*BAAM (Boston Anti- Authoritarian Movement) #36 Journal

Click on the headline to link to the latest BAAM Newsletter #36 (via Boston Indy Media).

Markin comment:

As always, I disclaim any political kinship with this newsletter. However, I have many times found interesting articles there. This issue has a good article on the struggle around the street opposition to G-20 meeting in Toronto in June 2010. And, in any case, it is always good to see what the younger anarchist militants are up to.

*From The Wilds Of Cyberspace-The Latest From The "By Any Means Necessary" Website

Click on the title to link to the website mentioned in the headline for the latest news and opinion from that site.


Once More Around the Bloc: Tactics, Democracy, and Mass Politics‘If Protesting is a Conspiracy, Then We are All Proud to Conspire!’
Posted by rowlandkeshena on July 29, 2010

By Derrick O’Keefe. This appeared on Socialist Voice.

On July 17, 200 people marched and rallied in Vancouver, Canada to protest the police repression of protests during the G8/G20 summit meetings in Toronto June 25-27.

Speakers at the rally included representatives of Amnesty International and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Derrick O’Keefe of the Vancouver Stopwar coalition, and New Democratic Party MP Don Davies.

Also speaking were three young people who took part in the protests and were arrested, including Montreal resident Natalie Gray, who was shot twice by police rubber bullets then detained and abused for 30 hours. Gray has retained noted civil rights lawyer Clayton Ruby and is suing the Toronto Police. Her talk at the July 17 rally has been published by rabble.ca.

All speakers delivered powerful affirmations of the right to speak out and organize against the policies of the G8/G20 summit gatherings, including the call by Toronto protest organizers and participants for a full and independent public inquiry into the police operation that cost more than $1 billion and incarcerated some 1,000 people.

The following is Derrick O’Keefe’s talk to the Vancouver rally.

hanks to everyone for coming out today. There are rallies like this one across the country today. There is a rally in Toronto, and I’ve heard that there are a lot of bubbles in the air heading over the police’s heads at this rally. Did you hear about this? A young woman was arrested in Toronto during the G20 summit for blowing bubbles, if you can believe that. What do we think of that? ["Shame!"]

Our idea of free speech includes bubble blowing – it’s not a chemical weapon. And this just gives you an idea of what happened in Toronto and what the atmosphere was. I went out to Toronto with the Canadian Peace Alliance. On my first night there, I spoke at a forum about Canadian foreign policy in Afghanistan and in Palestine. I was speaking on a panel with a journalist who writes for The Guardian, named Jesse Rosenfeld.

While we were having this ordinary public forum in a small art space on Bloor Street, we noticed there were police peeking through the windows, about six of them. Someone went out to ask the police, “What are you doing? This is a public forum.” They asked, “Are there any protesters inside?”

So they were treating everyone in Toronto that week as a potential protester, as a potential dissident and therefore as a criminal. This was the climate that was created, and it was obvious. They didn’t need any pretext, they didn’t need anything to justify what they did. This was planned. You could see in the days leading up to the weekend of protest that there were going to be mass arrests. There were 20,000 police officers in Toronto, that’s more than one for every protester who was out for the big day of action on Saturday, June 26.

What do we say about turning a major Canadian city into a police state? ["Shame!"]

What do we say about spending 1.3 billion dollars for a week-end of photo-ops for some of the biggest thugs and war criminals in the world? ["Shame!"]

What do we say to a government that would be party to ordering the biggest mass arrest in Canadian history and then stonewall and deny a full public inquiry?["Shame!"]

That’s why we’re here today.

I know some people have said that the police weren’t really doing their job, but if you think about it, in a society like ours with so many injustices, the police were doing their job, just in a little more over-the-top way than normal.

They were serving and protecting, but who were they serving and protecting at the G20?

They were protecting the criminals who were inside the fence, the criminals who are destroying our environment, the criminals who are waging illegal wars abroad, and the criminals who are attacking your rights every single day, who are attacking the poor people right across the country!

It wasn’t enough that they arrested over 1000 people. They arrested journalists. They arrested Jesse Rosenfeld, the young guy on the forum panel with me; on Saturday night, they punched him in the gut and hauled him away for witnessing a peaceful sit-in in front of the Novotel hotel where G20 delegates were staying.

They arrested bystanders who had just walked out of their homes to see what was going on.

And they even arrested some corporate media reporters live on the air – which helped the media coverage quality. But that is a real shame and an attack on free speech.

It wasn’t enough that they did these mass arrests – today there are still people in jail. I think it’s about a dozen people, facing conspiracy charges. I suppose that’s appropriate, because there was once a time in this country where you could be charged with criminal conspiracy just for getting together and talking about organizing a union. You could be charged with criminal conspiracy if you were a group of women getting together and talking about the fight for the right to vote, or the right to choose. They have always tried to criminalize dissent when people get together and fight for their rights.

