GM strike

Doug Henwood dhenwood at
Tue Jun 30 11:13:06 PDT 1998

Michael Eisenscher wrote:

>If that's what Dougie is saying, I have no quarrel with it.

Thanks, Mikey.

>But that said,
>real workers face real threats to their economic welfare and security that
>require immediate strategies. Promising them solutions under socialism is
>little different than telling them they'll get their reward in heaven.
>Neither is a very satisfactory response to what they confront in the moment.
>Academics can debate and dissect the "logic of capitalism." Workers still
>struggle within the framework of that logic to avoid being ground to the
>lowest common denominator, whether they accept that logic or not.

Of course you can't offer promised land solutions to workers in the midst of a struggle today. But the UAW is showing just how hard it is to fight a practical bread & butter struggle today if you've got no vision of the future. I hate to sound like a Spart, but unions are doomed unless they practice a class-struggle unionism, which is the exact opposite of the UAW's jointness (i.e., class-collaborationist) strategy. Does the UAW leadership really believe that auto executives view them as partners? Or are they just using that as a public excuse while they hide out and cash their fat paychecks?


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list