Trade Union.. but then again has it ever been done?

Communists built the unions! Who do you think did it?

The unions, 8-hour-day and all other major gains came from class struggle, often lead by communist workers. Unions like the ILWU have lots of communists in their ranks.. and the union itself was lead by a communist for a while. So were many others. Today there are some "communist" union leaders around the world, whether or not they actually deserve that label is up for debate.
well then again they aren't real communist. real communist someone with a clear agenda.. whatever it might be a genuine Marxist, or Trotskyist... not some petty-bourgoisie or democratic socialist trying to capitalize of his position in the Union. but rather radicalize it from with in and gain mass support.

communist started the unions.... but you even suggest they have abandon the main objective or are now just "communist"

I would like to know if this is a way to go about advancing the working class, taking back the trade unions and mobilizing them?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Work in the unions is part of what we should be doing, but it's not all.

[sexyguy]

Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.

Comrade, as this sentence stands, it is economist reformism, which is politics I asume you don't intend to degenerate to.


Communists built the unions! Who do you think did it?

Well, lots of different historical, political and ’religious’ influences went into building the unions as we know them know. Did you know that the tsarist police built unions?
And the revolutionaries joined and won them!

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 09:06 pm
I would like to know if this is a way to go about advancing the working class, taking back the trade unions and mobilizing them?
I don't think that we can "take them", or 'reform them', simply because they are already absorbed to suit bourgeois interests. We need to use the bricks of the demolished old structure to found new organizations that will suit working class interests.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Comrade, as this sentence stands, it is economist reformism, which is politics I asume you don't intend to degenerate to.

No it's not. I'm not suggesting it as an end-all strategy. It's a single part of an overall struggle.


Well, lots of different historical, political and ’religious’ influences went into building the unions as we know them know. Did you know that the tsarist police built unions?
And the revolutionaries joined and won them!

I believe RPAS was refering to unions in the U.S., though I could be wrong.

[sexyguy]

Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.
Go no then, explain why you only said “unionize their jobs if they are non-union.”
Why do you not say that if communist workers join unions (or any other organisation) in order to organise against the reformist leaders and strengthen them to become revolutionary unions?


“No it's not. I'm not suggesting it as an end-all strategy. It's a single part of an overall struggle.”

Exactly! Single issue reformist economism!

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 11:37 pm

Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.
Go no then, explain why you only said “unionize their jobs if they are non-union.”
Why do you not say that if communist workers join unions (or any other organisation) in order to organise against the reformist leaders and strengthen them to become revolutionary unions?


“No it's not. I'm not suggesting it as an end-all strategy. It's a single part of an overall struggle.”

Exactly! Single issue reformist economism!
picking one isolated sentence out of CDL's posts and holding it up to prove he's a reformist is pretty shady, even if the quote in question was an example of reformism (though it isn't).

[sexyguy]

Originally posted by PRC-UTE+April 29, 2007 12:09 am--> (PRC-UTE @ April 29, 2007 12:09 am)
[email protected] 28, 2007 11:37 pm

Communist workers should join unions or seek to unionize their jobs if they are non-union.
Go no then, explain why you only said “unionize their jobs if they are non-union.”
Why do you not say that if communist workers join unions (or any other organisation) in order to organise against the reformist leaders and strengthen them to become revolutionary unions?


“No it's not. I'm not suggesting it as an end-all strategy. It's a single part of an overall struggle.”

Exactly! Single issue reformist economism!
picking one isolated sentence out of CDL's posts and holding it up to prove he's a reformist is pretty shady, even if the quote in question was an example of reformism (though it isn't). [/b]



"picking one isolated sentence out of CDL's posts and holding it up to prove he's a reformist is pretty shady, even if the quote in question was an example of reformism (though it isn't).

Is or isn't it refomism?

[Luís Henrique]

"Infiltrating" trade unions is cop talk. The unions belong to the workers, and some workers are leftists, and will struggle to lead them. The rest is bullshit either from the police or from pseudo-vanguards that regard themselves as external saviours of the working class - which, yes, is the case of the Brigate Rosse.