We’re here to say that if organizing for social justice, if dissenting, if protesting is a conspiracy – then we are all conspirators, and we are proud to conspire! [Cheers, applause]

And as long as any one of our comrades, as long as any social justice activist is in jail in this country for organizing, we are going to continue to conspire, we are going to continue to protest, and we are going to continue to stand up for our rights! [Cheers, applause]

So let’s continue pushing for a public inquiry, but more importantly, let’s continue asserting our rights. Because you don’t win anything without constant protest, without constant vigilance. Every right that we have won has involved people going to jail, it has involved people going outside of the laws of day sometimes when those laws were unjust, and that continues to be the case today! [Cheers, applause]

We don’t have to beg for our right to protest, we don’t even have to politely ask. Everything we have in that Charter of Rights and Freedoms was demanded, was fought for, and was taken from the government of Canada. We will continue, every day if we have to, to take our rights and to assert our free speech from coast to coast to coast! [Cheers, applause]

So let’s finish up with a little more of that slogan, “This is what democracy looks like! Because this is what democracy looks like, and this is what political participation looks like!”

[Chants: This is what democracy looks like!]

*The Latest From The "Transport Workers Solidarity Committee" Website- "Actions In Defense of The Palestinian People On The West Coast Docks"

Click on the headline to link to the latest from the "Transport Workers Solidarity Committee" Website- "Actions In Defense of The Palestinian People On The West Coast Docks."


Markin comment:

Every action by the international working class, including unionized dock workers who have a militant history on the American West Coast docks, to slow down the Israeli war machine, even if only symbolically, is a step in the right direction. Totally End The Blockade of Gaza! All Honor To The Flotilla Blockade Breakers! Down With U.S Aid To Israel! Defend The Palestinian People!

*From The "International Marxist Tendency" Website- On The 90th Anniversary Of The Kapp Putsch In Germany-Guest Commentaries

Click on the headline to link to a "International Marxist Tendency" Website entry for the Kapp Putsch in Germany on the 90th anniversary of this victory for the international working class.

*********


4. The Kapp Putsch
Written by Rob Sewell
Saturday, 01 October 1988

ONCE THE THREAT of revolution bad subsided, and the workers' councils began to dissolve, the bourgeois looked for the removal of the Noske-Scheidemann-Ebert government. On 13 March 1920, 12,000 troops from the Ehrhardt Brigade and the Baltikum Brigade under General Luettwitz, entered Berlin in order to establish a military dictatorship, and declare Wolfgang Kapp, a founder of the old Fatherland Party, as the new Chancellor.



Noske, the Commander-in-Chief, called upon Reichswehr officers to put down the rebellion, which they refused point blank to do. The head of the army, General Hans von Seekt, simply announced he was going on 'indefinite leave'. To save its skin, the government fled from Berlin, firstly to Dresden, where a Freikorps general threated to put the entire cabinet under arrest, and then to Stuttgart.



As a matter of self-preservation the SPD, USPD and trade union leaders appealed to the workers to put down this military putsch and defend the republic. A general strike was called which so paralysed Berlin that Kapp could not find a single secretary to issue the decree that he had assumed power!

In a completely ultra-left fashion the young KPD issued a statement that the workers should remain neutral as it was a fight 'between two counter-revolutionary wings'. Within 24 hours the KPD were forced to reverse their position 180 degrees. The German workers were solid in their determination to defeat the military coup and the communists had no alternative but to participate in the struggle.

The coup electrified the whole country. From Berlin, the strike spread spontaneously through the Ruhr, Central Germany and Bavaria. Such was the counter movement that, in nearly every city and town, the military were driven out by mass demonstrations of workers and the middle class. The sheer scale of the resistance to General Luettwitz was gigantic.

In the Ruhr armed workers began to join forces in a 'Red Army' that put the Reichswehr to flight. They were estimated as 50,000 strong, fully equipped with modern weapons and artillery. They became, for a period, masters of the Ruhr.

Workers took action all over. Typically, in Chemnitz, the post office, railway station and town hall were occupied by armed workers. The Executive Council established on 15 March was made up of ten KPD members, nine SPD, one USPD and one Democrat, and extended its authority over a radius of 50 kilometres.

The spontaneous movement of the masses against the coup was similar to the later actions of the Spanish proletariat in July 1936 after Franco's revolt. As in Spain, with a revolutionary leadership, the German workers could have taken power easily.

Lenin had compared the Kapp putsch to the Kornilov uprising in August 1917 in Russia. In a similar way the forces of counter-revolution attempted to overthrow the Kerensky government and restore the old regime of the Tsar. Unlike the KPD, the Bolshevik Party immediately threw itself into the forefront of defending the revolution, organising a united front with the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries in order to defeat reaction. It was a huge blunder for the German KPD initially to advocate neutrality in such a struggle. Such ultra-leftism simply put up barriers between themselves, the social democratic workers and ordinary trade unionists.

