The mass strike - of which the general strike, called by the trade union leaders is one form - is essential for workers to develop their confidence as a class, capable of ruling society, abolishing exploitation and oppression and, eventually, abolishing class society itself.
Through the mass strike the repressive nature of the state, its police and military becomes clear and with that the need to destroy these institutions and replace them with institutions that workers control.
At the moment, workers' confidence to use the strike weapon is very low. At the same time the £81 billion of cuts announced by Osborne is a bigger attack than any of us have faced in our life times. We will not defeat this attack without mass strike action. We need to start that argument now. As Brian says it won't happen by simply issuing the call. It will need arguing in every trade union branch every stewards committee and, more importantly, it will require building confidence. Through mobilising in every way we can for protests and strikes, small, medium and large
Brian was right that the numbers on the streets on the day of the CSR, 20 October were nowhere more than the low thousands but on Saturday 23 Oct. we saw 25,000 march in Edinburgh and 15,000 march in Belfast. These are impressive figures and shows how when there is a call from the official movementan much can be done.
Of course, the picture is very uneven. In Manchester, the Right to Work organised 1,000. A very spirited demonstration and rally but we clearly have much more to do.
But who is going to do it if not us and when are we going to do it if not now?
I'm not saying Brian is wrong to point out the danger that the TUC's mobilisations will not lead towards strike action but away from it. That was the experience in the 1980s and Dave Douglass is wrong to tell you to 'keep ya gob shut'. But as the TUC has already set 27? March as the date for a national demonstration, we must be arguing now that getting hundreds of thousands to march is excelelnt but it isn't enough to stop the Tories. It shows the potential for a successful general strike and that can only happen with powerful organisation at the rank and file level.
On this, it's worth repeating that the general strike in Spain was a step forwards. For millions it showed in practice that unity in action is possible, that workers have huge power as a class and for those who hwlped occupy a bank in Barcelona is showed it's possoble to start challenging the power of the property of the bosses while those who witnessed police firings live rounds learnt a lesson in how far our rulers are willing to go to defend that property.
Tuesday 9 November 2010
Tuesday 12 October 2010
Myth of General Strike?
Brian’s opposition to the call from SWP members for 'a 24-hour general strike' argues that it is premature and that members are not ready for it. He wants “less political drama, demos & street theatre & more concentration on grassroots development on the shop floor & in the workplace.”
Most of us would see this as a strange ‘either-or’. Generally, grassroots activity in the workplace and public protest go together. The thousands who turned out in the rain in Birmingham, carrying over a hundred union banners and including over two hundred from Manchester, talked afterwards about going home to build the grassroots and mobilise them in support of both local campaigns like that launched by the South Manchester Law Centre and the street activity on 20 and 23 October, following the Comprehensive Spending Review. When has any serious movement from below not brought people together on the streets?
Equally strange is Brian’s quoting the New York Times on the general strike in Spain on 29 September, as an elaborate ritual manipulating workers. http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com/2010/10/myth-of-general-strike.html Of course, Spain’s union leaderships have been pushing conciliation and ‘social partnership’ with their equivalent of a Labour government and they have much delayed calling this strike. The significance of the strike is precisely that it has been pressure from the rank and file that has forced the union leaders to call it and it has been the activity of the rank and file that has made it a success, with 16,000 shop stewards meeting in Madrid to prepare it, local assemblies in the bigger cities, postering and leafleting everywhere. On the day, millions struck, electricity use fell to Sunday levels, many thousands picketed, police attacked pickets, in one instance with warning shots using live ammunition. Well over a million demonstrated on the afternoon of the strike, with slogans such as “Let the capitalists pay for the crisis.” Such mass action is a step forward. It strengthens workers’ confidence and weakens the government and the bosses. If we are to defeat Cameron & Co, we need action like this. A 24-hour general strike would be a huge step forward for us too. We need to start now to argue for it. If not now, then when? If not us, then who?
