CounterPunch hits home...

Max Sawicky sawicky at epinet.org
Fri Aug 6 15:12:46 PDT 1999


Thanks for the Buhle reference.


>> " . . . I do not think it is
especially romantic to talk about building democratic rank-and-file unions, . . . "
>>

Me neither. All I meant was that blame for limited worker insurgency is often superficially attributed to bureaucrats or "sell-outs," where the explanation is often the simple conservativism of unionists and the resulting pragmatism of their chosen leaders.

I'm in a union now -- at EPI. And it ain't too radical, believe me.


>>
. . . These unions and other show that there is not an insoluble opposition between a central "bureaucracy" and an educated and democratically-minded membership. I think history shows that a lot can be achieved when the two are combined. . . .
>>]

I don't doubt that either.


>>

Josh Mason seems to confuse a little the remarkably undemocratic local unions so common in this country with rank-and-file movements and to oppose them to a more enlightened central leadership.
>>

In assessing the labor movement as a whole, isn't the question whether the activists are the exception or the rule? It's hard to believe they are the rule. If they were, politics in the U.S. would look quite different, I think.


>>
Of course, Sweeny et. al. are better than a corrupt Teamsters local, but are they better than the folks in Atlanta's Central Labor Council or the brave dissidents in that corrupt Teamsters Local? The AFL-CIO might consider, if it is really serious about rebuilding the labor movement, condemning local autocracies(and national autocracies as well) and encouraging local and national democracy in unions large and small.
>>

I think this is a formula for the disintegration of the AFL-CIO. Such an initiative would rapidly lead to a split, or splits, then possibly to destructive competition.

Seems to me that everyone has to choose which side of the street they work on. If I want to work with AFL-central, I can't be aligned with dissident groups. If the latter, then I can get too hot for the AFL.

In reality in my personal case I can do some of both because the AFL and its affiliates couldn't care less what I say or do, by and large. But a federation has to stand above internecine disputes, except in extreme cases.

Can't speak on the UFW.

mbs



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list