A Swing to the Left
The consequences of the Kapp putsch brought about a great shift in the political landscape. After its failure, Noske resigned. In June 1920 the USPD became the second largest party in the Reichstag with 81 deputies; in the Landstags of Saxony, 'I'huringia and Brunswick it became the largest party. Its membership had grown spectacularly to 800,000. It published 55 daily newspapers. In the Reichstag elections, the USPD had got 4,895,000 votes, more than double its January 1919 figure, whilst the SPD, due to the masses' shift to the left, lost half the votes it won in January 1919, falling to 5,614,000. The SPD still, however, remained the biggest party in the Reichstag. On the other side of the spectrum, the vote for the extreme right also doubled at the expense of the liberals, indicating a growing polarisation of the situation in Germany.

In Bavaria, General von Nohl, ungrateful for past services, forced out the SPD Premier Johannes Hoffmann and established a more right wing government. In the Ruhr, however, the armed workers who had succeded in driving out the Freikorps and the Reichswehr forces now refused to lay down their arms as requested by the central government.

The new coalition government, under SPD member Hermann Mueller, decided to despatch government troops - who had previously refused to fight Kapp - to restore order in the Ruhr, which they did eagerly and with much brutality. Hundreds were killed and hundreds more executed to restore 'normality'.

Towards a mass Communist International
The year 1920 was a turning point not only for the KPD but also for the Communist International. The founding congress of the Third International, in March of the previous year had laid down the fundamental principles of the socialist revolution and the nature of soviet power. The success of the Bolshevik revolution was now having a big effect within the ranks of the mass parties of social democracy, with large layers pressing for affiliation to the new International. Negotiations concerning affiliations were opened by a whole series of mass workers' organisations: the Independent Labour Party in Britain, the French Socialist Party, the USPD of Germany, the Italian Socialist Party, the Norwegian Labour Party, and a number of others.

The possibility of creating a mass Communist International was in the offing. But the danger also existed of bringing into the new International reformist and centrist leaders who were attempting to keep a firm grip on their radicalised rank and file. In order to win over the genuine revolutionary membership, and to separate them from their opportunist leaders, the Comintern formulated 18 conditions for affiliation to the new International. When some of the opportunist leaders were prepared to swallow these conditions, three more were added to effectively exclude them.

The KPD had grown from 3-4000 members in January 1919 to 78,000 immediately after the Kapp putsch, despite an ultra-left split-off. It was nevertheless tiny in comparison to the two other mass parties, which had approaching one million members apiece. Under the impact of events, however, the ranks of the USPD was moving away from reformism and towards the ideas of Marxism. At its March 1919 conference, the USPD came out in favour of the dictatorship of the proletariat and a soviet government. In December it broke with the Second International and began negotiations with the Comintern. In October at its Halle Congress the USPD, after a four-hour appeal by the president of the Comintern, Zinoviev, voted to accept the 21 conditions and affiliate to the Communist International. Negotiations then opened up with the KPD with a view to the creation of a merged united Communist Party, which was founded in December with a membership approaching a half a million workers. The German Communist Party was now a truly mass party, which under the guidance of the Comintern, began to make preparations for the socialist revolution in Germany.

In December, the 140,000 strong French Socialist Party voted to affiliate to the new International. The whole of the old Socialist Party apparatus, its headquarters, its secretariat, and its daily paper L'Humanité with a circulation of 200,000 became the weapons of the new Communist Party. In Czechoslovakia also a mass Communist Party was formed out of the Socialist Party, numbering 350,000 members. With the split in the Italian Socialist Party, 50,000 members were drawn into the ranks of the newly founded Italian Communist Party.

These mass parties did not emerge from small sectarian groups on the fringes of the labour movement, but arose from the traditional mass organisations of the working class that were experiencing political turmoil due to the colossal events of the period. The mass of workers do not learn from theory, but from experience. They tend to take the line of least resistance and develop enormous loyalty to their traditional mass organisations that they have built up over generations. It was on the basis of titanic events that these parties were thrown into ferment, reformism became compromised and the rank and file moved towards the ideas of genuine Marxism.

The First Congress of the Communist International in March 1919 met amid great hopes of a rapid development of the European revolution. By the time of the Second Congress in 1920, it became obvious that more serious organisational and political preparation would be needed for the proletariat to gain victories in Western Europe. Along with the creation of mass communist parties went the urgent necessity of imbuing them with an understanding of revolutionary strategy and tactics. In the words of Trotsky: 'The art of tactics and strategy, the art of revolutionary struggle can be mastered only through experience, through criticism and self-criticism...the revolutionary struggle for power has its own laws, its own usages, its own tactics, its own strategy. Those who do not master this art will never taste victory.'

Lenin's Struggle Against Ultra-Leftism
In 1919 and 1920, a number of ultra-left tendencies appeared within the ranks of the newly formed Communist parties. This reflected a revolutionary impatience, which in turn was a reaction against the opportunist actions of the old reformist leaderships. This ultra-leftism was an attempt to find a short-cut to success. It failed to appreciate the strong grip of reformism on the minds of the mass of the workers, and the patient work that was needed to break these illusions.

