Re: Anglo-Saxon Labour Party trend and Discontent with Unions

[Adam Rose <adam@xxxxxxxx>]

Zeynep writes:
>
> A few questions about Europe and US.
>
> Do you think that the fact that there is now a search for a "Labour Party",
> rather than the existing Dems and Labs (yup, I'm abbreviating too) both in
> Britain and US points to a trend?
>

Yes - workers are looking for new political alternatives.
This is a reflection of the crisis in the system, economic and political.

However, Labo(u)r parties are still within the overall framework of the system.

Where there are not pre existing vehicles for this discontent ( Greens in
Germany ? Refounded Communists in Italy ? ) some workers have created new
ones.

>
> This may not be a trend caused by the same dynamic. Is this a historical
> contingency?
>

What's a "historical contingency" ?

> When people used to ask us a few years ago "why a trade union" (that is a
> basic question in this country, with union density very low, and anti-union
> laws very harsh) we'd say "for better wages for a better life." Now, that
> answer does not work, because union's are losing their ground as the way
> they operate nows is derived from their "welfare state", "corporatist" era.
> So, it seems the case in other countries.
>
> Is it possible or justified to say, that currently, the working people in
> imperialist countries are also wondering "the unions don't really work the
> way they are, and none of these parties can really protect our rights in
> this sea of insecurity". And looking for answers?
>

On the part of the large numbers of workers in the US, a move from not
voting or voting Rep or Dem, to voting Labor, is a move towards working
class organisation. Large numbers of white collar workers eg Bank workers,
nurses etc have moved towards trade union organisation in the last ten years
in the UK, and this is reflected in the Labour vote here ( or rather, these 
people
have moved left, and this move has an industrial and a political manifestation 
).

But, at the same time, the movement behind (Socialist) Labo(u)r also reflects
a move on the part of socialist activists away from seeing the working class
as the agent of change towards parliament. In other words, a move away from
the working class. They have not said "Union leaders sell us out. Therefore
we need to build an organisation with roots in the workplace to move
independently of them". They have said "Union leaders sell us out. Therefore
we need to build a political party that can put pressure on the system in
parliament to achieve any lasting change".

> And how do you think the discontent in France and Germany with union
> leadership (very obvious in France, increasing in Germany) will find its
> reflection in the politics? Can the SPD in Germany, or the CPF and/or the
> Socialists in France still claim to be the answer?
>

They will of course still claim to be the answer, and in the absense of an
alternative may be more or less successful. I think the SPD and the French
Socialists will have more trouble moving left in a credible way than the PCF,
because they are more closely associated with the attacks on the working class.

The working class in France recently also provided an answer - in some
areas, rank + file "coordinations" were formed, which brought together workers
>from different industries to coordinate the action.

> Last, of course related to the "performance" of the real left (us, us, us);
> could not the fascist/nationalist right mobilise this discontent in a very
> unwanted (to say the least) manner?
>

Indeed.
This has been, and may be again, the price of our failure.

Adam.



Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
UK


---------------------------------------------------------------


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---