Most of us would see this as a strange ‘either-or’. Generally, grassroots activity in the workplace and public protest go together. The thousands who turned out in the rain in Birmingham, carrying over a hundred union banners and including over two hundred from Manchester, talked afterwards about going home to build the grassroots and mobilise them in support of both local campaigns like that launched by the South Manchester Law Centre and the street activity on 20 and 23 October, following the Comprehensive Spending Review. When has any serious movement from below not brought people together on the streets?
Equally strange is Brian’s quoting the New York Times on the general strike in Spain on 29 September, as an elaborate ritual manipulating workers. http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com/2010/10/myth-of-general-strike.html Of course, Spain’s union leaderships have been pushing conciliation and ‘social partnership’ with their equivalent of a Labour government and they have much delayed calling this strike. The significance of the strike is precisely that it has been pressure from the rank and file that has forced the union leaders to call it and it has been the activity of the rank and file that has made it a success, with 16,000 shop stewards meeting in Madrid to prepare it, local assemblies in the bigger cities, postering and leafleting everywhere. On the day, millions struck, electricity use fell to Sunday levels, many thousands picketed, police attacked pickets, in one instance with warning shots using live ammunition. Well over a million demonstrated on the afternoon of the strike, with slogans such as “Let the capitalists pay for the crisis.” Such mass action is a step forward. It strengthens workers’ confidence and weakens the government and the bosses. If we are to defeat Cameron & Co, we need action like this. A 24-hour general strike would be a huge step forward for us too. We need to start now to argue for it. If not now, then when? If not us, then who?
Saturday 11 September 2010
Some local resistance, we need more
It’s still true - and has been for quite a long time - that “There is far too little strike action in Britain.” The big question is “When will this change?”
Brendan Barber was right when on ‘Any Questions’ last night he described the situation at the moment as “a phoney war”. The battles are going to come, mainly but not exclusively, after Osborne’s ‘Comprehensive Spending Review’ on 20 October. The problem is that the TUC isn’t getting ready for the battle that Barber is telling us will come. We must give them credit for getting the propaganda out. Today’s Guardian leads with the TUC report that that the proposed Tory cuts will hit the poorest ten times harder than the richest:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/10/coalition-cuts-poor-tuc
But this isn’t enough. There is a danger that the attacks will find many on our side like the proverbial rabbit in the headlights. So there is a need to be there where the action is. This week’s Socialist Worker features two excellent examples, both local, the angry 400 strong lobby against local authority cuts at Bolton Town Hall and the protest in Buile Hill Park, Salford, against the closure of Hope Maternity Unit. We need lots more of these and I’m sure we will get them but I’m not sure they will be organised on the scale and at the speed necessary. We need to get the message across that there is organised resistance so no one feels isolated and abandoned.
This is why the demo outside the Tory party conference is so important. It’s true that some are much easier to organise than others but we have to get it across that our enemies aren’t as confident as they like to portray themselves. Compared to Thatcher, they aren’t starting off against the background of the biggest global economic crisis since the 1930s, they aren’t able to portray the unions as the enemy and people no longer see privatisation as preferable to nationalisation. Rather, as in any battle, the enemy will look for weakness. It’s clear from the battles in the 1970s that those who resisted often succeeded. Those who didn’t went to the wall.
We mustn’t forget how vicious this government is. Lib Dem MP Bob Russell, the MP for Colchester, make the point, if in absurdly polite way when he tells the Today programme: "Yes, let's deal with the welfare cheats. But the notion that they are responsible for all the ills of the nation is in fact a smokescreen and it's not very ethical."
Tomorrow, Sunday’s, lobby of the TUC, calling on it to organise a national demonstration now, focuses on how the TUC is so far failing to give a lead. A brief glance at our history shows how this is no surprise. The nine months notice given by the Conservative government in summer 1925 was used by government and employers to build up coal stocks and a scabbing organisation, the Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies. The TUC did precisely nothing. And that was a TUC with much bigger left than today’s TUC. They didn’t invite Stanley Baldwin to address them as the current general council Cameron to address the congress.
The lobby of the Lib Dem conference in Liverpool in a week’s time is a step in the right direction but when union leaderships leave it to branches to organise transport, the limitations of organising from the top down become clear.