One of Lenin's most important works, Left Wing Communism - An Infantile Disorder, was devoted to this problem. Lenin saw ultra-leftism as a natural problem occuring in the newly formed communist parties, whose membership had been won to an irreconcilable struggle against capitalism and those who defended it. He compared it to a childhood illness which was a necessary part of growing up. Lenin's book, together with the discussions at the Second Congress, was aimed at educating the leaders of the various communist parties in the tactics and methods of bolshevism. For the child-like 'lefts' and sectarians of today, who repeat all the mistakes of the ultra-lefts of the past, these writings and ideas remain a closed book. As Lenin explained:

"It is beyond doubt...those who try to deduce the tactics of the revolutionary proletariat from principles such as: 'the Communist Party must keep its doctrine pure and its independence of reformism inviolate: its mission is to lead the way without stopping or turning, by the direct road to the communist revolution' will inevitably fall into error."

The task of the communist leaderships was to innoculate itself against infantile-leftism and absorb the method, tactics and strategy of Bolshevism in order to equip itself for the revolutionary battles that were unfolding in the main capitalist countries, particularly Germany.

After the unification of the new party, a central committee was elected under the joint chairmanship of Ernst Daeumig and Paul Levi, who had been a close friend of Rosa Luxemburg. At Levi's insistence, the ultra-left group was expelled from the Party, and established themselves as the short-lived German Communist Workers Party (KAPD). In February 1921, after violently disagreeing with the Comintern's decision to split the Italian Socialist Party, Paul Levi resigned from the party leadership. In his place came Brandler, Meyer, Froelich, and Thalheimer.

To assist the KPD, the Comintern had despatched the Hungarian Communist leader Bela Kun to Berlin, after the crushing in blood of the Hungarian Soviet Republic. (The Hungarian Revolution is dealt with in Militant International Review Number 18). But as leader of the Hungarian Soviet Republic, Bela Kun had made big mistakes, and was infected by ultra-left ideas. This tendency was fed by Zinoviev, the head of the Comintern, Bukharin and Radek, who poured scorn on the defensive struggles of the SPD organisations.




The 'March Offensive'

The new leadership of the KPD, egged on by the Comintern representatives, looked increasingly for a showdown with German capitalism. Their blind impatience became the framework of the new theory of the so-called 'offensive'. The whole essence of this theory was that the advance guard - the KPD - could by its own actions 'electrify' the passive proletariat into taking revolutionary action.

The situation in Germany was extremely tense after French troops had occupied Dusseldorf because of the government's failure to pay reparations in full. The party's central organ Rote Fahne stated: 'The workers of central Germany are not taken in by the 'anti-putschist' rumours alleging that a spirit of cowardice and apathy has arisen in the German working class.'

On 27 March a decision was taken by the German leaders to launch the revolutionary offensive in support of the miners of central Germany, whose Mansfeld coalfield had been occupied by the security police to prevent 'sabotage and attacks on managers'. This provocative occupation was conducted under the orders of the SPD President of Saxony, Otto Horsing, who attempted to pacify the area and purge it of Communist influence. The miners conducted armed resistance under the leadership of Max Hoelz, an heroic revolutionary figure, who had earlier been expelled from the KPD. The KPD called on the working class throughout Germany to arm itself in solidarity with the miners. They had completely misjudged the mood and the action remained mainly isolated to the central German area.

Out of desperation the Party attempted to provoke the workers into action. A KPD leader, Hugo Eberlein, was sent 'to provoke an uprising in mid-Germany', and, according to many sources, even went so far as to advocate the sham kidnapping of local KPD leaders, dynamiting a munitions depot, blowing up a workers' co-operative in Halle, and blaming it on the police in order to fuel the anger of the workers. Fortunately, little came of these crazy plans. Groups of communist workers occupied the Leuna Works and called for support, but were driven out after a bitter confrontation. The Communist Party organised the occupation of the docks in Hamburg in support of a partial strike, but again it was soon dispersed. The workers remained passive, leaving the KPD members to fight it out alone with the police.

This infamous 'March Action' resulted in hundreds of deaths and thousands being imprisoned for their involvement. The ultra-left actions of many good communists widened the split between them and the reformist rank and file. Within a short time over 200,000 members had deserted the KPD in disgust.

A few days after the debacle, Paul Levi issued a bitter attack on the Party's action, which was broadly correct. However, he wrongly published these criticisms outside the party's ranks, and as a result was disciplined and subsequently expelled from the KPD.

Lenin was alarmed at the putschist actions of the KPD and strongly condemned those responsible. 'The theses of Thaelheimer and Bela Kun are radically false...That a representative of the Executive proposed a lunatic ultra-left tactic of immediate action "to help the Russians" I can believe without difficulty: this representative (Bela Kun) is often too far to the left.'