Luís Henrique

[sexyguy]

The unions belong to the workers,

and the workers belong to the capitalists

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 01:23 am

The unions belong to the workers,

and the workers belong to the capitalists
And...?

What practical conclusions do you take from that?

Luís Henrique

[sexyguy]

Originally posted by Luís [email protected] 29, 2007 01:16 am
"Infiltrating" trade unions is cop talk. The unions belong to the workers, and some workers are leftists, and will struggle to lead them. The rest is bullshit either from the police or from pseudo-vanguards that regard themselves as external saviours of the working class - which, yes, is the case of the Brigate Rosse.

Luís Henrique

“Joining” trades unions is not “cop talk” unless you are a cop. Unions like everything else belong to the ruling class unless they become revolutionary unions. If they aren't, now they can be. Do we really have to spell it out?

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Luís [email protected] 29, 2007 01:16 am
"Infiltrating" trade unions is cop talk. The unions belong to the workers, and some workers are leftists, and will struggle to lead them. The rest is bullshit either from the police or from pseudo-vanguards that regard themselves as external saviours of the working class - which, yes, is the case of the Brigate Rosse.

Luís Henrique
I get the impression that everyone just assumes that all vanguards feel superior to the working class? or that they have a separate agenda than that of the working class?

Why does it hurt to have a more class conscious worker "enlighten" his fellow proletariat? perhaps Im just naive on this subject. But I want to believe that the purpose of the vanguard is solely to "get things moving, and rally everyone up" no necessarily take power and "lead" and then well thats a whole other issue.

I used the word "infiltrate" because thats what the news program used... and even if leftist workers are part of the trade unions... wouldn't you say they aren't revolutionary. or perhaps not even familiar with their REAL situation? they are just conformed? Why not have legitimate communist trade union and start a mass movement?

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by sexyguy+April 29, 2007 02:13 am--> (sexyguy @ April 29, 2007 02:13 am)
Luís [email protected] 29, 2007 01:16 am
"Infiltrating" trade unions is cop talk. The unions belong to the workers, and some workers are leftists, and will struggle to lead them. The rest is bullshit either from the police or from pseudo-vanguards that regard themselves as external saviours of the working class - which, yes, is the case of the Brigate Rosse.

Luís Henrique

“Joining” trades unions is not “cop talk” unless you are a cop. Unions like everything else belong to the ruling class unless they become revolutionary unions. If they aren't, now they can be. Do we really have to spell it out? [/b]
have Unions gone from being revolutionary(where they ever???) to just being a reform? an..
I mean are they even progressing? the way they exist now. or are they on a halt since like you pointed out they are controlled now by more bourgeoisie element than anything?

so how do they not need to be "infiltrated" by communist... after all wasn't communist influenced who put pressure on the ruling class and demanded them? why not take them back?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 02:19 am
I get the impression that everyone just assumes that all vanguards feel superior to the working class? or that they have a separate agenda than that of the working class?

Why does it hurt to have a more class conscious worker "enlighten" his fellow proletariat? perhaps Im just naive on this subject. But I want to believe that the purpose of the vanguard is solely to "get things moving, and rally everyone up" no necessarily take power and "lead" and then well thats a whole other issue.
There is not anything wrong with a vanguard. In fact, a vanguard is a fact; some workers are more mobilised, more knowledgeable or more outspoken than others. The problem resides in "vanguards" (or, as i put it, "pseudo-vanguards") that believe they bring revolutionary ideology to the class from outside.


I used the word "infiltrate" because thats what the news program used...

Yes, and they use that word for a precise ideological reason: to them, "radicals" are not part of the working class; the working class is a bovine mass that passively accepts capitalist order - and, so, any "elements" proposing radical change must be "foreign" or "exotic" "infiltrators" whose origin cannot be the impact of capitalist contradictions upon the working class.


and even if leftist workers are part of the trade unions... wouldn't you say they aren't revolutionary.