Brendan Barber was right when on ‘Any Questions’ last night he described the situation at the moment as “a phoney war”. The battles are going to come, mainly but not exclusively, after Osborne’s ‘Comprehensive Spending Review’ on 20 October. The problem is that the TUC isn’t getting ready for the battle that Barber is telling us will come. We must give them credit for getting the propaganda out. Today’s Guardian leads with the TUC report that that the proposed Tory cuts will hit the poorest ten times harder than the richest:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/10/coalition-cuts-poor-tuc
But this isn’t enough. There is a danger that the attacks will find many on our side like the proverbial rabbit in the headlights. So there is a need to be there where the action is. This week’s Socialist Worker features two excellent examples, both local, the angry 400 strong lobby against local authority cuts at Bolton Town Hall and the protest in Buile Hill Park, Salford, against the closure of Hope Maternity Unit. We need lots more of these and I’m sure we will get them but I’m not sure they will be organised on the scale and at the speed necessary. We need to get the message across that there is organised resistance so no one feels isolated and abandoned.
This is why the demo outside the Tory party conference is so important. It’s true that some are much easier to organise than others but we have to get it across that our enemies aren’t as confident as they like to portray themselves. Compared to Thatcher, they aren’t starting off against the background of the biggest global economic crisis since the 1930s, they aren’t able to portray the unions as the enemy and people no longer see privatisation as preferable to nationalisation. Rather, as in any battle, the enemy will look for weakness. It’s clear from the battles in the 1970s that those who resisted often succeeded. Those who didn’t went to the wall.
We mustn’t forget how vicious this government is. Lib Dem MP Bob Russell, the MP for Colchester, make the point, if in absurdly polite way when he tells the Today programme: "Yes, let's deal with the welfare cheats. But the notion that they are responsible for all the ills of the nation is in fact a smokescreen and it's not very ethical."
Tomorrow, Sunday’s, lobby of the TUC, calling on it to organise a national demonstration now, focuses on how the TUC is so far failing to give a lead. A brief glance at our history shows how this is no surprise. The nine months notice given by the Conservative government in summer 1925 was used by government and employers to build up coal stocks and a scabbing organisation, the Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies. The TUC did precisely nothing. And that was a TUC with much bigger left than today’s TUC. They didn’t invite Stanley Baldwin to address them as the current general council Cameron to address the congress.
The lobby of the Lib Dem conference in Liverpool in a week’s time is a step in the right direction but when union leaderships leave it to branches to organise transport, the limitations of organising from the top down become clear.
Reflections from February: "far too little strike action in Britain at the moment"
There is far too little strike action in Britain at the moment given the pay freezes, the job losses and, above all, the anger and in the last year we have seen the return of both the all out strike - Superdrug and the Leeds bin strike - and occupations. So in taking action and doing it in such a lively and determined way, the UNITE Fujitsu workers are a beacon and they certainly shone at the Right to Work conference a week ago.
This week I've been in the WCML reading about the Automat dispute 1976/1977, and the row about the Engineers Charter pamphlet which was temporarily withdrawn at the request of the strikers because they didn't feel confident enough to support an open challenge to Mather the local right wing official. The Automat workers weren't strong enough to occupy - they tried, though not in sufficient numbers - but they had amazing tenacity, the strike lasted a year and as the mass pickets were established, the employer finally crumbled. I suspect because of pressure from other employers, unhappy that the mass pickets, in mobilising the rank and file, were creating a strength that they, the extremely class conscious EEF, could see as a real threat. Looking back on it, it looks like a Pyrrhic victory: we won but at a cost which weakened the confidence of our side and boosted that of the employers. It will be worth looking at the actions of Winston Churchill Junior, MP for Stretford, and involved in the dispute, not least because he wanted to “get JT”, as revealed in a leaked letter, JT being John Tocher. 1976 is the year that Thatcher gets elected a Tory leader and the hard right in the Tory Party, inspired by the free market idea of the Institute of Economic Affairs, is busy planning their revenge for the defeats under Heath.