The United Front Policy
At the Third Congress of the Comintern in June 1921, both Lenin and Trotsky conducted a rigorous struggle against the so-called 'Theory of the Offensive' and the fallacies of the 'March Action'. The Congress also recognised a new turn in the international situation that had arisen. The first great revolutionary wave had now ebbed and capitalism had succeeded temporarily in stabilising itself. 'In 1919', stated Trotsky, 'we said it (the revolution) was a question of months, and now we say it is a question perhaps of years.' As the immediate struggle for power had been temporarily postponed, the tactics of the Comintern had to be concentrated on the united front policy: fighting in day to day struggles on wages, conditions etc., bringing around it the ranks of the reformist organisations. The united front was used to unify the workers' organisations in action against a common enemy. It did not mean the abandoning of any programme or mutual criticism under the guise of a spurious unity. In essence, it meant: 'March separately under your own banners, but strike together'. It was precisely through this joint action of the mass parties that the KPD could demonstrate the superiority of militant struggles over the limitations of reformism. In this new period of temporary, relative stability, the communist parties had to step up their activities in partial struggles to win the majority of the working class to their programme. In a nutshell, it was not a question of the Conquest of Power, but the Conquest of the Masses. The new KPD slogan became: 'Towards the Masses!'.

The turn of the German Communists towards united front work saw a steady revival in the party's influence. The annual report presented to the Leipzig party conference in 1922 described the considerable progress: amongst women, youth and children's sections, the co-operatives and trade unions. Alongside its press agency, the party now had 38 daily newspapers and numerous periodicals. They possessed over 12,000 councillors, with an absolute majority in 80 town councils and were the biggest party in a further 170. In the trade unions they possessed nearly 1000 organised fractions with 400 members in leadership positions.

Even according to the ultra-left Ruth Fischer, 'In the second half of 1922 the party was gaining in numbers and influence. In the third quarter of 1922 it had 218,555 members. It showed a sharp rise from the 180,443 of the previous year, just after the March Action.' The KPD was by far the biggest communist party in Western Europe.

On 24 June 1922, the foreign minister Walter Rathenau was murdered by the extreme right wing 'Organisation Consul', a gang of ex-army officers. There was widespread revulsion - as with the Kapp putsch and moves towards united working class action, which the KPD used to the maximum effect. On 4 July a monster demonstration organised by all the workers' organisations proved an outstanding success. It provided the KPD with the opportunity to prove in action the superiority of militant leadership and policies. Yet, because of this, the SPD broke off relations with the Communists four days later.

POLITICAL MURDERS COMMITTED (January 1919 - June 1922) BY PERSONS BELONGING TO THE
RIGHT LEFT
Number of political murders committed 354 22
Number of persons sentenced for these murders 24 38
Death sentences - 10
Confessed assassins found 'Not Guilty' 23 -
Political assassins subsequently promoted in the Army 3 -
Average length of prison term per murder four months fifteen years
Average fine per murder two marks -

(Source: Vier Jahre Politischer Mord, EJ Gumbel)

At this time inflation began to take off. Years of successive governments reverting to the printing press to plug their budget deficits had completely undermined the currency. It took 300 marks to buy one dollar in June: by December it was 8000 marks, and by January 1923, 18,000 marks to the dollar. This had a shattering effect not only on the workers but the middle classes, particularly those on fixed incomes, who faced absolute ruin.

By this stage the German bourgeois became increasingly determined to regain all the concessions won by the proletariat in the November revolution. In 1918 under the threat of revolution, the capitalist class were prepared to grant huge concessions: trade union recognition, agreement to withdraw support from company unions, establishment of shop stewards' committees, universal suffrage, all de-mobbed soldiers to be able to return to their former employment and the shortening of the working day to 8 hours. In October 1922 as inflation reached new heights, the German bourgeoisie prepared their offensive. The powerful industrialist Fritz Thyssen addressed an open letter to the government which stated 'Germany's salvation can only come from a return to the 10-hour working day.' The former Minister Dernburg fumed: 'every 8-hour day is a nail in Germany's coffin'!

Two weeks later another leading industrialist, Hugo Stinnes, declared:

"I do not hesitate to say that I am convinced that the German people will have to work two extra hours per day for the next 10 or 15 years...the preliminary conditions for any successful stabilisation is, in my opinion, that wage struggles and strikes be excluded for a long period...we must have the courage to say to the people: 'for the present and for some time to come you will have to work overtime without overtime payment.'"

The battle lines were drawn. Living standards were to be driven down to starvation levels to put German capitalism back on its feet. With hyper-inflation and the state facing bankruptcy, the SPD-Liberal coalition of Wirth collapsed, giving way to the right wing bourgeois government led by Wilhelm Cuno, director of the Hamburg-Amerika Line.

*Victory To The Shaw's Workers- The "March For Justice" To Boston In Defense Of The Shaw's Workers Schedule

Click on the headline to link to a "UJP" Website entry for a "March to Boston"(from Methuen, from the Shaw's warehouse for where the workers were fired) schedule in support of the Shaw's supermarket distribution workers strike.


Markin comment:

Okay, great swing band leader Artie Shaw had his moment, on the occasion of his birthday centenary, in this space today. Now back to the class struggle. Victory To The Shaw's Supermarkets Distribution Workers!

