Across the country in Ohio there has also been an
important development. The Lorain County Central Labor Council put up its own
candidates for the local elections, running against both the Republicans and
the Democrats, and all but two were elected. There are now two dozen trade
unionists in office on an Independent Labor Ticket in the area. This
development while important has to be watched closely as one spokesperson for
one of the elected candidates spoke of the successes bringing the
"Democratic leaders to their senses." This is a mistake and is
different from the victory in Seattle where the campaign wants to build a
movement independent of both capitalist parties not pressure the
capitalist Democrats.
These developments, especially the one in Seattle which has
at its core the socialist group Socialist Alternative, raises important
questions for working class activists, youth and the anti-capitalist
movement as a whole. Specifically, where should these movements go from
here? It is difficult to get a full picture of the thinking of the Seattle
movement. It is even more difficult to get much information on the
internal forces and politics of the Ohio development. I would like to
concentrate for the moment on the Seattle development.
What should the Seattle movement around Kshama Sawant do
now? There is talk of trying to run 100 candidates similar to Sawant
in electoral areas across the country. This is an ambitious project and
has to be considered. But this is not the crux of the matter. The crux of the
matter is on what program should such candidates run? And flowing
from this, on what basis should the movement try to consolidate itself
organizationally. Should it seek to build a left party, should it seek
to build a socialist party, should it seek to build a Workers' Party
with roots in the unions, or should it seek to build a united front of mass
direct action on a series of demands which would challenge, and if they
gained sufficient support, be capable of halting and throwing back the
capitalist offensive?
In relation to these various alternatives it is the building
of a mass direct action united front that I think is most in tune with the
consciousness and organization of the movement at present. There are many, many
anti-capitalist activists and groups throughout the country. There are tens of
millions of workers and youth who are angry at the system and what it is doing
to them but can see no way to do anything about this except in their own
localized sector. For example, the actions around Walmart, and Fast Food, the
actions for a higher minimum wage. These are important actions and show that
things are stirring. The question is how can the success in Seattle,
the high vote for the Socialist Alternative candidate in Minneapolis, the election
of the trade unionists in Ohio have the best chance of
being generalized into a mass movement which can bring these forces
together and can halt and throw back the capitalist offensive? If
this offensive was halted and thrown back the consciousness and
confidence of the working class would be raised enormously, a new
movement would be built, and this in turn would once again put on the agenda
the big issues, specifically capitalism and its nature and what is the
alternative. Socialism would once again become an issue for the masses and in
the mass consciousness.
For this reason I think that the best way to build on the
successes of Seattle and Minneapolis and Ohio, and to build on the strikes and
demos at fast food and Walmart and elsewhere is to seek to build a united front
on a series of demands which are capable of getting support amongst broad
layers of the working class. This would of course include the $15.00 an hour
minimum wage, a guaranteed job for all, a health care system free for all at
the point of use, free education and affordable housing for all, an end to the
mass incarceration of the youth and workers, an end to racism and sexism.
Possibly develop a sort of peoples' charter for the mass united front. Part of
this approach would also mean that at all times this united front movement
would be independent of the capitalist parties, the Democrats and the
Republicans. On these basic demands and this approach, it would be possible to
build a united front of struggle and bring tens of millions of people into
action. As to where the money would come from for this peoples' charter
or program? Make the rich pay, resurrect the 1% 99% idea.
The authors of this blog have been campaigning for this
approach for years. We have highlighted the importance of fighting to increase
the minimum wage. We think that $15.00 an hour is not enough. We have
campaigned for a $20,00 an hour minimum wage. We have also campaigned for a
$15.00 an hour minimum wage or a $5,00 an hour increase whichever is the
greater. However in order to try and build on the momentum that is now
developing around the $15.00 an hour minimum wage demand we agree with going
with the fight for this demand at this stage. The authors of this blog have
also campaigned for years for the setting up of minimum wage clubs like there
were the 8 hour day clubs in the decades of the battle for the 8 hour days in the 1800's.
These $15.00 an hour clubs would have a structure, would have a membership and
would not only take up the minimum wage but all the basic issues facing
workers.
Another alternative to this united front approach that is
being discussed is to seek to build on the recent events in Seattle,
Minneapolis and Ohio by seeking to build a socialist party or a mass workers' or labor party
party. I am not convinced that this would be the best way forward at this stage
for a number of reasons. In spite of the millions of people who think the
present capitalist system is rotten there is a caution and lack of clarity
about there being an alternative, especially about there being a socialist
alternative. So asking these millions to take as a first step to join a
socialist party could act as an obstacle to the movement going forward rather
than as a stepping stone to taking it forward. It is undoubtedly the case that
there would be many people from a left background and many left groups that
would join such a party. However these groups have a history of sectarianism
and infighting and also ultra-leftism and then at other times capitulating
to the idea that the system can be reformed and to the trade union leaders who
also believe the system can be reformed. Such groups would most likely join a
new socialist party in significant numbers. This could destroy such a
party. If the party was mainly made up of such forces this would most
likely put off the fresher workers from joining such a party, and also
put off the more experienced workers who have seen the activities of
these groups before from joining the party. And it is these fresher
workers along with the more experienced workers who are essential if
a healthy movement is to built.
Success for a new movement either a united front or an
independent workers or socialist party will depend on the involvement of large
numbers of workers fresh to struggle as well as experienced workers. These are
the workers who will demand clear answers, who will insist on the various
opinions and groups in either a united front or socialist party or workers party clarifying
their ideas and coming up with a practical strategy and tactics for taking the
movement forward. The input of fresh and combative layers of the working class
is essential to taking this potential movement forward. It seems to me
therefore that the united front tactic is best suited to organizing these
workers at this time, to realizing the potential and meeting the
needs of the situation in the present stage of consciousness and struggle in
which it now finds itself. .
However a united front of mass direct action while capable
of challenging, halting and throwing back the capitalist offensive would not be
capable of actually solving the problems working people face. This would be the
case whether a socialist party, a labor party, a workers party or a united front was built. The
problem is capitalism and until it is overthrown the problems will not be
resolved. Therefore it is necessary to build a revolutionary socialist
current within any new mass formation. This current would have to openly
explain the need to end capitalism and establish democratic socialism and build
a force on this basis. However it would have to do so within the mass movement
without trying to force the mass movement to adopt this position. In the case
of a mass direct action united front this should be a united front of mass
direct action to halt and throw back the capitalist offensive. This is the best
way to mobilize the greatest number of workers and youth at this point in time.
To try and commit such a united front to socialist policies would be to
overreach what would be possible at this stage. The same is likely true only
more so, of any attempt to build a socialist or workers' or Labor party. To
try and build such parties would most likely be to overreach the
possibility of the movement in its present state of consciousness and organization.
The mobilization of millions of workers in a mass direct
action united front would create the opportunity for a revolutionary
current within this movement to also become become a mass force. . This force,
this current, which would work within and be an organic part of the united
front would have to work in a non-sectarian way . It would have to be part of
the new movement, learn within and as part of this new movement, learn
along with the working class the lessons of the struggles while at the same
time helping the working class gain knowledge of the struggles of its own past
and what was done right and what was done wrong.
Don’t forget to “like” our Facebook page at: http://www.facebook.com/FactsForWorkingPeople
No comments:
Post a Comment