>Very good to hear from you again. People are never really far away on a network!<
Thanks.
>Some of the forces going to Seattle, were trade unions. Which of them have really progressive programs on world trade that combine the material interests of their own workers with economic solidarity with working people across the world?<
I would say that by and large the dominant theme expressed by the unions was internationalist. Some, especially my union the steelworkers go even farther. George Becker, the president of the USWA, basically told us at a pre-WTO protest meeting, that he doesn't see anyway to fix the WTO because it is the tool of the banks and the transnational corporations to divide and exploit the world. The USWA also called a conference on building international trade union solidarity during the seek in Seattle. It included unionists from Africa, Latin and South America, Asia and the pacific rim. Yet the steelworkers are one of those most accused of protectionism - and to a degree this is also their stance, though I would not cynically suggest protectionism as their main issue as some do. In fact many honest union leaders are trying to grapple with these question without the benefit of Marxism. Though going.
>The militant but rational purusit of reforms is essential to that struggle. That may require old progressive organizations thinking in new ways. Trade unionists must not restrict themselves to narrow economism but must find new ways to express material interests in political forms. What do you think?<
Not sure what this means, but I do think that you can pursue reforms in a reformist way or a revolutionary way. I would say a defining characteristic of the US labor movement at this point is groping for a way out of narrow economism. And at the same time trying to find a more effective and militant way to resist the economic onslaught of global capitalism. I've always felt that the primary goal of unions is the mass defence of their living standards and wage - this is not in and of itself narrow economism. In fact the last fifty years of class collaborationist, cold war labor leadership has devastated a very large sector of the working class and almost destroyed it to boot.
Just to have some union leaders that now realize that, is a step forward for the working class here.
Scott
ps. I'm not sure what is acceptable to post here, but I've written a piece on what happened in Seattle for Political Affairs that I would be glad to post if folks are interested. Its more feature than analysis, but might be of interest to some who weren't there.