*Films To While Away The Class Struggle By-"The Salt Of The Earth"

Click on the headline to link to a "Wikipedia" entry for "Salt Of The Earth

Recently I have begun to post entries under the headline- “Songs To While Away The Class Struggle By”-that will include progressive and labor-oriented songs that might be of general interest to the radical public. I have decided to do the same for some films that may perk that same interest under the title in this entry’s headline. In the future I expect to do the same for books under a similar heading.-Markin

DVD Review

Salt Of The Earth, starring professional and non-professional actors and actresses, directed by Herbet Biberman,1954

Lately, with the recent coal mining disaster in West Virginia and the struggle for union recognition in the Boran mines in California the subject of unions, union safety committees, and the right to organize unions in the mines has come up, front and center. Those events, as well as the repeated instances in this space of my writing about the Kentucky coal mines and the sagas of bloody Harlan County have provided many lessons about how to proceed with this kind of struggle. So it is apt that the film under review, "Salt Of The Earth", is being reviewed at this time. This rather didactic film, by today's standards at least, with quite a political history of its own brings home in dramatic form almost all the lessons of the struggle in the mines.

A quick overview is in order here. Western zinc miners, mainly Hispanic at this site, were negotiating with the local agents of a huge mining conglomerate based elsewhere over working conditions and mine safety. The negotiations stalled, the mine conditions got worst, and eventually the impasse was resolved in a strike vote. The miners went out and stayed out for several months as the company "stonewalled" on their demands. Along the way every trick in management's book was brought into play from closing off credit to the company-owned store, harassment of various forms, bringing in the local police and goons, and going to the bosses' courts. That last trick worked, or almost worked, except that the miners' wives, who had been organized into an auxiliary, saved the day by 'manning' the picket lines. The struggle continued with more harassment, more threats, and eventually things were brought to a head by an attempt at evictions, first of the main local miners' leader. Still the lines did not break. The company seeing its position, for now, as futile agreed to negotiate in "good faith".

That, "for now", is critical for it is spoken by a senior representative of the company who has let the "cat out of the bag" here. A successful fight for a union contract is just a momentary "armed truce" in the class struggle and is recognized by the bosses as such, if not by most union leaders. It should, however, be recognized as such and etched in the mind of every labor militant. That dramatic finish to the film,however, with a hard fought "temporary" victory, thus let's one see in microcosm all the problems that went before in order to get just this momentary justice. I might add that this film, done in 1954, at a time when unions were still growing and thriving in this country, and when there was still a layer of militants in the secondary leadership of the organized trade union movement would almost seem like a "socialist's paradise" compared with he level of class struggle today.

Although some of the factual aspects of this film may be different- the locale of the mines were in New Mexico not the East, were zinc rather than coal mines, and the miners were mainly Hispanic rather than Appalachians whites this script could have been written today without much exaggeration. I am not generally a fan of the Stalinist-influenced "socialist realism" form of political propaganda, of which this film seems a prime example, but in this case it is very effective as it brings up every possible problem that any union recognition effort runs into.

For openings there are the problems of separate Hispanic mine locals and of Anglo locals and of separate local union contracts rather than a uniform national contract. This is a recurring problem, not fully resolved even during the great strike wave of the 1930s. Another is the problem, endemic to the mining industry, of the physically isolated places that the vast majority of mines are located in which makes wide-spread support more difficult, although as depicted in the film, financial and physical aid did come in during this battle. Another problem mentioned here, and a particular problem of long, drawn out strikes is that of union members going back to work, or trying to, for a whole variety of reasons, none good enough. Also the attempts by the bosses to buy off union militants with promises of advancement or "soft" jobs, or failing that to run them out of the mines, out of town, or into jail.

The thing that makes this one interesting, and brings a rush of solidarity to the cause, is that once the militants were committed to the strike most of them were willing to see it through to the end. They faced down the attempts by the company to bring in scabs, to jail their leaders, to use their legal system to get injunctions and other legal relief in order to break the union. There was nothing the company was not willing to do to break the strike. And they almost did, except, and this is what also makes this one so interesting, is the wives of the miners, not without a great deal of social and personal turmoil, filled the breech when the company got it's injunction. The women, who had formed, the by now classic women's auxiliary first used extensively in the great strike struggles of the 1930s, "womanned" the picket lines, and held them through thick and thin, including arrest of their leaders.

This film is certainly an advanced one for the time in dealing with the women question, especially in an isolated, company-run town where the socially conservative Hispanic male miners had a hard time coming to grips with the need to include the women, and their demands, in the negotiating struggles. Of course, in true "social realist" form, the woman narrator/star also turns out during the course of the film to be an "earth mother" and stalwart militant, or at least evolves into that position during the struggle. In that sense this script follows the tradition of Maxim Gorky's "Mother" in its depiction of the evolution of political class consciousness by the most oppressed layers of society, especially house-bound women with children.

