Protests in Bahrain, Iran: conclusions US workers can draw. Victories are contageous

Iranian women protest the regime

Reports are coming out of the Middle East that there are clashes between protesters and police in Tehran, Iran. Demonstrations definitely have been taking place today amid heavy security.

“Security forces used tear gas and pepper spray against the protesters and even baton-charged them.” according to Al Jazeera's Dorsa Jabbari, in Tehran.

In Bahrain, another client of the advanced capitalist countries demonstrators have called for a "Day of Rage" Monday, spurred on by anti-government uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia. According to Al Jazeera, “Helicopters circled over the capital Manama, where protesters were expected to gather in the afternoon, and there was greater police presence in Shia villages.”

The demonstrators are demanding better treatment and an end to discrimination against the Shias. "We are only asking for political reforms, right of political participation, respect for human rights, stopping of systematic discrimination against Shias” says one human rights activist.

This video below showing riot police in Bahrain charging peaceful demonstrators gives a glimpse of the response so called democratic regimes (Bahrain is a constitutional monarchy like Britain) have for those that want genuine reforms. This is yet another ally of the US and western capital. Reforms of any lasting nature are not possible under capitalism, Republic or Constitutional Monarchy; the ruling classes fear the potential power of the working class. The video is unverifiable by Facts For Working People.



In Egypt, the military have called on workers to end strikes as thousands of state workers have struck for better pay, conditions and permanent work. "Noble Egyptians see that these strikes, at this delicate time, lead to negative results," the military is saying. This is a threat and the using of the term “noble” Egyptians from those that I assume are not noble, is aimed at dividing the popular movement and isolating the public sector workers on strike. The Egyptians will learn pretty quickly here how reliable a friend the military is and all efforts must be made to appeal to the rank and file of the military to build committees of representation and link up with the trade Union and community committees that arose in the course of the uprising.

We will not see the same approach from US capitalism to the demonstrations in Iran that we saw with Egypt as Egypt’s dictator helped the US corporations plunder the wealth of the region more willingly than those in Iran.

From North West Africa to the Persian Gulf to the borders of Turkey we are seeing a historic rising of the Arab masses, (Iranians are not Arabs contrary to what many Americans think).

Revolutions are great educators. There are many lessons but also conclusions US workers can draw from these developments, not least, that collective power works. But I am thinking here of the reason for the inactivity, or more accurately, outright suppression by organized Labor’s hierarchy of any movement from within their ranks that wants to fight back in a serious way against the capitalist’s offensive. As this offensive has intensified, the Labor leaders here in the US have no room for manoever, they cannot even pretend to be fighting back anymore and instead are more openly in collaboration with capital, the corporations and their political representatives in the Democratic Party.

We have always argued against those who have held that the reason for this collaboration is personal character flaws; that the Labor leaders are simply “greedy” or that they are “corrupt” in the sense that they take money payments from the bosses. Then there are those that claim that their obscene salaries are the problem. Too many genuine and dedicated activists have joined those ranks for it to be that simple; of course, many more have not.

All these issues have some merit though. Obviously there is corruption and there is bribery and their salaries are disgusting and this contributes to their betrayal; after all, we live in a corrupt system and Labor officials are not exempt from falling prey to it. However, in my years as a trade Union activist, including in the higher bodies of the movement, I do not believe the vast majority of the others I ran in to were corrupt or on the take. The issue is not corrupt in the criminal sense but corruption in the ideological sense or perhaps bankrupt is a better term; the Labor hierarchy is corrupt ideologically.

What we mean by this is that the dominant reason for their refusal to mobilize the tremendous potential power of its members is how they view the world. It is, as we have said many times, the “stop in the mind” that English historian Christopher Hill spoke of in his book about the English revolution. The leadership of the organized working class accepts totally the idea that there is no other way of organizing society except along capitalist lines. For them, capitalism and the free market are permanent historical fixtures. Admittedly, the present state of affairs among the heads of organized Labor in the US is pretty dismal and most of them probably would know little about Labor history or the real struggles that have taken place in the US or the world over the centuries but for them, as Thatcher said, “TINA”, "there is no alternative." They leave the theoretical and historical analysis of working class struggle to liberal academia, better them than workers.

Consequently, whenever a movement develops within the ranks of organized Labor (or outside it) that threatens this view of the world, that demands from the employers things that the employers say they can’t afford and all the other excuses they use like it will mean job losses and such, the Labor officials have to crush it, drive it back. The stifling bureaucratic measures and lack of democracy all flow from this; they must keep the members down. It threatens their world-view. For them, the bosses have the right and are indeed the only rightful owners of the means of production. Profit and the laws of the market are sacrosanct. The threat of the anger that lies beneath the surface of US society rising to the top and taking organizational form threatens this world-view; it can only lead to chaos they believe.

So there is nothing more terrifying for Labor’s hierarchy than a victory, And the lessons from the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa will confirm their worst fears as what started in Tunisia is encouraging workers throughout the region to rise up and fight back. Workers do not need a degree in Labor history or sociology or any other subject to see what works. A major victory in a strike or some social movement here in the US that won major concessions from the bosses would transform the mood in society and the balance of class forces; so the heads of organized Labor have to prevent that. Instead of the demoralization that sets in at hearing from Labor leaders, liberals and many on the left unfortunately about what we cant’ do, what we can’t change, how weak we are or how stupid, workers would see a victory and would want to build on it.

That workers will fight; that any activists that want to challenge their Union leadership or replace them or challenge the dictatorship that capital has over our lives. That the victories of one section of the working class are watched by others who learn from them and in turn gain confidence from them; and that once this is accepted, the need for organization, program and tactics is crucial to success are important conclusions we in the US can learn from the uprisings of the Arab masses as well as the successful strikes and struggles of workers in China and throughout the world.

Thatcher was wrong; TIAA, There is an atlernative.