I’ve also gone back to the chapter on the Manchester occupations in ‘Glorious Summer’. There is a marked contrast here with the chapters on the miners and the building workers and the dockers where the strikers won a clear victory. The attitude of the strike leaders to the rank and file is the key here. In fact, the contradictions of John Tocher’s politics seem to sum it up.
Here was a man who mobilised the rank and file to win a decisive victory at Roberts Arundel in the late 1960s. This happened under the control of his leadership in a purely industrial dispute. It did not create any tensions with the CP and its relations with left officials, the heart of their industrial strategy.
By 1972, under a Heath government with the AUEW the key union in the resistance to the IR Act, Scanlon’s leadership was seen as tactically skilful. In fact, the right remained a very powerful force in the union and the overall CP strategy of an alliance with left Labour MPs, a parliamentary road to socialism, meant that the emphasis was on the election of left officials, getting the vote out at geographical branch meetings, not on the organisation of the rank and file. Thus the election campaign of AUEW president involved having transport ready to get people to go from work to the branch to vote. In the event, Scanlon’s majority in the Manchester area was greater than his majority nationally.
It is also worth noting the mobilisation of the Birmingham engineers, under right wing leadership to Saltley in March 1972 and their absence during the fight against the EEF that followed soon after. Only Manchester and to a much smaller extent Sheffield fought.
I’ve heard that Tocher many years afterwards, said it had been our International Socialist bulletins – the Greater Manchester Engineer – that had worried him during the dispute. The chapter in Glorious Summer certainly keeps referring to them for the argument on how the dispute was progressing.
It is a complicated story at one level. Large numbers of workers on one side, ranged against a large number of employers. In the context of 1972 it was perhaps the biggest battle
The title refers to Richard III – the original quote was ‘the winter of discontent’. There is a curious reversal however in the timing. Glorious summer in the original succeeds winter. Here it precedes it. It leaves open the question ‘Why?’
Colin Barker argued with me the question was easy to answer and Adam Rose put it simply in a recent meeting -. It was he said ‘A lack of politics’. More of this anon.
Coming back to the RtW conference, and how the discussion in the pub the day before with UNITE strikers: they've certainly developed a clear understanding of the position of their officials but that isn't the same as an overall view of the relation between rank and file and bureaucracy
All history is the history of class struggle. Easy to say, harder to spell out. The struggle is ‘sometimes open, sometimes hidden’. Rather more hidden at the moment.
This week I've been in the WCML reading about the Automat dispute 1976/1977, and the row about the Engineers Charter pamphlet which was temporarily withdrawn at the request of the strikers because they didn't feel confident enough to support an open challenge to Mather the local right wing official. The Automat workers weren't strong enough to occupy - they tried, though not in sufficient numbers - but they had amazing tenacity, the strike lasted a year and as the mass pickets were established, the employer finally crumbled. I suspect because of pressure from other employers, unhappy that the mass pickets, in mobilising the rank and file, were creating a strength that they, the extremely class conscious EEF, could see as a real threat. Looking back on it, it looks like a Pyrrhic victory: we won but at a cost which weakened the confidence of our side and boosted that of the employers. It will be worth looking at the actions of Winston Churchill Junior, MP for Stretford, and involved in the dispute, not least because he wanted to “get JT”, as revealed in a leaked letter, JT being John Tocher. 1976 is the year that Thatcher gets elected a Tory leader and the hard right in the Tory Party, inspired by the free market idea of the Institute of Economic Affairs, is busy planning their revenge for the defeats under Heath.
I’ve also gone back to the chapter on the Manchester occupations in ‘Glorious Summer’. There is a marked contrast here with the chapters on the miners and the building workers and the dockers where the strikers won a clear victory. The attitude of the strike leaders to the rank and file is the key here. In fact, the contradictions of John Tocher’s politics seem to sum it up.
Here was a man who mobilised the rank and file to win a decisive victory at Roberts Arundel in the late 1960s. This happened under the control of his leadership in a purely industrial dispute. It did not create any tensions with the CP and its relations with left officials, the heart of their industrial strategy.