Note: As described in the above-linked entry from "Wikipedia" those involved with the production of this film, including the director, produces and many of the actors faced the "blacklist" during the 1950s "red scare" in America. Frankly, whatever qualms I have about its literary and political deficiencies, this film is a powerful statement about working class struggles and the road forward. Watch it.

*Boycott Call In Support Of the Shaw's Supermarket Workers (Massachusetts)

Click on the headline to link to a "United For Peace and Justice" Website entry concerning the fate of 300 striking Shaw's Supermarket unionized workers.

Markin comment:

All out in support of the fired Shaw's Supermarket workers! Support the boycott! An injury to one is an injury to all!

*Again, An Anniversary of Sorts- On Keeping (Or Trying To Keep) A Revolutionary Perspective In Hard Political Times

Click on title to link to the Leon Trotsky Internet Archive's copy of pages from Leon Trotsky's Journal for 1936 and 1937, a tough period for him politically and personally before the Mexican exile came through.

Commentary

Parts of this entry were used last summer (An Anniversary of Sorts, July 2007 archives) to mark my 35th year as a follower of Karl Marx. Most of these remarks are also pertinent here as I celebrate my 35th year as a follower of Leon Trotsky.

This summer (2007) marks the 35th year of my commitment to Marxism. Those who have been reading my commentaries for a while know that I try to commemorate, and comment on, important anniversaries in our common working class and leftist history like the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti or the start of the Paris Commune. Those same readers also know that I have been rather short with bourgeois politicians like John Kerry who have a habit of commemorating every little political move they have taken. The winner for me was Kerry’s very public celebration at historic Fanueil Hall in Boston in 2006 of the 35th anniversary of his anti-war testimony before Congress in 1971. Christ, I still chuckle over the absurdity of that one. But hear me out on this. I want no pat on the back but to just make a comment about why, despite the current historic trend away from socialist solutions to the world’s problems, I still proudly carry the title communist.

I once remarked in a review of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto that the third section of that document where he polemicizes against the various liberal and so-called socialist groups of his day that in my search for political solutions in my early days I had probably held virtually every position that he argued against. And believe me, dear reader, that is no exaggeration-except maybe I did not advocate for feudal socialism. But the rest, liberalism, both tactical and principled versions of pacifism, anarchism, guerrilla warfare, and ...well you get the drift I was right in the thick of. This is probably why when I headed, reluctantly I might add, to Marxism it stuck. And that is the main idea I am trying to get at in this piece. That is the power of Marxism as a tool for looking at and changing the world. The only other point I would add is that over the past thirty-five years nothing in politics, our few victories and our many, too many defeats at the hands of the capitalists, has made me regret that I took the road back to my working class roots. I have made many a political mistake in my life, that is for sure. But this is not one of them. LONG LIVE THE WORLD SOCIALIST REVOLUTION!!!

2008

Recently in an entry (A Slight Irving Howe Confession, May 2008 archives) I mentioned Professor Howe’s role in my introduction (at least conscious introduction) to the work of Leon Trotsky. As mentioned below it was not enough back in 1972 to come to a Marxist understanding of the world it was also necessary to trace the threads through to the thoughts of more modern Marxist thinkers. I repost the section on how I was introduced to Trotsky’s thought here as a little reminder that fate takes some funny turns in this wicked old world.

Confession#2- Irving Howe actually acted, unintentionally, as my recruiting sergeant to the works of Leon Trotsky that eventually led to my embrace of a Trotskyist worldview. As I noted last year I have been a Marxist since 1972. But after some 150 years of Marxism claiming to be a Marxist is only the beginning of wisdom. One has to find the modern thread that continues in the spirit of the founders. This year marks my 35th year as a follower of Leon Trotsky. Back in 1972, as part of trying to find a political path to modern Marxism I picked up a collection of socialist works edited by Professor Howe. In that compilation was an excerpt from Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution, a section called On Dual Power. I read it, and then re-read it. Next day I went out to scrounge up a copy of the whole work. And the rest is history. So, thanks, Professor Howe- now back to the polemical wars- the truce is over.

Once Again in 2008- Long Live The World Socialist Revolution!

LABOR DAY SCORECARD-2006

COMMENTARY

TOUGH TIMES FOR THE AMERICAN LABOR MOVEMENT- AND THAT AINT NO LIE

FORGET DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS AND GREENS- BUILD A WORKERS PARTY!

This writer started his blog site in February 2006 (see below for blog site) so this is the first Labor Day scorecard giving his take on the condition of American labor. And it ain’t pretty. That says it all. There was little strike action this year. There was little in the way of unionization to organize labor’s potential strength. American workers continue to have a real decline in their paychecks. The difference between survival and not for most working families is the two job (or more) household. In short, the average family is working more hours to make ends meet. Real inflation in energy and food costs has put many up against the wall. Forget the Federal Reserve Bank’s definition of inflation- one fill up at the pump confounds that noise. One does not have to be a Marxist economist to know that something is desperately wrong when at the beginning of the 21st century with all the technological advances and productivity increases of the past period working people need to work more just to try to stay even. Even the more far-sighted bourgeois thinkers have trouble with that one. In any case, here are some comments on the labor year.

The key, although not the only action necessary, to a turn-around for American labor is the unionization of Wal-Mart and the South. The necessary class struggle politics that would make such drives successful would act as a huge impetus for other areas of the labor movement. This writer further argues that such struggles against such vicious enemies as Wal-Mart can be the catalyst for the organization of a workers party. Okay, okay let the writer dream a little, won’t you? What has happened this year on this issue is that more organizations have taken up the call for a boycott of Wal-Mart. That is all to the good and must be supported by militant leftists but it is only a very small beginning shot in the campaign (See blog, dated June 10, 2006)

The issue of immigration has surfaced strongly this year. Every militant leftist was supportive of the May Day actions of the vast immigrant communities to not be pushed around. Immigration is a labor issue and key to the struggle against the race to the bottom. While May Day and other events were big moments unless there are links to the greater labor movement this very promising movement could fizzle. A central problem is the role of the Democratic Party and the Catholic Church in the organizing efforts. I will deal with this question at a latter time but for now know this- these organizations are an obstruction to real progress on the immigration issue. (See blog, dated May 1, 2006)

By far the most important labor action of the year was the transport workers strike of Local 100 in New York City just before Christmas 2005. Although this turned out to be three day work stoppage that eventually has to rank as a defeat for the labor movement there are some lessons militant leftists can learn from the experience.

*It appears that every time the left, and not only the left, gives up on the possibility of the international labor movement being capable of coming close to what Marx and other projected as its historic role in creating a new society something happens to pull that theory up short. In my generation it was the events which led to a workers general strike and semi-insurrection in France in 1968. Now is it the example of the New York transit workers. Although both efforts were defeated, mainly through the treachery and class collaboration of the trade union leadership, no one then or now can deny the potential political power of the working class. We militant leftists are not just blowing smoke when we say that labor must rule. The key is to channel those possibilities into a struggle for power for a new, more just society.

*Although the transit workers proved to have more than enough militancy to succeed the leadership, frankly, got scared when the capitalists rulers started to play rough. The issues in dispute were hardly radical issues- pensions, wages, working conditions. Actually they represented a rather defensive effort on the part of the transit workers to stop falling further behind in the capitalist race to the bottom. This fight nevertheless could have been won. Perhaps it is because the labor movement has lost continuity with its historic roots in the huge and successful struggles of the 1930’s. But know this -every serious effort at class struggle by the working class will be met by the same kind of reaction and worst that was meted out by the ruling class in New York. Not only do militant leftists have to know this fact but also that every labor action has to be planned carefully to ensure victory. In short, that means a new labor leadership based on a program of struggle is needed. More on this another time. Start reading about the labor struggles in the 1930’s- in auto, the Teamsters, steel, electrical workers, etc. Those were the days.

*The transit workers strike brought out the underlying class tensions of society. Sure the yuppies, ruling class, etc. were inconvenienced as were working people, however, working people in general supported the transit workers’ struggle as their struggle. Know your enemies- yes. But, also know your friends. As for enemies note the ugly role played by the International Transit Workers Union bureaucracy in leaving the New York workers in the lurch. Also note well the treacherous role of the rest of the New York labor bureaucracy in not calling out their members to support the strike. That support was the key to success. A general strike was in the cards there. Needless to say I do not even have to mention the role of the politicians, both Democratic and Republican, in outbidding each other in denouncing the strike.

*The transit workers as governmental workers prove you can strike against the government. But you need to defend against the capitalist onslaught by insisting on amnesty for your membership and for the leadership before going back to work. Also know this, if you did not already, that the courts, the cops and the politicians are not your friends. If nothing else the defeat in New York should burn these lessons in the memories of every serious militant. Next time we can win. Plan for it.


If one needed one more example of why the American labor movement is in the condition it is in then an article this summer by John Sweeney, punitive President of the AFL-CIO, and therefore one of the titular heads of the organized labor movement brings that point home in gory detail. The gist of the article is that the governmental agencies, like the National Labor Relations Board, have over the years (and here he means, in reality, the Bush years) bent over backwards to help the employers in their fight against unionization. Well, John, surprise, surprise. No militant leftist, no forget that, no militant trade unionist has believed in the impartiality of governmental boards, agencies, courts, etc. since about 1936. Yes, that is right, since Roosevelt. Wake up. Again this brings up the question of the leadership of the labor movement. And I do not mean to turn it over to Andy Stein and his Change to Win Coalition. We may be, as some theorists imagine, a post-industrial society, but the conditions of labor seem more like the classic age of rapacious capitalist accumulation of the last century and the early part of this century. We need a labor leadership based on a program of labor independence and struggle for worker rights- and we need it damn soon.


THIS IS PART OF A SERIES OF ARTICLES ON THE 2006-2008 ELECTION CYCLE UNDER THE HEADLINE- FORGET THE DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS, GREENS-BUILD A WORKERS PARTY!