What is the situation in Finland? which are the biggest trade unions? What percentage of people are in them? Are they organs of class struggle, or do we need to repair them?
Yes, since they are supported by the government financially there is not a shread of class consciousness there. Also, membership does indeed quarantee some minor advantages. And membership percent is very high when compared to some countries. I do not know the exact numbers, but it is obvious that there are more members than those who are not in unions at all.
Frank, if you believe in working within mainstream unions to radicalise and democratise them, would you interested in forming a group or network that would deal with coordinating in that way?
You would rather build an independent trade union?
Why? would it not be easier to form a Political organisation and operate within existing unions?
Maybe. [FONT=Arial]"Anarcho-syndicalism, trying to forcefully introduce libertarian ideas into the left wing of revolutionary syndicalism as a means of creating anarchist-type unions, represents a step forward, but it does not, as yet, go beyond the empirical method, for anarcho-syndicalism does not necessarily interweave the 'anarchisation' of the trade union movement with that of the anarchists organised outside the movement. For it is only on this basis, of such a liaison, that revolutionary trade unionism could be 'anarchised' and prevented from moving towards opportunism and reformism.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]In regarding syndicalism only as a professional body of workers without a coherent social and political theory, and consequently, being powerless to resolve the social question on its own, we consider that the tasks of anarchists in the ranks of the movement consist of developing libertarian theory, and point it in a libertarian direction, in order to transform it into an active arm of the social revolution. It is necessary to never forget that if trade unionism does not find in anarchist theory a support in opportune times it will turn, whether we like it or not, to the ideology of a political statist party.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]The tasks of anarchists in the ranks of the revolutionary workers' movement could only be fulfilled on conditions that their work was closely interwoven and linked with the activity of the anarchist organisation outside the union. In other words, we must enter into revolutionary trade unions as an organised force, responsible to accomplish work in the union before the general anarchist organisation and orientated by the latter.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]Without restricting ourselves to the creation of anarchist unions, we must seek to exercise our theoretical influence on all trade unions, and in all its forms (the lWW, Russian TU's). We can only achieve this end by working in rigorously organised anarchist collectives; but never in small empirical groups, having between them neither organisational liaison nor theoretical agreement.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]Groups of anarchists in companies, factories and workshops, preoccupied in creating anarchist unions, leading the struggle in revolutionary unions for the domination of libertarian ideas in unionism, groups organised in their action by a general anarchist organisation: these are the ways and means of anarchists' attitudes vis-Ã*-vis trade unionism."[/FONT]
Meaning of this post? And who wrote it? Makhno wrote it. It says that building our own anarcho unions has some value, but puts us in a box where we become unable to influence the rest of the workers movement with out politics. Therefore it is better for us to be involved in all the major unions as anarchists.
