Re: AUT: Unions and revolution

[mrnobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

neil wrote:

> Workers for workers rule should of course work in
> unions but in the main to encourage the ranks to take up  building
> of re-newed workers combativity and mass actions.

Hmm. Maybe unions could usher in an era of 'workers rule' in the sense
of worker managed capitalism, in which case this statement would be
correct (if in contradiction to the anti-union analysis of the rest of
your mail). But for proletarians fighting for the abolition of the
proletariat, and of work as such, the question is more complex.
Sometimes survival depends on joining a union, such as in the case of a
closed shop, when a refusal of union membership means no work and so no
wage. But if we are talking in general, then its probably better to
avoid union membership. Unions are capitalist organisations, so why
join?

I know of workers who have been on strike without being in a union (out
of principle) and this action helped weaken the grip of unionist
ideology at there workplaces. On the other hand I know of 'communists'
who re-iterate critiques of the unions whilst themselves being
(secretely) shop stewards or other union officials, and who then go one
to apologise for other low level officials. Joining the union it seems
is a slippery slope. I don't know why so many supposedly "anti-union
communists" recommend joining them.

Lets make this clear. I am not condemning anyone for actually joining
unions. But I don't think joining should be recommended in general.


--
web:            http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill//Lobby/3909/
email:          mrnobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
post:           BM Makhno, London WC1N 3XX, UK


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---