By 1972, under a Heath government with the AUEW the key union in the resistance to the IR Act, Scanlon’s leadership was seen as tactically skilful. In fact, the right remained a very powerful force in the union and the overall CP strategy of an alliance with left Labour MPs, a parliamentary road to socialism, meant that the emphasis was on the election of left officials, getting the vote out at geographical branch meetings, not on the organisation of the rank and file. Thus the election campaign of AUEW president involved having transport ready to get people to go from work to the branch to vote. In the event, Scanlon’s majority in the Manchester area was greater than his majority nationally.
It is also worth noting the mobilisation of the Birmingham engineers, under right wing leadership to Saltley in March 1972 and their absence during the fight against the EEF that followed soon after. Only Manchester and to a much smaller extent Sheffield fought.
I’ve heard that Tocher many years afterwards, said it had been our International Socialist bulletins – the Greater Manchester Engineer – that had worried him during the dispute. The chapter in Glorious Summer certainly keeps referring to them for the argument on how the dispute was progressing.
It is a complicated story at one level. Large numbers of workers on one side, ranged against a large number of employers. In the context of 1972 it was perhaps the biggest battle
The title refers to Richard III – the original quote was ‘the winter of discontent’. There is a curious reversal however in the timing. Glorious summer in the original succeeds winter. Here it precedes it. It leaves open the question ‘Why?’
Colin Barker argued with me the question was easy to answer and Adam Rose put it simply in a recent meeting -. It was he said ‘A lack of politics’. More of this anon.
Coming back to the RtW conference, and how the discussion in the pub the day before with UNITE strikers: they've certainly developed a clear understanding of the position of their officials but that isn't the same as an overall view of the relation between rank and file and bureaucracy
All history is the history of class struggle. Easy to say, harder to spell out. The struggle is ‘sometimes open, sometimes hidden’. Rather more hidden at the moment.
Sunday 13 June 2010
Building for the Right to Work protest on 22 June
Saturday afternoon in Market Street, working for half an hour or so on the RtW stall with Andy and Tom. It’s quite hard work to engage with people - perhaps something to do with football - but we do get a response. Sometimes it’s about the big picture as with the woman doing market research. She is angry; in particular as the little guys are being asked to pay as the fat cats get fatter. Sometimes it is people worried about what is going to happen to the services they are delivering. A volunteer in a hospital trust speaking at length about excessive dependence on volunteers. And then going on to talk about PFI and the financial burden it imposes. And there is a civil servant who when I said 'Ah! Your union is backing protests on the 22nd’ replied 'Well, no, I’m in the FDA (First Division Association, organising the top 18,000 civil servants) but I will be with you in spirit’
The Emergency Budget won't be all the cuts; there'll be more in the comprehensive spending review in the autumn. But they will be savage (as promised by Clegg) so the friendly image being cultivated by the government will be damaged. Cameron's offer of more dosh to soldiers on active service and limiting of the war aims to 'national security' (**) may help him at home for the moment but will the image last beyond Tuesday 22 June?
** Cameron, of course, does nothing to clarify, how this is going to be achieved, nothing about how NATO can avoid defeat in Afghanistan.
The Emergency Budget won't be all the cuts; there'll be more in the comprehensive spending review in the autumn. But they will be savage (as promised by Clegg) so the friendly image being cultivated by the government will be damaged. Cameron's offer of more dosh to soldiers on active service and limiting of the war aims to 'national security' (**) may help him at home for the moment but will the image last beyond Tuesday 22 June?
** Cameron, of course, does nothing to clarify, how this is going to be achieved, nothing about how NATO can avoid defeat in Afghanistan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Malcolm Pittock interview Thursday 3 September 2015, Bolton ----- Born 1930. His family moved from a hamlet near Selby to Todmor...
-
Bob Pounder interview 14 April 2015 Marne St, Ashton-under-Lyne Summary · Royal Navy firefighter to 1978 · P...
-
Brian’s opposition to the call from SWP members for 'a 24-hour general strike' argues that it is premature and that members are not ...
