File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/97-01-08.181, message 59


From: Adam Rose <Adam-AT-pmel.com>
Subject: M-I: RE: Korea and its significance
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:34:20 -0000



Jon Flanders writes :

>   I think you could argue that this is what was happening up until the 
> early seventies. The post-war period was indeed a time of expansion and 
> adjustment for capitalism.
> 
>  I just don't see such a possibility today. Everywhere you look 
> capitalist governments, from Argentina to Zimbawe, are turning the screws
> on their working class as they jockey for competitive advantage in the 
> world market.
>

We came up with similar arguments to the same statement of Louis G's.

I am very nervous about tiny quibbles with Jon when the main argument
is with Louis G. Nevertheless, clarification amongst those who see both
the possibility and necessity of workers revolution is the main function of
this list, IMO, not polemic between those who do and those who don't.

So :
>   The space for cozy corporative relations between  the trade unions and 
> capitalist governments is shrinking rapidly.

Seems to me to be one sided ( which is correct when faced with the Louis
G's of this world ).

It is true, the economic space for trade union leaders
to negotiate the rate of exploitation within capitalism is less now than
previously. Nevertheless, the opposite is also true - since their politics
requires the healthy operation of capitalism, there is also more pressure
on them to negotiate away workers' conditions. There is a very strong
whiff of "jobs for pay" deals at present in Britain, with the run up to
a Labour government. British Trade Union Leaders spent most of the
period between 1926 and 1931 or 2 sellling their members down the
river. And of course in the 1930's the German Trade unions performed
the same role for the German Bourgeoisie, clearing the way for Hitler.

I would argue: 
i) The Trade Union Leaders always oscillate, under pressure from above
and from below.
ii) 	Economic crisis tends to increase the pressure from above and from
below, leading to wilder oscillations to left and to right from the trade
union leaders.
iii) 	The extent to which the Union Leaders move left is determined by
degree to which they are frightened of the rank + file moving without 
them - and this is at bottom a political question.

So, for example in South Korea, not only does the militant, illegal trade
union federation call a general strike but so too does the legal,
traditionally conservative one. We can also expect both federations
to act in similar ways to call the thing off.

Adam.

Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
Britain.










     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005