Re: [Marxism] new blog post/what if the uaw owned an auto company?

[Waistline2@xxxxxxx]

What if the UAW owned an auto company? This very same question was asked 30 
 years ago - 1979. In the third quarter of 79, unable to meet it's bond  
obligations, Chrysler went belly up, and was bailed out by the Carter  
administration. The Union made horrific economic concessions, which amounted to 
 
freezing wages and benefits. The government demanded more concessions than the 
 company asked for and both went back to the table further slashing wages 
and  ending the 3% annual raise and periodic wage adjustments, called COLA, 
cost of  living allowance. 
 
When the union owns a company the union becomes the capitalists. When the  
union or workers own companies, even under socialism where the government is 
the  primary property owner, the union and workers are locked into the 
value relation  and evolve - acquire, material interest governed by the 
underlying economic law  of exchange. 
 
Is workers control or workers ownership, with or without unions a step  
forward? I would say No! 
 
Is workers control or workers ownership, with or without unions a step  
backwards? I would say, No! 
 
Workers ownership is no more or less than a last ditch effort to stabilize  
a company and increase its competitive edge by unlocking hidden pools of  
productivity and achieve greater levels of rationalization of production  
withheld from "the bosses" and institutional capital. Workers control in the  
21st century - the era of the speculator dominating the total social capital 
and  writing the agenda for the bourgeoisie as a class, is the last gasp of  
historical syndicalism and industrial forms of collusion and colliding with 
 capital. At last this is true for the working class at the front of the 
curve of  industrial and post industrial development. Just because a certain 
kind of  reform works best in Venezuela or some other less developed 
capitalist country  does not mean it is appropriate to American circumstances. 
 
State or government ownership of companies becomes a preferable option for  
various political segments of capital world wide, preferring employment of 
labor  producing hard commodities as oppose to the direct injection of 
money,  commodities and services to the unemployed. The idea that the American 
working  class should embrace the idea of scuffling another 100 years trying 
to stay  competitive in the market is bullshit. It is better to take all 
socially  necessary means of life out of the market relations and let society 
work for  itself providing these services. What is meant is your water bill, 
basic rent is  subsidized housing, health care, basic transportation, basic 
clothing, public  schools, baby sitting and who every wants more can slave 
for the capitalists,  who cannot employ everyone anyway. 
 
Such is the immediate solution to this crisis as it is being felt on May 1, 
 2009. 
 
The capitalist are not sent by God to run society forever in their  
interest. Just as the slave system was overthrown the so-called free market is  
reducing millions below the status of the old Southern slaves. Master had to  
feed his slaves and provide for their basic life necessities. Corporate 
capital  will not feed one mutherfucker that is not making them a profit. So 
the 
issue  slowly becomes who is going to survive into the 22 nd century. 
 
Us or them? 
 
Specifically, should socialists, progressives and communists support the  
current concession package endorsed by the Union, company and government? I  
cannot answer this question for anyone. I vote yes to the concessions, with  
communist literature in hand. Not literature about abstract Marxism but  
literature explaining in popular terms the fight to create a new system and 
new  laws of sovereign birth rights and advocating for a Third Edition of the  
American Revolution: Proletarian Revolution. 
 
We have a right to live and enjoy the basic fruits of society outside the  
ups and downs of the business cycle, which has become a permanent crisis. 
 
The reasoning for my actions would be the entire historical curve of  
defensive actions and fights by the working class against capitalist  
exploitation. 
 
For Marxist rhetoric? Perhaps, but I am not a liar or prepare to stand in  
front of anyone and pretend our fight for life, liberty and the pursuit of  
happiness can come of fruition within the bounds of capital. 
 
Fuck that! 
 
Yet, it is clear that the workers cannot NOT fight to survive and achieve  
employment or maintain their status as capital. 80 - 90% of the workers, at 
all  times are going to vote or express the desire to remain employed rather 
than  unemployed. Some workers will occupy plants, some will chain 
themselves to the  machine and demand the union protect their right to 
employment. 
Anyone that  stands in front of this mass of workers and tell them to just go 
home and  passively join the swelling ranks of the unemployed is going to 
be politely  listened to and completely ignored. 
 
No one is going to go quietly into the night pretending that everything is  
going to be alright. 
 
Stated another way, the only way out of this contradiction, that is really  
the contradiction called labor and capital, is the fight to reshape, 
reform,  bend and finally overthrow the power of the Constitutional regime.  
And  
create a new constitutional regime that guarantees life, liberty and the 
pursuit  of happiness by all members of the working class, especially when they 
are  unable to provide for their families and loved ones. That is to say, 
the fight  of the workers have to be pushed outside the framework of the 
capital-labor  contradiction or the trade union struggle and placed at the 
table 
of our  Constitutional authority. The spontaneous movement and evolution of 
capital, on  its own, pushes the workers outside the narrow trade union 
framework, and we  communist must explain this process, over and over again, 
even if it means  saying the same thing a million more times. 
 
Here is the issue that must be placed before the Obama administration. Nor  
do I care if Obama did not create the current crisis. He is the top dog and 
the  buck stops at his desk. 
 
Concretely, small segments of the union have pushed for years - decades, to 
 place the issue of health care at the feet of government, which company 
and  union leaders - at the highest level, have refused to do. If the 
"retirees"  owning 55% of Chrysler is to mean anything then the union must be 
mobilized on  as a permanent battle formation, marching on government until all 
of 
our arches  collapse. In America one gets nothing without protest. 
 
"Be quiet, you are going to get us in trouble and mess things up for us"  
was the attitude of the last generation of union leaders. 
 
In frustration some of us blamed the union leaders as the problem rather  
than a symptom of a bigger problem: capitalist control over the life of the  
country. Then the social consequences of the revolution in the machinery of  
society began to be felt. 
 
More later. Brain scrambled. 
 
WL. 
 
 
 
 
**************Join ChristianMingle.com® FREE! Meet Christian Singles in 
your area. Start now! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221673648x1201419171/aol?redir=http://www.christianmingle.com/campaign.html%3Fcat%3Dadbuy%26
src%3Dplatforma%26adid%3Dfooter:050109%26newurl%3Dreg_path.html)

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu