US Unionism–What to Do (Part Two)?
By Rich Gibson, March 2011
With respect to nearly anyone
who is trying to fight back in our current context, I differ from what most
people think about the current state of US unionism.
Of course, none of that can
be split away from an analysis of our current circumstances which I believe is
the rapid emergence of fascism as a popular movement.
It does not have to be that
way.
Let us hope that another
scenario is possible if we take on the hard tasks of the immediate future. One
of those tasks is to determine the role of the unions and the relationship of
radicals to them.
Labor bosses at all levels
are the nearest and most vulnerable of workers' enemies. Rather than "move
unions to the left," better, "demolish the labor quislings, take
their treasuries, seize their buildings, as we build a mass class conscious
movement to transcend the system of capital."
Why does that make better
sense?
*Every
major labor leader in the US adopts the corporate-state view of unity of Labor
Bosses, Government, and Corporations in the national interest. These are hardly
"labor" unions in the strict sense of the word. They are the Empire's
unions. I assume the connections of Labor and US intelligence are known and do
not need to be explained. They are the unions of what now is, surely, the US
Corporate State.
*It
follows that the Labor Bosses deceive people from the moment they join a union,
the key lie being that none of labor’s elites believe that workers and
employers have contradictory interests–the very reason most people agree
to send them money.
*The
remarkable salaries of US Labor Bosses come directly from the fruits of US
imperialism and war. They know that. They have been war hawks for decades, using
the unions to promote the Empire's desires. They sit on the boards of the
Social Democrats USA, the National Endowment for Democracy, The Albert Shanker
Institute, The George Meany Center, and other fronts for the Central
Intelligence Agency. Following the history of the American Federation of Labor,
which sought to organize white men into craft (skill based) unions, and exclude
most of the working class, the international operations of the AFL-CIO seek to
demolish indigenous workers’ struggles so, in theory, American workers will do
better. Clearly, this failed.
*Union
tops trade a pacified or disciplined work force for money from employers. That
is the nucleus of “collective bargaining.” Employers collect dues (check off)
on behalf of the union, send it to the union heads, while the labor tops
promise labor peace for the duration of the contract. That is precisely the
traditional exchange. Labor heads use violence to “protect the contract,”
because employers can sue them if the rank and file wildcats, strikes within
the contract’s time period. Henry
Ford fought unions for years. When he finally came to understand this devil’s
deal, he said, “You mean I’m the union’s banker? Sign me on!” Today, Ford
management organizes Ford plants on behalf of the United Autoworkers Union. The
upshot is, labor leaders (1) condition the work force for passivity, (2) urge
members to think of the union as a vending machine, (3) consider the treasury,
and thus mis-leaders own jobs, to be more important than the interest of the
rank and file members–the union becomes a bank.
*When
labor tops cry, “Save Collective Bargaining,” they really mean, “Save My Job
and Pension!” The last 40 years of labor history show they are willing to
concede everything the members have (wages, hours, working conditions,
pensions) to management, often under the guise of “Save Our American Industry,”
but what they really want is to preserve their money.
*The
vast majority of unions are corrupt and hierarchical at the core, usually
mimicking the structure of the employers. So, those seeking to reform those
unions are not learning lessons to transcend capitalism, but rather they learn
every opportunist and corrupt maneuver that has kept US "unionism"
afloat when it should have been put to death years ago.
*
When one gets close to "reforming" a US union, one will face serious
violence. That will come from not only the union bosses, but their allies in
the courts, the cops, joint union/Boss firings, intelligence, and the mob--one
or all. Those unprepared for that should, at the least, be forewarned.
*The
unions accept without question the multiple divisions of labor that, in part,
lay at the base of the capitalist system. The unions divide people far more
than unite people.
*The
"Labor Movement" is full of police, prison guards, and others
dedicated to the promulgation of the violence that is the stick behind
capital's carrots (vanishing fast).
*Other
labor unions are so mobbed up that it is impossible to distinguish the labor
leaders from the gangsters–an indicator of the relationship of those who
do crime, and the cops who often help them organize it. In this case, the
relationship has a third party, the members, who are thrice robbed: by the
cops, by the gangsters, and by fetish that is their union, but is not a union.
*The
last thing the Labor Movement and its aristocrats wants is a mass of class
conscious workers who are willing to fight in solidarity to control their work
places and communities. That would mean the Labor Bosses would have nothing to
sell to the Big Bosses (labor peace/no strike clauses for check-off). Instead
the ability to control the work place becomes confused with ability to control
the union, which is often a contradiction. There is no way to overcome this structural
and psychological poisoning of the well.
*The
Labor Movement is not about to teach people Grand Strategy (overcome capital),
strategy (how to study concrete conditions about how capital works in specific
places and make broad plans to fit the Grand Strategy) and tactics (sit down
strikes, mutinies, etc) not only because the Labor Movement bitterly opposes
that, but also because there is nearly no one left in Labor who even knows how
to fake it.
*The
"Labor Movement" is not a movement and it is not where most people
who work are. In fact, the overwhelming majority of people who are likely to be
early change agents are not in unions: soldiers and students. To lure them into
some bogus kind of US unionism, or nearly any other "unorganized"
person, is to just add a layer of enemies for them. Why do that?
*Yes,
some people are in unions and those who are serious about transforming
capitalism need to be in those unions, attacking the leadership, the
corruption, the hierarchies, the betrayals, the theft of treasuries, etc. But
they need one toe in and nine out.
*There
are, nearly, no progressive lessons to be learned from the Labor Movement,
except when the rank and file fights the union -- with the goal of overturning
it entirely. The IWW notion that, "The working class and the employing
class have nothing in common," applies to workers and their union leaders
as well.
*Repeated
efforts to reform "Labor" have either been silly like Aronowitz and
others' "Scholars, Artists and Writers for Social Justice," etc, or
simply failed, if pretty heroically: Labor Notes.
The emergence of fascism will
not mirror its predecessor movements in precise ways. However, if that was to
happen, the US union offices would be where people would be instructed to pick
up their brown-shirts.
It is well past time to get
beyond the genteel idea that Richard Trumka, the picture of narcissism, is
going to be "moved left," or voted out of office, just as it is well
beyond the time to grasp what capitalist democracy is: capital trumping
whatever democracy may be at every turn today.
I am sincerely sorry UAW
members have not yet assaulted Solidarity (sic) House, thrown the vile leaders
of the UAW in the Detroit River, grabbed membership lists, needed machinery, and
whatever of the treasury they can, and either fled or held the building as long
as possible while reinforcements have a chance to arrive to fend off the UAW's
goon/staff a la their action at the Detroit Mack Avenue plant in 1973.
I am sorry workers have not
stormed podiums, grabbed mikes, slugged the labor hacks, and made speeches to
their co-workers about what a real workers' organization would look like (see
Paris Commune for starters).
I am sorry there have not
been more wildcats like the Detroit Teachers Wildcat Strike:
http://clogic.eserver.org/2-2/gibson.html
Harsh, harsh measures to
those union hacks who seek to foist concessions on the rank and file when 40
years of labor history show that concessions do not save jobs. Like feeding
blood to sharks, concessions only make employers want more. Harsh measures.
I look forward to all of that
happening, and more, and I think it will.
The core issue of our times
is the rise of color-coded inequality and the real promise of perpetual war met
by the potential of mass class-conscious resistance.
At issue is connecting reason
to power.
So far, the education agenda
is a war agenda. http://www.richgibson.com/edagenda_waragenda.html
Good luck to us, every
one. r