Unions, in themselves, cannot be revolutionary; their task is to defend workers' living standards within capitalist rule. That said, it is possible to undertake revolutionary work within unions. And to discard unions because they are not revolutionary is like a knight throwing away his armour because it cannot be used to punch his enemy...


Why not have legitimate communist trade union and start a mass movement?

Well, that would be a task. Unhappily, it is not quite easy.

Luís Henrique

[R_P_A_S]

I just don't get it. Marxist.. I mean just communist at that are to me very smart people. those who understand the principles and the ideology... why cant we be organized? if fucking crazed religious god loving nut jobs can coordinate chaos and attacks and master plans with their ridiculous idealism why can't we do better? having a solid theory!???!?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 02:57 am
I just don't get it. Marxist.. I mean just communist at that are to me very smart people. those who understand the principles and the ideology... why cant we be organized?
We can be and are organised. What we cannot do is to believe that our "ideology" is forged in a different place than class struggle; that it is deduced by a purely intelectual process, or bestowed upon us through some iniciatic procedure, or that it somehow makes us "better" than other workers.

Luís Henrique

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+April 29, 2007 03:06 am--> (Luís Henrique @ April 29, 2007 03:06 am)
[email protected] 29, 2007 02:57 am
I just don't get it. Marxist.. I mean just communist at that are to me very smart people. those who understand the principles and the ideology... why cant we be organized?
We can be and are organised. What we cannot do is to believe that our "ideology" is forged in a different place than class struggle; that it is deduced by a purely intelectual process, or bestowed upon us through some iniciatic procedure, or that it somehow makes us "better" than other workers.

Luís Henrique [/b]
well i agree... but some people feel that the working class are just one day going to magically get class conscious all at the same time. theres need for a teacher.. why not? as longest as, like you said this "teacher" does not believe he is better than its "student".. that has to be something everyone should agree with.

[Social Greenman]

I don't know if workers will all develope class consciousness but, as a wise man once told me, workers do look out for their interest. Perhaps one day they will unite against capitalist because it would be in their best interest. We have to develope that interest and its not going to come from those methods of the past. New ideas are needed.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

Unions are practically an arm of capitalism now. They help maintain a pleasent equilibirum for the capitalists to be able to carry out their businesses without worry.

If workers form their own anti-hierarchical, directly democratic unions, why even call them unions? They'd be pre-revolution workers' councils. Which come to think of it is not a bad idea to promote.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Social [email protected] 29, 2007 06:32 am
I don't know if workers will all develope class consciousness but, as a wise man once told me, workers do look out for their interest. Perhaps one day they will unite against capitalist because it would be in their best interest. We have to develope that interest and its not going to come from those methods of the past. New ideas are needed.
Humans... ok Workers. workers lacking class consciousness under capitalist society look out for their OWN interest and socialism and revolution is NO WHERE near their worries.. you can bet that.

these workers are worried about living better under the system. not changing it. and the Union just makes it more tolerable.

we need to take over the Unions.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Sexguy

You are talking total shit.

The capitalists don't want workers to Unionise, because they know there is potential for Unions.

If leftists don't join unions then we cant stop the bosses just sacking 10% of the workforce, we cant stop cutting hours or giving back pay.

All those things strengthen capitalism.

The Unions are able to unite workers, when you are voting for strike action workers who might hold racist views, will still need workers from others races to vote for the strike. It therefore has a compulsion towards collective multi racial multi religious and multi cultural action, unifying the workforce.

Not a bad thing lol.

A large international union, which we could see sometime in the future, would have tens of millions on strike at any one time. A strike of that magnitude, could really rock the capitalist class.

And imagine the amount of collective power that could bring to the working class. Remember, an international union would mean western workers striking with third world workers.

[sexyguy]

The influence of capitalist culture is everywhere all the time. Including in the unions, in revolutionary parties and is part of the consciousness of individual revolutionaries without exception. How could it be otherwise? We don’t come from some other planet. Revolutionaries in the unions or anywhere else, EMERGE FROM CAPITALIST SOCIETY. Capitalism provides the conditions that create revolutionaries and revolutionary ideas. Existing conditions are not static conditions, they are constantly changing.

As capitalist economic crisis gets more destructive and its war chaos gets more vicious it creates the conditions for revolution and creates its own “grave diggers”. The ‘conscious’ revolutionary “grave diggers” of capitalism ‘lead’ others because they gain ’authority’ among workers. This is a process that capitalism instinctively and consciously attempts to disrupt and destroy, and why wouldn’t it?

Guarding against opportunist ’vanguards’ who posture as revolutionaries is a good policy, but revolution is a very ’authoritative’ business where one class imposes its will on another class. If anyone out there can say how this is to be accomplished without ’leadership’ and ’authority’ among the unions together with many other social formations, please let us know.

[redflag32]

I just thought this website would be usefull to any Irish posters here, they have alot of potential i think,and this is coming from someone who doesnt think much of the union movement at all.

http://www.union.ie/index.htm

Sorry if this seems like a plug for them,it int,im not even a member. I just thought the link was relevent to the discussion,mods can take it down if they wish. ;)

[bolshevik butcher]

Work inside trade unions is vital for socialists/communists. The unions is where workers are most likely to respond to our ideas, unions by their very nature generate class consciousness, they clearly set workers against bosses. Socialists need to work in unions to further radicalise the membership and push for an agenda that goes beyond economics, as is initially the case in many unions and into wider political questions.

[redflag32]

I would agree that we have to infiltrate and revolutionize Unions,but as i see it today,Unions are more of a tool for the capitalists to control the workers. I dont think pitting the worker against the boss creates class consciousness either,it has to be much more than that. Everybody knows the boss will take as much as he can and that you have to fight for everything you get,most people know this and they are not class conscious,you have to show them why the bosses do this and ow they are able and allowed to get away with it. If the people dont make that connection between capitalism and the boss then they will just see the union as a reformist tool which will aid them in getting a better wage or standard of living.

[bolshevik butcher]

I'd agree that intiially union membership usually provides a low level of class consciousness, but through their struggles the workers learn where they stand in relation to their boss, and as events escelate this can often develop. I'd agree that the task of socialists is to demonstrate how the workers interests conflicted with all bosses and lay with the working class as a whole and not just in their particular work place.

It's true that many unions are run by bueraucrats who'se interst it is to see the status quote in place so that they can keep their high salaries and continue to sell out their member as a result. However I don't think this changes the fundemental class character of a trade union as a working class organisation.

[UndergroundConnexion]

ye brigade rosse is like the RAF or Action Direct, urban guerilla shit, I understnad that trade unions do not want to be seen as close to these groups, as especailly brigade rosse, has a bad reputation.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by bolshevik [email protected] 29, 2007 11:35 am
I'd agree that intiially union membership usually provides a low level of class consciousness, but through their struggles the workers learn where they stand in relation to their boss, and as events escelate this can often develop. I'd agree that the task of socialists is to demonstrate how the workers interests conflicted with all bosses and lay with the working class as a whole and not just in their particular work place.

It's true that many unions are run by bueraucrats who'se interst it is to see the status quote in place so that they can keep their high salaries and continue to sell out their member as a result. However I don't think this changes the fundemental class character of a trade union as a working class organisation.
I agree comrade,although i dont have great faith in Unions as they stand,particularly in Ireland,they are still by default working class organizations and have great potential.

[Xiao Banfa]

"Infiltrating" trade unions is cop talk. The unions belong to the workers, and some workers are leftists, and will struggle to lead them. The rest is bullshit either from the police or from pseudo-vanguards that regard themselves as external saviours of the working class - which, yes, is the case of the Brigate Rosse.

Luís Henrique

Most definitely. It's not about "infiltrating the unions" it's about helping the workers.
It's about being a worker.

There should be a strong working class- conscious and aware of it's own interests and hopefully looking towards a positive, cleaner future for humanity.

There's a lot of straightforward social, political and cultural work necessary to lay the foundations for a transition to socialism.

Infiltration is cop talk, it's not vocabulary progressive people should use.